You hired a coach, purchased an e-book, or bought a program through an app, and you are motivated to start something new. You know that feeling where the excitement of starting a new program and feeling hopeful you will get better results?

You open the program up and see the standard exercise prescription written like this:

3 x 12

Three sets for twelve reps each.

How heavy?

How light?

Do you go to failure?

Do you pyramid the weight up to a top set of 12 reps?

Unless the program explains how to perform this set and trust me, many programs do not do this, nor do many coaches; you are left with more questions than answers.

Sure, you can take the approach of "train your ass off," and hammer those sets with a reckless abandon of hopeful gains, but depending on your training history, age, goals, and recovery ability, that could either be a great idea or absolutely asinine.

3 x 12 can either make you overthink or underthink. Neither of these is a brilliant idea regarding training with weights.

There is so much to think about, right?

Suppose you are relatively new to lifting and don't have the experience or ability to understand your specific intensity threshold. In that case, you will inevitably make more mistakes than necessary.

Even if you are an experienced lifter, knowing the specific parameters of each exercise will be very helpful in ensuring long-term progress and staying injury-free.

3 x 12 is, quite frankly, obsolete.

It is the easy way out and does not give the trainee enough information to execute their program correctly.

Enter two acronyms that have been around the lifting world for quite some time and, when used correctly, can accurately explain how hard they need to push on every single set without bogging them down with sentences like, "I want you to push this last set to failure," and saves the coach a lot of time in writing.

First, the "bro."

There are two videos I recommend to every person who wants to start lifting weights, regardless of their goals. These two videos show a similar approach to training across different eras, mindsets, and physiques.

One is "Pumping Iron," and the other is Dorian Yate's "Blood and Guts." Pumping Iron can be found on streaming services, while Blood and Guts is free on YouTube.

I chose these videos because I want them to show how these people train. They are training hard. They are taking sets to failure. They are training with an intensity to grow and forcing growth with their effort.

"But Jay, I don't want to be Arnold or Dorian, bro."

That's okay. I am not asking you to train like that. I am asking people to look at what intensity is when it comes to lifting weights and how it applies to any goal they have in the gym.

Got it? Good.

That is the bro; here is the science.

"Training closer to failure enhances the accuracy of self-reported repetitions in reserve," said Zac P. Robinson, Ph.D., first author and a Ph.D. graduate of FAU's Department of Exercise Science and Health Promotion. "When people estimate how many reps they have left, this perception influences the weights they choose. If the estimation is off, they might use lighter weights than needed, which could limit strength gains. On the flip side, our meta-analysis shows that training closer to failure also leads to greater muscle growth. So, for the average individual, training close to failure may be the best option – as it seems to improve the accuracy of our perception of effort as well as gains in muscle size." (Galoustian, 2024)

You can summarize it up with two words:

Effort matters.

I am not writing this to tell you how much effort you need to achieve your goals or how hard to train each session. That information is reserved for people who hire me to coach them.

I am writing to show a better way than 3 x 12.

I didn't forget the acronyms, don't worry.

The first one is RPE. RPE stands for Rate of Perceived Exertion.

Gunnar Borg developed RPE first using a scale from 6-20 and later modified to the Borg CR-10 scale. It was initially used for clinical diagnosis and assessing the severity of breathlessness, dyspnea, chest pain, angina, and overall body pain. The CR-10 scale was not initially designed for exercise; however, some sports coaches had the bright idea to use it to assess the intensity of training, and like all good ideas, it spread across the Strength and Conditioning world. (Borg, 1982)

As people who lift weights, we are unconcerned with RPE 5 or below. It would be ridiculous to tell someone, "10 reps @ RPE 5," which says you will do 10 reps where you can do five more.

We have a term for that set; it's called a warm-up.

Using RPE as a metric of "how heavy is this set?" is a phenomenal way to judge the intensity of the current set.

For example:

6 reps @ RPE 8

You can do that set for eight reps but stop at six reps.

I am not expecting people to magically learn how to judge the intensity of your set right away. This type of work takes time to learn and develop the awareness of how much they can push in a given set. Those new to lifting will struggle with this concept as body awareness isn't yet developed enough to learn what heavy feels like.

