Autoregulation for Strength Training: How should you Incorporate it?
Do you go into the gym and feel significantly weaker than you have in the past few workouts? As you finish your squat set, you are struggling to lift the programmed weight. Or even worse, end up failing the rep and (hopefully) getting saved by the safety rack. This is a common issue that many lifters and athletes face, leading to the development of load-prescription autoregulation.
What is Autoregulation?
Autoregulation is a method of prescribing an adjustable training load, which allows your training load to match your performance on a specific day. This can be achieved using two popular methods; bar velocity and subjective autoregulation using Rate of Perceived Exertion (RPE). Using bar velocity requires you to have access to an accelerometer, and instead of receiving a percentage of 1RM to determine the weight, you determine weight by the speed the bar is moving. The prescribed bar speed is meant to be equivalent to the desired percentage of your 1RM, but will adjust the weight based on your fatigue level. Using RPE or RIR is based on how you feel the set went. Instead of prescribing a set of 5 at 80% (which tends to correlate with 7RPE), you prescribe a set of 5 at a 7RPE. This way, you choose a weight you feel that you could have done eight reps with (no more than 8), but stop at 5 reps. If it feels like you could have done more than eight, you increase the weight next set. If it feels like you could have done less than eight, you decrease the weight to something that you feel like you could have done eight with.
How can you add autoregulation into your own (or an athletes) training?
Before implementing, I would recommend tracking bar velocity or RPE in 2-3 percent-based training blocks. This will allow you or your athletes to learn how an RPE of 6 feels relative to an 8, and will allow you or the athlete to feel more comfortable with using the accelerometer. Following these blocks, begin to program a few exercises using one of these methods to see if you enjoy using the autoregulatory methods. If you enjoy the method you selected, implement it more into your training. If you do not, continue to use percentage-based training.
There is not enough evidence to show that using autoregulatory methods leads to better outcomes than percentage-based training. Because of this, I would recommend choosing autoregulatory methods based on your preferences as a coach and your athlete’s preferences. If an athlete enjoys using the newest/latest technology available in their training, have them use velocity-based training. If an athlete is experienced in the use of RPE, program using RPE. Percentage-based training is best used for the athlete who likes to have a set-in-stone or the athlete who only experiences minor performance fluctuations.
It is also possible to use multiple methods in one program. For example, you can prescribe an athlete to do 4 sets of 5 at 80%, unless it gets above a 7RPE. Then prescribe a given load drop to complete their workout if the RPE rises above 7. This same method can be done using bar velocity. Overlapping methods may lead to better outcomes because it allows the prescription to be based on both previous data and real-time feedback, not just one or the other.
Image: Percentage to RPE chart created by Reactive Training Systems
Limitations of autoregulation
As stated earlier, autoregulation is meant to correlate with the percentage of 1RM. Whether a training program says a set of 5 at 80% or at 7RPE, it is the same program. The only difference is the 7RPE allows the training to be adjusted for daily fluctuations, which makes it individualized to the athlete.
There are limitations to the autoregulatory methods. Using bar velocity requires expensive equipment that most people don’t have access to. Also, different people tend to have different bar speeds at the same percentages of 1RM, meaning that you will individually have to develop a personalized chart at various rep ranges. If you are a Strength and Conditioning Coach who works in a team setting, this likely isn’t feasible to do, since it will be very time-consuming. But if you train in a very well-equipped training facility and have time to develop this bar speed portfolio, this could be a great way to autoregulate training.
As for RPE, this is limited by experience. If you are unaware of your abilities, you will likely undershoot every workout leading to worse training adaptions. If you are a Strength and Conditioning Coach and don’t explain well to your athletes how to use RPE, you may find some athletes chronically overestimating their ability and overshooting every workout. If you find that an athlete is chronically overshooting their RPE, switch them back to percentage-based training.
Some other interesting findings
When using velocity to autoregulate training load, athletes need to move the bar upwards with maximum speed on every rep. There is evidence to show that moving the bar at maximum speed every rep may lead to better training outcomes when it pertains to improving 1RM. In a study by González-Badillo et al. (2014), participants who performed every workout with maximal bar speed on the way up saw greater increases in their 1RM when compared to participants who moved the bar at a slower speed. Also, Galiano et al. (2022) found a unique finding, where a group that performed roughly ⅓ of the training volume was able to achieve similar increases in 1RM as a group that performed a higher rep (much closer to failure) protocol. Both of these articles show that utilizing maximum bar speed during the concentric portion of a rep may be very beneficial when attempting to increase strength.
If you are interested in learning more about autoregulation, check out these episodes from the Iron Culture Podcast. Dr. Eric Helms is one of the leading researchers on the topic of autoregulation.
Velocity Based Training Episode
About the Author
Vincent De la Cruz is a Senior at Westfield State University studying Sports Medicine with a minor in coaching. Vincent is planning to become a Strength and Conditioning Coach following his expected graduation in December 2022. If you would like to reach out to Vincent, contact him by email at Vincent.dlc51@gmail.com
References
Galiano, C., Pareja-Blanco, F., Hidalgo de Mora, J., & Sáez de Villarreal, E. (2022). Low-Velocity Loss Induces Similar Strength Gains to Moderate-Velocity Loss During Resistance Training. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 36(2), 340–345. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000003487
González-Badillo, J., Rodriguez Rosell, D., Sánchez-Medina, L., Gorostiaga, E., & Blanco, F. (2014). Maximal intended velocity training induces greater gains in bench press performance than deliberately slower half-velocity training. European Journal of Sport Science, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/17461391.2014.905987
Comments
Post a Comment