The problem with RPE & RIR

Since I entered the strength training / performance industry over 30 years ago, things have changed quite a bit. One such change is the realization that it is better to train smart than hard.

While pushing yourself to the limit each and every time you train makes sense in the mind of a hungry athlete, and it sure is fun, we realize now that throttling one’s self on the regular is neither good for performance nor for injury avoidance. Thanks to innovative coaches, technological advances, and brilliant researchers, we now value more accurately dosing the training to the athlete. The most common and readily available way to do this is by having the athlete subjectively evaluate the difficulty of the set/round/workout they just performed. The coach will take this information and modify the training appropriately. Two methods of evaluation have emerged: Rate of Perceived Effort (RPE) and Reps in Reserve (RIR).

RPE typically uses a 1-10 scale, much like the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) we often use in the clinic for pain. An RPE of 1/10 would be very light activity and an RPE of 10/10 would of course be a maximal effort. The less popular method RIR, simply asks the athlete how many more reps could that have done in that particular set…how many reps did they leave in reserve. Both enable the athlete to subjectively evaluate the difficulty of the effort. RPE can be used to evaluate anything from as small as an individual set to an entire workout. RIR, however, cannot be used to rate the difficulty of an entire workout, but I find it to be much easier and potentially more “accurate” than RPE. The 1-10 scale RPE uses is accurate’ish at the extremes, but is frustratingly vague in the middle ranges. RIR, on the other hand, seems more precise.

The idea to dose the load/volume/intensity to the athlete…on that day…at that time, while brilliant, is quite a bit more challenging to pull off than it may appear. It makes one critical assumption. It assumes that the athlete’s assessment of their effort is accurate. It assumes that the athlete knows their limits. If you’ve trained athletes for more than a year, really trained them, pushed them, it becomes obvious that most athletes have a very poor ability to accurately rate their effort. I remember my early days at Ashland University. I would finish a set and just look at my coach Jud Logan so he could tell me if I should stay there or go up and by how much. I had no idea what I was capable of. Over the years my ability to accurately assess my efforts and modify my training according improved substantially.   

We can agree that using RPE or RIR is a good idea, but if we want to use it to good effect, we need teach our athletes the ability to accurately evaluate there efforts. If the athlete’s evaluation is inacurate, then any modification to their training based on this assessment will be equally inaccurate. An athlete cannot accurately evaluate her effort without knowing her limits, so it is important that an athlete find and know her limits. This task comes with risk. Finding the line requires crossing the line. One cannot just guess where the line is. Unfortunately, the more frequently an athlete crosses the line (of their limitations) and the more extremely they cross that line, the more likely they get injured.

So the question is: how does one find their limitations safely? Sadly, there is not an easy answer. An athlete’s limits are context dependent. Working up to a max set of 5 in the deadlift with 3 minutes rest is completely different than doing this with only 60 seconds rest. What the exercise is coupled with also influences the line, making it more challenging to accurately predict. Doing 5 reps in the deadlift at 75% of 1RM coupled with 10 push-press, is quite different than doing the same 5 reps at the same weight but this time coupled with 10 toes-to-bar. An athlete’s limits are also movement dependent. The pain and challenge that comes with a difficult set of 8 in the squat is entirely different than performing 8 nearly maximal barbell biceps curls. Making it even more challenging, the athlete’s recover state and their stress level will strongly influence the athlete’s limitations and these variables change on the daily, potentially even within the same workout.

The best answer I can provide to this challenging question is use repeat effort method & always remember to be patient. Patience will allow you to more slowly bring the athlete up to and beyond the line. Using more sets will allow you to more accurately and more safely find the line. Finding the line in only 3 sets as apposed to 6-8 sets requires bigger, more risky jumps.

My final suggestion would be to regularly test your athletes. This, of course, only applies to the primary movements: your squats, cleans, bench, push-press, etc. On these days, you will seek to find the athlete’s limitations, and the athlete should be made aware of this goal. By scheduling tests, you will be able to better prepare your athletes for these maximal efforts and you will be able to more accurately estimate where that line is, enabling you to navigate the athletes safely across the line without any injury (hopefully).

The benefit of regularly testing your athletes and seeking to teach your athletes to be able to more accurately evaluate their efforts is that you will be able to more precisely dose your athletes’ training based on their RPE or RIR. The more accurately you dose their training, the more effective the training becomes, the less likely the athlete get’s injured, and the more likely the athlete is able perform at the highest level of which they are capable.

Richard Ulm, DC, DNS-SC