Some will argue it's too complicated to learn as a novice, but I disagree.

What is complicated about knowing how you feel after a given set? At the very least, you are starting to learn valuable training skills even though you will undershoot or overshoot your RPE more than once.

If you are following a basic linear progression program, you can take notes after each working set while you train. Write down how heavy it felt using the RPE scale above, and over time, you will start to see your self-awareness improve with your lifting.

This skill is helpful when you reach the inevitable conclusion of linear progression. Good luck adding five pounds, or more reps, to your workout every session after a couple of years of lifting; therefore, you should start learning it now.

The second acronym is RIR. This stands for Reps in Reserve. It is just another way to use RPE but with a different perspective.

I know what you are thinking: what is the difference between RPE and RIR?

Nothing, but when you use each one makes a difference in how you use each.

Time for class.

Lesson One: RPE is superior for the first set of an exercise.

Strength training is primarily performed at a submax intensity unless you train using a Conjugate system. Conjugate lifters concern themselves with Max Effort, Dynamic Effort, and Repetition Effort, not RPE.

By submax intensity, I refer to 75-85% of your one-rep max (1RM). This range is what builds your base. You will spend most of your training in this zone if you want to get stronger, as it is the safest way to maximize proper form while using a weight that is heavy enough to generate a physiological response to the stimuli.

The next percentage zone is 85-90%, and the last zone will be 90-100%.

Three zones.

Zone 1: 75-85%

Zone 2: 85-90%

Zone 3: 90-100%

How I like to disperse the training load across this range is:

If you refer to the RPE chart again:

You can see a pattern develop when it comes to percentages and RPE.

Looking at 80% of the intensity and volume correlation chart below, your "ideal" reps on your first set would be 5-6 reps. That is a single set performed with minimal fatigue after warming up.

RPE 10 would be 5 reps.

RPE 9 would be 4 reps.

RPE 8 would be 3 reps.

RPE 7 would be 2 reps.

When you consider the fatigue accumulation from set to set, you can understand why performing strength work at a higher intensity for an extended workload is a recipe for overreaching and possible injury.

There is room for error when using RPE solely as a singular method for training. What if you are told to take a set of four to RPE 8, and your last rep is a grinder?

You and I both know that grinding a rep is not RPE 8, and I can't tell you how many Instagram videos I have seen where someone has a caption saying, "405 for 2 at RPE 8," and the video shows his head turning three darker shades of red while his legs are shaking trying to lock it out.

RPE requires honesty, not ego.

If you look at your workout for the day and you see:

S1 (set 1): 5 reps @ RPE 8

You can see below in the Intensity and Volume Correlation chart that five reps at RPE 8 would be about 75-77% of your 1RM. This gives you a great mental picture if you have an idea of your 1RM.

You are expected to perform five reps where you have 2 more left that you can do. What if those five reps are a grinder? You know you have more sets to do yet, right?

You played yourself a little, and now you have to contend with fatigue you didn't need to have because your first set ended up being an RPE 9.

Enter RIR reps in reserve.

RIR is the same concept, but instead of focusing on how many reps you NEED to do at a certain intensity, it focuses on how many reps you CAN do.

You will see coaches use RPE, and you will see coaches use RIR, but I use them together.

Why?

Because it makes the program work the way I want it to. I want my clients to be educated, informed, and knowledgeable about how to lift. I want them to know how to listen to their body and be present with their training. Being present means knowing what they are doing, why they are doing it, and how to do it.

Lesson Two: RIR is superior to correcting the first set's errors or ensuring you apply intensity properly.

How does it work?

This is where it gets fun.

At the end of this blog, I will attach the Intensity and Volume Correlation for Strength Training with RPE chart that I modified from Mladen Jovanović.

My adjustments to it are from my modified Prilepin's Chart - don't worry, there will be a blog for that later. For now, you don't need to know the why of this chart; instead, you need to know the hows.

Take the previous exercise notation:

S1: 5 reps @ RPE 8

Now, you need to move on to set 2, set 3, and maybe more.

S2: 2 RIR @ same weight

S3: 1 RIR @ same weight

If your first set was a grinder at five reps, you may only get 3-4 reps on the second set because you overshot your intensity and accumulated more fatigue than needed.

