Prilepin's Chart, Programming and You

Swanson52

Swanson52

Well-known member
I'm hoping this thread can be an informative resource on PL training programming using Prilepin's Chart as a guideline. Additionally, it will hopefully provide some discourse on programming, implementation of percentage based training, and some information on periodization.

Read about Prilepin's Chart here;

Invalid Link Removed

And here;

Invalid Link Removed

A basic summary;

Prileipin’s Chart is the result of a lot of Russian research done with Olympic weightlifters. It depicts the optimum number and range of reps given a certain percentage to increase strength. The researchers looked at bar speed, technique, and the lifter’s next competition.

And the chart;

Invalid Link Removed
 
WSBB uses percentages to calculate set/rep schemes for their DE/ME training days. 5/3/1 uses percentages. Cube method uses percentages. There's a reason you'll find various incarnations of this chart in every single PL program written; it's proven to work.

As a novice (<1 year of training) these principles may be a bit advanced, and a program like 5x5 or 5/3/1 would likely be the best bet. However, don't let that deter you from attempting your own programming! It's fun, it's rewarding, and you learn A LOT.

Personally, I just designed a program using undulating (waves) periodization, and incorporating each of the 4 optimal rep ranges per training block.

The key to programming with the chart is to OPTIMIZE volume. Too many ME sessions will lead to fatigue & regression. NO ME sessions may not allow you to hit the upper limit of your strength, Sam Byrd excepted. ;)

Please, ask questions, add info, link articles; I feel this is an excellent and oft overlooked piece of the training puzzle, and we can all benefit from passing it along!
 
Here's how I've blocked my own training using the chart;

I broke the weeks down in A, B, C, D, rep schedule as follows;
Reps x sets
A-5x5 55-66%
B-3x6 70-80%
C-2x5 80-90%
D-1x3-4 90+%

I'd rotate them as follows
DL- A, B, C, D
BP- B, D, A, C
SQ- D, C, B, A

Day 4 will be make up, ohp, or weak spot work.

Each block will be 4 weeks, and depending on proximity to competition I can use W5 to deload, or repeat w1-w4 again.
 
Subbed. I'll throw more links up later. Good stuff



image-2066135149.jpg


Page 55 from Beyond 5/3/1

Periodization Bible
Invalid Link Removed

Block Periodization
Invalid Link Removed

Invalid Link Removed
 
Examples of acceptable sets/rep schemes using Prilepin's Chart, listed as sets x reps:

55-65: 8x3, 6x4, 5x5, 9x3, 7x4
70-80: 6x3, 3x6, 4x4, 5x4, 4x5
80-90: 5x3, 7x2, 4x4, 8x2, 9x2
90+: Sets of singles or doubles, up to you how many you do. I would never do 3 or less unless you're maxing/hitting a PR max.

With the above examples, the idea is to try to hit the optimal number of total reps for each percentage. You may find though that it may be appropriate to push this by adding more reps in order to develop work capacity (especially at the lower 55-70% ranges) and strength via adding reps. Sometimes, it may be appropriate to tone it down a little. Keeping to Prilepin's number of suggested reps per set is smart because as you extend a set with the squat, bench, and deadlift, your form changes to deviate from what it normally looks like in competition, thus you're ingraining/training bad motor patterns.

With Prilepin's chart, I would also add in the time variable.

55-65: 40-80 sec rest between sets
70-80: 1-2 min rest between sets
80-90: 2-4 minutes rest between sets
90+: 3-7 minutes rest
 
Count me subbed. I'll look to contribute after I get home from work.
 
Edited my time for rest in chart above, btw.
 
Sean1332 said:
There's already a sticky, but this thread already has more beneficial information than the stickie last updated in 2009. Maybe sticky swap??
Click to expand...

Yeah I looked at the sticky and thought we could- a) do better and b) get more traffic with a new thread. I also would like to keep this directed towards the principles within the scope of the table & associated methodologies, where the sticky is more general.

IMHO.
 
Swanson52 said:
Yeah I looked at the sticky and thought we could- a) do better and b) get more traffic with a new thread. I also would like to keep this directed towards the principles within the scope of the table & associated methodologies.

IMHO.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I only posted the periodization implementation links because you wrote programming.
 
Sean1332 said:
Agreed. I only posted the periodization implementation links because you wrote programming.
Click to expand...

I was going to post those as it's helpful to see implementation of Prilepin's chart.

However, I'd like to add in a caveat to this chart: eccentric contractions. As Prilepin's work was done on Oly lifters, which does not have an eccentric phase, the carryover is not concrete. This becomes especially true for the geared lifter where the eccentric portion is far longer than the concentric. There is validity to using as a baseline, but I'd initially start off with less volume once you get into the >80% phases.
 
