Objective Accuracy in Estimating Repetitions in Reserve in the Back Squat: An Analysis between Experienced vs. Novice Subjects.
Level 3 - non-randomized controlled study
Non-randomized comparative cohort study evaluating two experience-based groups
PubMed 42211811 · doi:10.5114/jhk/205218
What was done
Sixteen healthy adults (mean age 24.31 ± 4.94 years; 4 women, 12 men) were categorized into experienced (n = 8; ≥ 18 months resistance training experience) and novice (n = 8; < 18 months experience) cohorts. Participants completed Smith machine back squats at 70% 1RM over two testing sessions: one set to muscular failure on Day 1, and target sets of 3 repetitions in reserve (RIR3) and 1 repetition in reserve (RIR1) on Day 2. Mean propulsive velocity (MPV) and rating of perceived exertion (RPE; 0–10 scale) were measured to objectively quantify RIR accuracy.
What was found
No significant differences in estimation accuracy were observed between experienced and novice lifters for either RIR3 or RIR1 (p > 0.05, d ≥ 0.03). Additionally, no significant differences were found between groups for MPV, velocity loss, RPE, or total repetitions completed in the failure, RIR3, or RIR1 sets (p > 0.05, d ≥ -0.07). Absolute values for accuracy and repetition counts were not reported in the abstract.
Why it matters
These findings suggest that general resistance training experience alone may not improve an individual's ability to accurately gauge proximity to muscular failure during squatting.
Limits
The sample size was very small (n = 16, 8 per group) with an unbalanced sex distribution (12 men, 4 women). The 18-month cutoff for defining experienced lifters is relatively short. Testing was restricted to a single guided exercise (Smith machine back squat) at one relative intensity (70% 1RM), limiting generalizability to free weights and other loads.
Cited by
- context On average, beginner and intermediate lifters underestimate the number of repetitions they can achieve before failure by five to six repetitions.