Set three will also be affected by the first set.

Let's return to that first set of 5 reps @ RPE 8.

Looking at the charts above and for download, if you performed it correctly, it would be 75-77.5% of your 1RM; therefore, if you are grinding that last rep and calling it an RPE 8, you are most likely between 77.5% and 80% of your 1RM.

It seems like such a minor error, but those small errors add up over time with more unnecessary stress on your body.

This is why I use RIR in the subsequent sets to correct your mistakes so that in the next session, you will be more aware of what weight you should be using rather than what weight you want to use.

I know you have questions, so let me summarize Lesson Two more.

S1: 5 reps @ RPE 8

You got 5 reps at 405 pounds, but it was really an RPE 9. Using the chart, this should be about 75% of your max, but you made it close to 80% because your ego got in the way of your training.

S2: 2 RIR @ same weight

Since you RPE 9'd the first set, you can expect 3-4 reps max on the second set due to fatigue. According to the chart, this still keeps you in the 80% range.

S3: 1 RIR @ same weight

You will get 2-3 reps when you should be able to get 3-4 reps if you judged RPE 8 correctly on the first set.

Percentages are a better method for strength work, but that requires knowing your maxes. Many people do not know their maxes, and unless you plan to compete in lifting, it doesn't matter how much you can lift for one rep on a given exercise.

Using RPE/RIR for strength work comes with some caveats, but if the trainee is willing to deal with the hiccups of learning how to judge intensity, it can be a very productive method to get stronger.

Is this a perfect method for strength training, i.e., the "powerlifts"? No, but…

Where this method shines is with hypertrophy.

Lesson 3: Effort matters

Taking sets close to failure in hypertrophy training will generate more muscular damage and allow you to gain lean mass more efficiently. As I quoted earlier:

"Training closer to failure enhances the accuracy of self-reported repetitions in reserve," said Zac P. Robinson, Ph.D., first author and a Ph.D. graduate of FAU's Department of Exercise Science and Health Promotion. "When people estimate how many reps they have left, this perception influences the weights they choose. If the estimation is off, they might use lighter weights than needed, which could limit strength gains. On the flip side, our meta-analysis shows that training closer to failure also leads to greater muscle growth. So, for the average individual, training close to failure may be the best option – as it seems to improve the accuracy of our perception of effort as well as gains in muscle size." (Galoustian, 2024)

Those sets would be your 1 RIR and 0 RIR sets.

1 RIR means you can do one more rep, while 0 RIR means you can't do another rep. This is more commonly known in lifting circles as "taking a set to failure."

Using RPE and RIR together in a hypertrophy program has yielded excellent results from my clients.

S1: 10 reps @ RPE 8

You will take your first set to ten reps using a weight you can do for 12 reps.

Judging RPE with higher reps has more room for error based upon the user's muscular endurance along with the normative knowing how to judge the intensity of your training, but it doesn't matter as much for hypertrophy because, after that first set, reps do not matter at all.

Yes, you read that correctly.

Reps mean little. EFFORT means everything.

Where strength work is predicated on the majority of your volume being in the submax range for optimal stimulus, recovery, and safety, hypertrophy work is predicated on the reps that matter in the context of the volume you are given for the day; therefore, does it really matter how many reps you get on set two and three if you are applying the proper intensity?

Not really.

What matters is that this is self-correcting when appropriately used.

S1: 10 reps @ RPE 8

S2: 1 RIR @ same weight

S3: 0 RIR @ same weight

You got your 10 reps on set one and rested fully for set two.

Let's say you got 13 reps on set two, which means one of two things: either you went HAM on set two and did more than you normally should have, or you could have done more weight on set one. Chances are you can go heavier on set one, and now you know what you need to correct on the first set for next week. Regardless of that minor mistake, you are still putting forth the effort on set two to achieve quality reps at the appropriate intensity.

Easy enough, isn't it?

Moving onto set three, you have 0 RIR. This means you will do as many reps as possible until you cannot do another rep. I am not going to discuss the nuances of failing reps, just be smart about it. If you are using free weights, please have a spotter.

By now, you are loaded with information, and I need to give you a FAQ or some tl;dr to help you take all this information and bite-size it.

