Why Can't I Do 3x8 w/ 70% of 1RM?

Training Bodybuilding
1

I’m trying to do CW’s Big Boy Basics, which on two days of the four training days per week calls for 3x8 with 70% of 1 RM, with 90s of rest between sets for most exercises (e.g. squats, incline DB bench press, etc.)

Taking incline DB presses as an example, I can do 90lb DBs for 6 reps, which should give me a 1RM of around 105lbs. But using 70lb DBs, I can’t get 3x8 when I follow the prescribed rest time of 90s. I end up getting 8, 8, then 4 or maybe 5 reps before failure.

Same with squats. I can squat 125kg for 6 reps, so my 1RM should be around 145kg. But when squatting 70% of that, or 100kg, and sticking strictly to the prescribed rest interval, I end up doing breathing squats after rep 4 on the last set and having to lean forward into a “good morning” style lift in order to finish the set - by which point my face has turned red and the veins on my forehead are popping out like crazy.

I’m wondering if this is a work capacity issue (I used to take longer breaks between sets, usually around 3 minutes for the big lifts like squats and deads)? Or does it have to do with muscle fibre composition? Advice?

2

[quote]fairbairn wrote:
I’m trying to do CW’s Big Boy Basics, which on two days of the four training days per week calls for 3x8 with 70% of 1 RM, with 90s of rest between sets for most exercises (e.g. squats, incline DB bench press, etc.)

Taking incline DB presses as an example, I can do 90lb DBs for 6 reps, which should give me a 1RM of around 105lbs. But using 70lb DBs, I can’t get 3x8 when I follow the prescribed rest time of 90s. I end up getting 8, 8, then 4 or maybe 5 reps before failure.

Same with squats. I can squat 125kg for 6 reps, so my 1RM should be around 145kg. But when squatting 70% of that, or 100kg, and sticking strictly to the prescribed rest interval, I end up doing breathing squats after rep 4 on the last set and having to lean forward into a “good morning” style lift in order to finish the set - by which point my face has turned red and the veins on my forehead are popping out like crazy.

I’m wondering if this is a work capacity issue (I used to take longer breaks between sets, usually around 3 minutes for the big lifts like squats and deads)? Or does it have to do with muscle fibre composition? Advice?

[/quote]

Find out what your actual 1RM is. Don’t go by the charts or 1RM calculators. I know the calculators and charts tend to be off with me especially if my body isn’t used to a high weight lower rep scheme. Just my 2 cents though.

3

Work capacity or just lower endurance. Keep workin hard and u can bring both up

4

I have never been a fan of the %maxes because they just don’t translate into reality for most people.

Somebody else had a question very similar to this the other day, and the truth is people are just physiologically different.

Even something as basic as fast/slow twitch muscle fiber distribution can affect the number of reps a person is going to get with a certain amount of weight.

And trying to build a program off of %maxes just doesn’t work very well for most people.

5

Crazy people.

% do not work. period.

You have to do 3x8. He says use 70% because he is erroneously assuming something alog the lines of, you should be able to do 3x10 with 70%, therefore, doing 3x8 means you should not be going to failure. THAT is the INTENTION of his program.

But, for you, you ARE going to failure.

What a program needs to say is, do 3x8, but you should be using a weight that …

  • for the 1st set you could get 10 reps
  • for second set you could get 9 reps
  • for 3rd set you can get 8.5 reps, say.

So you don’t go to failure until the very last rep of the last set, and even then, not total failure.

Now I am not saying that is exactly what CW had in mind in that program. But I am saying that anytime that someone says a % of max, that is a bad bad bad way to describe what they are really trying to say.

If you did this routine like you said in front of CW what do you think he’d say? He’d say that is not what he meant, or, that you should do a different routine, or, you should use less weight, or concentrate on work capacity or something.

70% of frikkin what … my 1RM changes day to day depending on what I did the day before or the previous exercise.

A much better way is to say to go 1 or 2 reps short of failue.

These points need to be made clear because training to failure is a real bollocks way to train.

6

“Taking incline DB presses as an example, I can do 90lb DBs for 6 reps, which should give me a 1RM of around 105lbs.” Not necessarily as posted above. I would start lower overall then calculated (you’re probably thinking DUH now). Whatever you “calculated” drop 10 lbs lower and see if that works. It is a work capacity issue if you are used to 3 min rests and then try cut it in half overnight then this has to be factored into what you “think” your 1 rm max is for 90s rest. All you have done is calculated your 1 rm for 3 min rest. Does that make sense?

7

The repetitions you can get with a certain % of RM depends, largely, of your fibers type dominance. Fast-twitch fibers ar stronger, but have less endurance. Slow-twitch vice versa.

8

I think that approach (the percentages of 1RM) is just representative of CW’s earlier work. The BBB plan has been around for years, and his philosophies have been refined a bit since then.

The most recent plan I’ve seen from CW is his 10-10 plan in the ebook, and it uses better terminology. On the heavy load days, you’re doing 3 reps with a weight you can lift 4-6 times before failure (basically your 4-6 rep max.) Medium loads are 8 reps (10-14 before failure) and light loads are 15 reps (18-22 before failure.)

