Monitoring rest is just another way of gauging progression. Whether or not it is more significant than progression by sets or reps seems pretty subjective and the solution to the question won’t be determined by internet debate skill.
There is a relation between sets and reps performed, and the amount of rest taken. It’s obviously not linear. Most of us understand that lower rep maximal effort sets require longer rest periods than higher rep sets do.
Personally, I time most of my rest periods. I think this has little impact on my performance. What it does do is it keeps me from spacing out when I’m fatigued and it forces me to keep track of the duration of my workouts.
A question for the experienced lifters that don’t time rest between sets: if I do 3x5 with a given load, resting 90 seconds, then next time I do 3x5 with 10 lbs more, but resting 180 seconds, is there a progression in my training?
[quote]fabiop wrote:
A question for the experienced lifters that don’t time rest between sets: if I do 3x5 with a given load, resting 90 seconds, then next time I do 3x5 with 10 lbs more, but resting 180 seconds, is there a progression in my training?
[/quote]
I’m not sure I understand. You mean like if you did, say:
3x5 @ 210 with 90 seconds rest, then the next session you do 3x5 @ 215 but you rested twice as long?
You can’t really measure progression based on 2 sessions, but the short answer: Yes, you progressed because you lifted
more weight. Some will say that you waited longer between sets, making the exercise less “intense” or whatever, but that’s bullshit.
The thing is, on something like 3x5, you should be resting long enough for NEAR COMPLETE recovery between sets anyway. If resting for 180 seconds between sets netted you a better performance, then I’d say the 90 seconds you used in the first session simply was not enough rest.
If you’re a beginner I would def say take as much time as you need between sets. You should be focused mostly on getting stronger.
I lose alot of reps when I put a stopwatch on the compound lifts. I have also tried the rest pause thing and I don’t get enough reps to make it worthwhile. I think so much of it depends on how much you put into each set. The closer to failure you get, the longer it takes to recover.
But I do like to push the isolation stuff for tempo. I hear what you’re saying about heart rate and sweating. Unless you are trying to put on weight I don’t think there is any harm in pushing tempo on isolation work.
I’m not sure I understand. You mean like if you did, say:
3x5 @ 210 with 90 seconds rest, then the next session you do 3x5 @ 215 but you rested twice as long?
You can’t really measure progression based on 2 sessions, but the short answer: Yes, you progressed because you lifted
more weight. Some will say that you waited longer between sets, making the exercise less “intense” or whatever, but that’s bullshit.
The thing is, on something like 3x5, you should be resting long enough for NEAR COMPLETE recovery between sets anyway. If resting for 180 seconds between sets netted you a better performance, then I’d say the 90 seconds you used in the first session simply was not enough rest.
[/quote]
Yes, you ansewered my question. I normally take short pause between sets, even on compound lifts (90 sec for DL), but I don’t get very close to failure. I’m gonna loosen it up a bit!