Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Oct 1;36(10):2696-2700.
doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003952. Epub 2021 Feb 22.

Repetitions in Reserve Is a Reliable Tool for Prescribing Resistance Training Load

Simon Lovegrove  1 , Liam J Hughes  2 , Sean K Mansfield  2   3 , Paul J Read  4 , Phil Price  1 , Stephen D Patterson  1
Affiliations

Repetitions in Reserve Is a Reliable Tool for Prescribing Resistance Training Load

Simon Lovegrove et al. J Strength Cond Res. .

Abstract

Lovegrove, S, Hughes, L, Mansfield, S, Read, P, Price, P, and Patterson, SD. Repetitions in reserve is a reliable tool for prescribing resistance training load. J Strength Cond Res 36(10): 2696-2700, 2022-This study investigated the reliability of repetitions in reserve (RIR) as a method for prescribing resistance training load for the deadlift and bench press exercises. Fifteen novice trained men (age: 17.3 ± 0.9 years, height: 176.0 ± 8.8 cm, body mass: 71.3 ± 10.7 kg) were assessed for 1 repetition maximum (1RM) for deadlift (118.1 ± 27.3 kg) and bench press (58.2 ± 18.6 kg). Subsequently, they completed 3 identical sessions (one familiarization session and 2 testing sessions) comprising sets of 3, 5, and 8 repetitions. For each repetition scheme, the load was progressively increased in successive sets until subjects felt they reached 1-RIR at the end of the set. Test-retest reliability of load prescription between the 2 testing sessions was determined using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of variation (CV). A 2-way analysis of variance with repeated measures was used for each exercise to assess differences in the load corresponding to 1-RIR within each repetition scheme. All test-retest comparisons demonstrated a high level of reliability (deadlift: ICC = 0.95-0.99, CV = 2.7-5.7% and bench press: ICC = 0.97-0.99, CV = 3.8-6.2%). Although there were no differences between time points, there was a difference for load corresponding to 1-RIR across the 3 repetition schemes (deadlift: 88.2, 84.3, and 79.2% 1RM; bench press: 93.0, 87.3, and 79.6% 1RM for the 3-, 5-, and 8-repetition sets, respectively). These results suggest that RIR is a reliable tool for load prescription in a young novice population. Furthermore, the between-repetition scheme differences highlight that practitioners can effectively manipulate load and volume (repetitions in a set) throughout a training program to target specific resistance training adaptations.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Banyard HG, Nosaka K, Haff GG. Reliability and validity of the load–velocity relationship to predict the 1RM back squat. J Strength Cond Res 31: 1897–1904, 2017.
    1. Bocalini DS, Portes L, Ribeiro K, et al. Insight for learning and stability of one repetition maximum test in subjects with or without experience on resistance training. Gazzetta Med Italiana 172: 845–851, 2013.
    1. Fisher J, Steele J, Bruce-Low S, Smith D. Evidence based resistance training recommendations. Medicina Sportiva 15: 147–162, 2011.
    1. Graham T, Cleather DJ. Autoregulation by “repetitions in reserve” leads to greater improvements in strength over a 12-week training program than fixed loading. J Strength Cond Res 35: 2451–2456, 2021.
    1. Grgic J, Lazinica B, Schoenfeld BJ, Pedisic Z. Test–retest reliability of the one-repetition maximum (1RM) strength assessment: A systematic review. Sports Med 6: 31, 2020.

LinkOut - more resources