That sort of flexible approach is easier to work with and more adaptable to the individual. In the case of 3x8, don’t worry about the percentage of your 1RM, just pick a weight you can lift about a dozen times before failure. It’s not necessary to be super-precise with the poundages.

9

Thanks guys, that was all very helpful. The point about not training to failure and what CW would say if he were supervising is especially well taken.

So, I will start by dropping the weights to a level where I can get the 3 x 8 at the prescribed rest interval.

Hopefully as my work capacity/endurance increases I can get back to using the heavier weights that I am used to and enjoy training with. :slight_smile:

This is going to have a negative impact on volume (in the sense of weight * total reps) though.

Maybe the old-fashioned approach is better: adding weight to the bar each set, do something like 15, 12, 10, [working for it now] 8, 6 and then a back-off set with a lower weight. That covers a bunch of different rep ranges, the heaviest set makes sure you work on strength, and then you get the hypertrophy effect from the volume.

Not sure I want to tweak CW’s program before I’ve given it more of a chance, though…

10

[quote]Magarhe wrote:
Crazy people.

% do not work. period.

You have to do 3x8. He says use 70% because he is erroneously assuming something alog the lines of, you should be able to do 3x10 with 70%, therefore, doing 3x8 means you should not be going to failure. THAT is the INTENTION of his program.

But, for you, you ARE going to failure.

What a program needs to say is, do 3x8, but you should be using a weight that …

  • for the 1st set you could get 10 reps
  • for second set you could get 9 reps
  • for 3rd set you can get 8.5 reps, say.

So you don’t go to failure until the very last rep of the last set, and even then, not total failure.

Now I am not saying that is exactly what CW had in mind in that program. But I am saying that anytime that someone says a % of max, that is a bad bad bad way to describe what they are really trying to say.

If you did this routine like you said in front of CW what do you think he’d say? He’d say that is not what he meant, or, that you should do a different routine, or, you should use less weight, or concentrate on work capacity or something.

70% of frikkin what … my 1RM changes day to day depending on what I did the day before or the previous exercise.

A much better way is to say to go 1 or 2 reps short of failue.

These points need to be made clear because training to failure is a real bollocks way to train.[/quote]

Can’t say I agree with your last statement Mag, but the rest of this post is right on the money.

11

I’m not quite convinced there’s a problem with the percent recommendation. In fact in this case it might be real close. I wonder how many reps you could do with 70’s on your first set if you went to failure. If you could do 10-12 then the percent is fine. To repeat it 2 more times is with incomplete rest (90 seconds) is going to tell you how your strength recovery is and not necessarily how rep ranges compare to your 1RM. Even if a person doesn’t fit the standardized reps per a given %1RM it doesn’t mean that percents are useless for that person. If over time they track out several different reps and certain percent 1RMs and establish their own custom 1RM % chart it can provide helpful in the future. For certain exercises you will need to take into account a portion of bodyweight being moved in the exercise (like squats, chins, etc) to achieve higher accuracy.

Also, after looking at CW’s BBB plan he doesn’t specifically say they are to be done in straight sets. Now he doesn’t say they are to be done as alternating compounds sets either but he does talk about pairing agonists with antagonists. If you look at the exercises you can see that you could easily go back and forth between pairs. That would give you 3 minutes of rest between the repeated sets of the same exercise.

Having said all that, probably the bigger thing to learn is how to adapt the program to fit you. Should you be able to do straight sets with this weight maybe. If you think you should and you can’t then maybe you have identified an area where you need improvement. Instead of dropping weight you could start out with a longer rest period and gradually drop it as your strength recovery improves. Most likely no standardize program is going to work perfectly. The can provide a great starting point but knowing how to adjust them to suit your specific needs will be extremely valuable.

Good luck.

12

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
Magarhe wrote:

These points need to be made clear because training to failure is a real bollocks way to train.

Can’t say I agree with your last statement Mag, but the rest of this post is right on the money.[/quote]

hahaha I agree with YOU!

Nothing wrong with training to failure at all if a person knows what they are doing, just seen so many people do it wrongly, and for that matter, MYSELF I did EVERY set to failure as a kid, and in fact nearly every rep of every set when I was really dumb. And where did that get me? Not as good as I could have done.

Currently I like westside. And if you look at that, say, Max Effort Day, you go to failure to max out on one movement on the day, and then, all the repetition work is just a bit short of failure. Now I think what happens there, is you get one movement to failure driving your bodies’ change mechanisms, but then, all the RE work is telling your body what else needs to get enhanced. Note you do the RE work on assist/supplementary work which is largely your weaknesses. Your body does not overtrain the specific weaknesses because you did RE work on them, not to failure. Your body is however pushed to the limit and wanting to supercompensate. IT is a good system. Training to failure but only on one thing, once per week. Then you get more volume work doing DE work another time in the week on similar movements. I hope some of that makes sense.

But if people follow programs and they don’t know whether they should go to failure or not, or what intensity they should use, and if they just go all out (like a lot of beginners) then that is not good at all. Well, not optimal anyway.