Submaximal training or not
Submaximal is a term relating strictly to strength. I use the term to describe the act of doing a set with fewer number of reps x<nRM. E.g. doing 14 reps with your 15RM.
Many have the understanding that linear increments in weight load would always be submaximal as long as you don’t go to failure. This is true, assuming failure always occurs precisely at that number of reps which represents your previously established RM with that specific weight load. But like we said earlier, your 10RM on one day might be your 8RM on another, or even a 12RM yet a different day. It would also be really impractical to try to find your RMs for every conceivable number of reps (and weight increment).
Let’s go back to the idea that there is no “on/off” switch for growth assigned to a given number of reps. 1 long rep (essentially just holding onto a weight for a long time) will make whatever muscles being stretched grow larger (initially). At the same time, making a muscle do 50 consecutive high-force eccentric reps will also make it grow. So it isn’t critical to do a specific number of reps “per set”, although a minimum number of reps per “bout” will be required to achieve the minimum amount of time under tension required to stimulate growth. This "minimum time" changes up (or down as in SD) as your muscle becomes more (or less as in SD) conditioned to the load.
I follow the 15>10>5>eccentric rep progress. I always make sure I hit the target reps on the first set, but I don’t worry about falling short on the second set when I close to my RM. With sufficient rest betweens sets it usually isn’t a problem though.
- Bryan Haycock
Submaximal is a term relating strictly to strength. I use the term to describe the act of doing a set with fewer number of reps x<nRM. E.g. doing 14 reps with your 15RM.
Many have the understanding that linear increments in weight load would always be submaximal as long as you don’t go to failure. This is true, assuming failure always occurs precisely at that number of reps which represents your previously established RM with that specific weight load. But like we said earlier, your 10RM on one day might be your 8RM on another, or even a 12RM yet a different day. It would also be really impractical to try to find your RMs for every conceivable number of reps (and weight increment).
Let’s go back to the idea that there is no “on/off” switch for growth assigned to a given number of reps. 1 long rep (essentially just holding onto a weight for a long time) will make whatever muscles being stretched grow larger (initially). At the same time, making a muscle do 50 consecutive high-force eccentric reps will also make it grow. So it isn’t critical to do a specific number of reps “per set”, although a minimum number of reps per “bout” will be required to achieve the minimum amount of time under tension required to stimulate growth. This "minimum time" changes up (or down as in SD) as your muscle becomes more (or less as in SD) conditioned to the load.
I follow the 15>10>5>eccentric rep progress. I always make sure I hit the target reps on the first set, but I don’t worry about falling short on the second set when I close to my RM. With sufficient rest betweens sets it usually isn’t a problem though.
- Bryan Haycock