Thank you for the answers guys.
I think the second set might be good in getting more volume in. If the load is suffcient (who knows anyway) then more volume might be a andvantage for growth.
Even if the second set is terminated before 15 reps,the last reps are still effective in the sense of Blade.
So I think more sets have their value. Be it more work overall or regarding effective reps.
But of course most important is the load increase over the cycle.
Next session will be on friday.
Thank you for the interest.
Please don't take offense from my repetition, but you are spending
far too much energy focusing on the minutiae, the details that don't matter for someone at your stage of lifting. You've found a strong program and you've only just done the first workout of a program that has 24 per cycle. Stop trying to plan your exercise down to the last breath. Move the weight, eat the food, the size will come.
Hi, Alex, I guess that's a little more devastating than the 3 straight sets of 5's. I'm not even doing 3 sets, but 2. Can you do that cluster thing 3 times a week when on 5's? How much do you rest after each mini-set? Looks like myo-reps. Do you do that for bench press too? Then how do you consider the effort required to rack the bar on and off each time, or do you use a spotter to assist you?
Myo-reps are typically done around the 8-10RM load range. Cluster reps can be done at any rep range/or load range, if you prefer to think of it that way. The heavier the weight you use, the more time you'll need between clusters. I currently use clustering for my chins, I do somewhere in the space of 20-25 reps, and currently I'm working at what is around my 5RM (I've been pushing it up and up over the last couple of months). For that weight, I probably take about 3mins between clusters, so doing chins take me around 25-30mins. It sounds like a lot of time but it's working magnificently for me, and no matter how you separate the reps (into clusters, sets, myo-reps, whatever) when you are working at 5RM range, you HAVE to rest in between exertions. I do that load of volume because I'm fairly well trained, I like feeling exhausted and it keeps me hungry, carb friendly and builds some measure of endurance.
Clustering is merely removing the (somewhat arbitrary) structure of a set-rep matrix and placing the focus upon 'work done'. It could be described as 'doing as many reps as you can, one shy of failure, in as many sets as it takes to complete a rep target for the given load'. Presently, I'm up to adding 31.5kgs to my BW (~115kgs) for my chins, there's no way I can do a 5x5 for that. +31.5kgs is my 5RM, maybe my 2x5RM, it's not my 5x5RM. But I still get ~20-25 reps done with it in my session, it's just done in clusters rather than 'sets'. I'm progressing much more thoroughly than I have using a set-rep matrix.
The downside of clustering is that if you want to maintain a rep target across rep-ranges (ala across lighter and heavier weights), be prepared to spend an hour working out for two exercises once you get heavy. I'm not attempting to add size to my chest at present, were I to do so, I would almost certainly use clusters at a load in the 2-5RM range. Doing that and chins would take me an hour. Given that I find isolation exercises to be near-ineffective beyond a metabolic effect (joints, glycogen storage - ala high rep work), that wouldn't bother me in the slightest.
It's all about progression as well. For someone in the 3rd or 4th cycle, a rep target of 20-25reps might be too high. 12-15 reps is still highly likely to produce significant growth at that point. I've merely added volume because I've spent over a decade lifting now and I find that;
a) More reps at a heavier weight makes me stronger, and clustering produces less fatigue than sets-reps
b) The stronger I get, the bigger I get (over time)