Strength Training Wk2 REC

Monitoring and Adjusting Training Intensity

Methods for monitoring and adjusting resistance training intensity include linear loading, the two-for-two rule, percent of one repetition maximum (1RM), RM zones, rate of perceived exertion (RPE), repetitions in reserve, set-repetition best, autoregulatory progressive resistance exercise (APRE), and velocity-based training (VBT).

Key Points

• Linear loading, the 2-for-2 method, percentage of one repetition maximum, and repetition maximum zone training may not effectively monitor resistance training intensity due to their failure to account for daily changes in an athlete’s performance capabilities.

• RPE, repetitions in reserve, set-repetition best, APRE, and VBT may provide greater insight into an athlete’s daily readiness due to their autoregulatory nature.

• Future research may improve monitoring methods by assessing motor learning and skill acquisition to assist in adjusting training intensity.

Introduction

Muscular strength is a critical motor capacity underpinning motor performances. Monitoring athletes includes fatigue management and assessing program efficacy.

Monitoring and Training Intensity Prescription Methods

Linear Loading

Linear loading gradually increases training loads to improve maximal strength but may lead to performance stagnation, non-functional overreaching, and overtraining if implemented over an extended period. It is limited as a monitoring tool due to insufficient load variation.

Two-for-Two Rule

The two-for-two rule increases weight if an individual can perform $\ge$ 2 repetitions over their assigned goal in two consecutive sessions. It may promote training to failure and ignores technique, training goals, and relative intensity.

Percentage of One Repetition Maximum

Expressing training intensity as a percentage of an athlete’s 1RM is a common method. However, 1RM is dynamic and fluctuates with physiological/psychological status. There is considerable variation in maximum repetitions performed at a given %1RM between athletes. It is recommended that this approach be combined with other load adjustment methods.

Repetition Maximum Zones

RM zones involve selecting the heaviest load that can be lifted for a given repetition range with the goal of reaching muscular failure on the final set. Shortcomings include the necessity of constant relative maximum effort; chronic training to failure also makes fatigue management very difficult, which may result in physiological consequences such as non-functional overreaching or overtraining. Thus, other methods, particularly those allowing the use of submaximal loading as well as “heavy” and “light” days, may better facilitate long-term improvements.

Rating of Perceived Exertion and Repetitions in Reserve

RPE and estimated repetitions in reserve are highly correlated and valid methods for prescribing resistance training intensity. However, the primary limitation is the potential for underreporting by athletes. As the implementation of RPE/estimated repetitions in reserve is based more on subjective measures, it may be most effective when combined with other methods that include more objective measurements, such as %1RM or velocity-based training (VBT) to monitor and adjust training intensity effectively.

Set-Repetition Best

Percentage of SRB is used to prescribe relative intensities (percent ranges) in which an athlete’s maximum weight is estimated based on their performance of a given set-repetition scheme. Based on the extant literature and its autoregulatory nature in prescribing relative training loads, SRB may be an effective monitoring and adjustment method during resistance training.

Loads may be estimated when switching from one set-repetition scheme to another. A practical aspect of percentage of SRB is that it has a built-in goal setting component in which the athlete becomes aware of their “bests” for various set-repetition schemes and can plan on surpassing them in the future.

Autoregulatory Progressive Resistance Exercise

APRE is based on the use of three loading methods: APRE10, APRE6, and APRE3, which use different percentages of an athlete’s 10RM, 6RM, and 3RM, respectively, and emphasize the development of specific physical characteristics. Based on the repetitions performed during the third set, the APRE adjustment charts require the athlete to either decrease, maintain, or increase the load .APRE may serve as an effective monitoring and load adjustment method. Practitioners should be cautious when using APRE protocols due to the potential for greater fatigue given the emphasis of training to failure.

Velocity-Based Training

VBT involves measuring movement velocity of resistance training exercises. Benefits include feedback, 1RM prediction, and velocity thresholds. VBT may be used to estimate the 1RM of an exercise using general or individualized load–velocity relationship equations. In summary, it is likely that VBT has its greatest application as a specific monitoring complement. There are potential disadvantages that can be present without knowledge and use of skill acquisition and motor learning principles.

Monitoring Motor Learning and Skill Acquisition

The monitoring and adjusting of intensity for strength development should not be presented in isolation to understanding and assessing the quality of movements performed during resistance training or the enhancement of motor skills that may ultimately be the intended result. Future resistance training monitoring should aim to include a combination of measures that quantify outcome (e.g., velocity, load, time, etc.) with process (e.g., variability magnitude or structure, coordination, efficiency, etc.).

Conclusions

Practitioners must understand the advantages and disadvantages of each method to choose the method(s) that works for them from both a practical and financial standpoint. Many of the previously discussed methods can be used together to provide greater insight into an athlete’s training state. Finally, monitoring tools should be used to supplement and guide the practitioner, quantify what the practitioner ‘sees’, and provide longitudinal data to assist in reviewing athlete development.