Does RPE apply to me if I use percentages in my training for my main lifts (squat, bench, deadlift, press)?

Yes, it can. You can practice RPE on AMAP sets, note how specific rep ranges of designated percentages feel using RPE, and correlate your notes to the chart I made available to download at the end of this blog.

I give you the ideal number of reps on the first set for all percentages from 55% to 100%. This is a guide that Dan Clark developed through his research and application. The original chart had data from Cal Dietz in a second column, but I removed it as Baker's numbers are more accurate.

The second section is the RPE scale on a perfect lifting day. At RPE 10, you should get the ideal reps completed. At RPE 9, you should get one rep less; at RPE 8, two reps; and at RPE 7, three reps less.

The Modified Prilepin's Chart in the third section will be an upcoming blog post. I printed that blog five years ago and will re-add it with some important updates.

This chart is beneficial for trainees who know their one-rep max on the powerlifts or for anyone who is using RPE in their strength programs.

Why do you use RPE on the first set and RIR for subsequent sets?

I like to give the trainee a number and intensity in RPE to aim for on the first working set - after warming up - and follow it up with RIR to take them away from thinking about goal reps and instead focusing on goal effort.

Why not just use RIR across the board?

For some reason, people prefer the concept of RPE when given a specific number of reps to achieve over using RIR.

The same people understand the concept of RIR better when gauging intensity without a specific number of reps to aim for. I choose to run with it rather than against it.

How do you structure this in your training?

This is how I lay out individual exercise protocols:

Performance: here is where I tell the client/trainee the tempo I want them to focus on and any other details I need them to know about this specific exercise.

Warm up to the first working set as needed: I add this here as a reminder to warm-up before the working sets. Common sense isn't always so common.

Rest b/t sets: The recommended rest periods between each set or superset.

S1: This is set one, and if I am not using percentage-based training, they will see notation like 8 reps @ RPE 8. Working set one will be the FIRST working set AFTER the warm-ups, where a set of eight feels like they can do ten reps.

S2: This is where I start to use RIR. You will see something like this: 1 RIR @ same weight. This means I want the trainee to keep the same weight but do a set where you work until you have one more rep in the tank. This could be any number of reps; it doesn't matter; what matters is the intensity and effort.

S3: This is the third and last set of this exercise, and you may see something like this: max reps @ add weight if S2 was 7+ reps. If set two was performed for seven or more reps, I want you to add some weight and execute this set for as many reps as possible.

Depending on the week in the cycle, there may be added intensity techniques like drop sets, rest/pause work, EMOMs, or timed sets. These are goal and client-specific.

COACHES: Doesn't this overcomplicate training and writing programs?

No, it doesn't. This makes telling the client what you want easier without using extraneous wording or extra time for writing workouts. There are some who enjoy being wordsmiths when it comes to programming workouts, but I prefer to keep it as concise as possible in a way that helps them understand exactly what I want from that exercise. I have found this method to do just that.

This method requires the trainee to be coached in terminology and applying proper intensity. It requires you to be a teacher. It requires you to educate your client and explain how to use the appropriate intensity, what to look for when approaching the RIR/RPE you want from them, and how to set aside their ego and fear when it comes to training hard.

I have found this method to make training better for people over time.

Sets and reps are easy to write. I can make a program in minutes using established rep schemes like 3x5, 3x6, 3x8, 3x10, 3x12, 3x15, etc., but this is not coaching, nor is it explaining what I want. I use this method to coach, explain, and elaborate without making each day into an e-book of written information, and it has made my job better.

If you want more information about how to use this or to be coached by me, email me, and let's discuss it.

Download the Intensity and Volume Correlation for Strength Training with RPE Chart.

——

Galoustian, G. (2024, July 31). For bigger muscles, push close to failure; for strength, maybe not. FAU News Desk. Retrieved January 12, 2025, from https://www.fau.edu/newsdesk/articles/muscle-growth-strength-study#:~:text=%E2%80%9CFor%20strength%2C%20how%20close%20you,leads%20to%20greater%20muscle%20growth.

Borg G. A. (1982). Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 14(5), 377–381.

Why Sets x Reps are obsolete