Reactive Training Systems

Mark Robinson · Senior Member

Cool article on Prilepen's Table

KyleThompson · Veteran Member

Cool article Mark. it has some very good ideas, and have modified them to fit my own observations. I developed a system to do the very same thing proposed in the article but I like mine a bit better :)

if I find the time (ie, I'm too bored to do anything else), I will write it up, it is pretty simple. You can find an example of it in my training log.

Mike Tuchscherer · Guru

I thought the article was very interesting. Thanks for sharing!

MikeGagne · Senior Member

I'm familiar with Prilepin's table. I read about it in Louie's Book of Methods. I think its pretty accurate about the number of lifts and sets that are optimal. Its helped my training.

Mark Robinson · Senior Member

Well, things got a little interesting since I discovered this and compared it to Russian ideals...I'm not saying either is right or better but my analysis revealed the following: (posted on another board)

"I've been doing my research tonight, specifically looking into prilepin's chart as I saw a claim that Sheiko training was based off the numbers, for those unfamiliar, have a look here:

http://www.texaspowerscene.com/articles/powerlifting/prilephin.html

Now I understand that Sheiko works across mutliple intensity ranges but, at class 1 or higher, specifically in the mastery groups, you're going to have some trouble sticking to this if you want to make your volume quota.

Lets say you are a class 1 and need to hit 1000 fundamentals this month.

Assuming we train squat 8 sessions, bench 12 and deadlift 4 in the month (standard Sheiko template), that gets us a total of 24 fundamental sessions. We need to hit 41 lifts per fundamental session on average to hit our quota. Now, there's no place for 41 lifts anywhere near Prilepin... at our average of 69% for a typical cycle, we should be hitting 24 reps per slot according to his system if we are to train optimaly. If we take it over 70%, our optimal is 18. If we averaged this we'd get 432 fundamental lifts in the month on prilepins guidance. Nothing like Sheiko's...

If we cross the boundary into CMS or MS classes and talk about upping the average intensity, the problem is further magnified even given the extra sessions.

I also understand that it was intended for olympic weight lifters where speed and technique are much more important, could this be good evidence/argument that it wasn't found to be optimal for powerlifters under the Russian system? I'm not into being bookish for the sake of it, I'm interested in how the principles may apply to programming for the powerlifter and the debate on whether its useful for us or whether to disgard it.

My current view is that since Prilipen derived his data from high level olympic lifters, he was likely regarding one session as one of 12 or so that took place that week. Given this training frequency, its easy to see how the lifters would make up the volume on these "optimal" figures. However, a modern day powerlifters training looks a lot different and therefore requires different guidlines. However, I'm happy to be shown I'm wrong if I am."

I'm not entirely satisfied with my analysis as it doesn't take into account all the possible variables...but I'm still thinking that Prilepin may not give the whole truth for a 3 or even 4X per week powerlifter.

Mike Tuchscherer · Guru

You really nailed my concerns with the original Prelipin's table. It isn't really applicable to programming training in and of itself. There are too many variables left unaccounted for. The above article addresses one of those problems, but that's based on experience/assumptions made long after the original Prelipin product. The other problem, as you mention, was frequency. Assuming anything about the appropriate frequency where the chart applies is just that -- an assumption. A guess.

I don't really like the original Prelipin's chart that much. I also don't think Sheiko programs are based (or even heavily influenced) by the chart. What I do get out of the article is a very cool way of relating the stresses induced by reps across intensity ranges. I have been developing something similar myself for quite some time. What he has matches fairly loosely with what I have. The one change I would make to it is in regard to his INOL calculation. His chart that determines the stress of the workout based on the INOL... I would pick different numbers as his seem a bit too high based on my experience. Still, the calculations seem to be accurate even though I haven't completely made sense of them in my head.

MikeGagne · Senior Member

Prilepin's table is more for Olympic weightlifters than for powerlifters from what I've read lately in Louie's book.