It’s to manage fatigue and recovery u silly billy. From workout to workout, month to month

Yes it is subjectif but it become more and accurate the more your practice it. It has gained popularity a lot because it produce results but not all part of it are to be used with everyone that's for sure. Also you there are many way to perceive exertion. (RPE, RIR, Bar speed, etc.). After 3 years of collecting data for me and my clients I'd pick a RPE table over any calculator to estimate a 1rm. As for Volume vs fatigue % I'm more of a MRV guy to plan volume for a block of training.

This post was edited by Aube on Jan 16 2018 10:09pm

its dumb. its not a real metric. it doesnt reflect anything tangible, only how you think you feel. this often wont correlate to actual phosphagen stores in the muscle, peak force production, bar speed blah blah blah. if you were actually recording a measurement, id be fine with it. youre literally just making up a number and therefore it is stupid

Are you talking about rating a set or autoregulation? They are not mutually exclusive so be precise.

Not really...it does reflect to % so it's tangible. You collect data and see trend over blocks and blocks of training. That's a correlation if you ask me. A 1 rep at RPE 8 is about 92%...92% on THAT day. How? based on data collected. Is it gonna be 100% accurate? No just like if you are training %. A Given % of you max isn't exact every training day because it varies because on volume accumulation, mood and other factors. Autoregulation can make up for that.

Are you against autoregulation? It's not just a tool within a workout by it's also used week to week and months to months for long term planning.

rating a set by assigning it a random number is highly variable in itself and does not lend itself to precise measurements. autoregulation as a concept is fine, but RPE ratings for sets and reps is stupid

Not at first but you get good at it just like any other things. Don't knock until you try it.

Likewise, using a % to program your intensity is stupid. You're using a number that you produced on a single day and base your training cycle on that. That in itself is just as tangible as RPE however much more volatile - you can easily undershoot or over estimate your percentages. At least RPE stays relatively within margin.

thread@rpe 8.5

Use the borg scale for maximum gains.

Borg scale is fake news