Rodja said:
However, I'd like to add in a caveat to this chart: eccentric contractions. As Prilepin's work was done on Oly lifters, which does not have an eccentric phase, the carryover is not concrete. This becomes especially true for the geared lifter where the eccentric portion is far longer than the concentric. There is validity to using as a baseline, but I'd initially start off with less volume once you get into the >80% phases.
Click to expand...
Agreed, it's an important consideration.
 
Sean1332 said:
Agreed. I only posted the periodization implementation links because you wrote programming.
Click to expand...

For sure. The chart in & of itself doesn't mean much without accompanying programming, and I think the links you posted are pure gold.
 
Rodja said:
I was going to post those as it's helpful to see implementation of Prilepin's chart.

However, I'd like to add in a caveat to this chart: eccentric contractions. As Prilepin's work was done on Oly lifters, which does not have an eccentric phase, the carryover is not concrete. This becomes especially true for the geared lifter where the eccentric portion is far longer than the concentric. There is validity to using as a baseline, but I'd initially start off with less volume once you get into the >80% phases.
Click to expand...

Very valid considerations. Raw lifters can extrapolate the information pretty easily, where geared lifters have so many more variables.

Honestly, Rodja, you should start a thread on geared lifting. From the very basics to types of equipment to modifying training & recovery to optimize results for gear.

I think that'd be awesome, since it's such a different and oft-misunderstood beast.
 
Invalid Link Removed

Invalid Link Removed

More of the same really. Actual text by Pripelin is really the same but much much more directed toward Olympic lifters
 
Swanson52 said:
Very valid considerations. Raw lifters can extrapolate the information pretty easily, where geared lifters have so many more variables.

Honestly, Rodja, you should start a thread on geared lifting. From the very basics to types of equipment to modifying training & recovery to optimize results for gear.

I think that'd be awesome, since it's such a different and oft-misunderstood beast.
Click to expand...

I may get around to that one day, but it's really hard to describe simply via text. I could make a thread simply on the basics of multi-ply gear and even that would have short comings as it depends so much on the particular fabric of the piece of gear.
 
What dictates progression on the varying percentages?

For instance, yesterday I did BP (6 sets of 3) @ 70%; do I judge progression by rep speed through the work sets? If I can complete all 6 sets do I move up?

This is my only mental block with the chart. When do I know to move up in weight?
 
2 cents,
The chart is really a guideline.
When I got to a W/O where I was unable to get all the reps in the set (say 6x6 @ 80% or 4x4 @90% ie: Russian BP program), I tried another week. If that worked good but if not I still completed the sets with lower rep numbers perhaps or rest paused the reps to get all. Then still moved up the next week.
Taking into consideration (more time between sets to recover more etc. etc.)
 
PaulBlack said:
2 cents,
The chart is really a guideline.
When I got to a W/O where I was unable to get all the reps in the set (say 6x6 @ 80% or 4x4 @90% ie: Russian BP program), I tried another week. If that worked good but if not I still completed the sets with lower rep numbers perhaps or rest paused the reps to get all. Then still moved up the next week.
Taking into consideration (more time between sets to recover more etc. etc.)
Click to expand...

Agreed on the guideline, but I'm a dude that can only understand quantifiable factors. Because I'm a meathead ;)

I like your approach to completing vs moving up.

I know guys like Sam Byrd use bar speed, and I totally agree in principle, but damn if I can judge it worth a shyt. That's no indictment of the approach, it's me not being able to accurately judge my own performance.

Another thing I need to get better at.
 
I vid my lifts, so I can judge it on my own. If no vid, someone who's familiar w your bar speed can do it.
 
Bottom line is that it shouldn't be a grinder. I'm sure you are familiar with those and have encountered grinders on your journey to hitting 400# benches, whatever squats and near 600 deadlifts. If it is you're at the top/pushing the limit. If that's ok and fits your programming so be it. I think it's not terrible if your last rep of your last set is a grinder, especially if you're working on a weakness (a grinder at low% = strength issue, grinder at high % = power issue), but you shouldn't see those anytime before your last set IMO or you're working at a higher % than you think you are/than you intended.
 
Torobestia said:
Bottom line is that it shouldn't be a grinder. I'm sure you are familiar with those and have encountered grinders on your journey to hitting 400# benches, whatever squats and near 600 deadlifts. If it is you're at the top/pushing the limit. If that's ok and fits your programming so be it. I think it's not terrible if your last rep of your last set is a grinder, especially if you're working on a weakness (a grinder at low% = strength issue, grinder at high % = power issue), but you shouldn't see those anytime before your last set IMO or you're working at a higher % than you think you are/than you intended.
Click to expand...

Great post.
 
I'd recommend using RPE instead of basing everything purely off of percentages, especially as you get to the higher end of the spectrum. For example, during the transmutation phase in block periodization, you're intentionally overreaching and you will most likely not get the allotted percentages as a result.
 
When I was into PLing, I used this chart religiously when planning max attempts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top