Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Robernaut

5X5 And 3X5 And 3X3 As A Percentage Of 1Rm

Recommended Posts

Either my Google-fu is weak, or the answers provided by google don't seem to be sufficiently credible, so I figured I would ask you folks.

 

I am going to progress my lift to reach my goals by cycling intensity through 5x5, 3x5 and 3x3.  This just appeals to me (presently).  It's a bit like autoregulated periodisation and does not require much faffing or planning.  I was just wondering though if there were any rough (I know it varies from person to person) estimates for what percentage of your 1RM you would be at if you were doing 5x5, 3x5 and 3x3.

 

Ta :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very difficult as you could imagine,

 

I usually assume whatever I can lift for 3x5 I could probably do a single set of 7 reps balls to wall with the same weight.  

 

So tricep kickback 140kg 3x5

 

Assume 140kg x7

 

140kg x7 x 0.033 = 32.34

 

140kg + 32 = 1rm 172kg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:o for a 200 kilo squat I need to 3x5 my PR :o

 

Strong triceps kick back dude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on Prilepin's Chart (see below), I'd estimate the following:

 

5x5: ~65% 1RM

3x5: ~80-85% 1RM

3x3: ~90-92%% 1RM

 

 

Prilepins-Chart.png

 

(Of course, it's better to start on the lower end and work up, methinks.)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MathiahM   

If LSG is doing Triceps Kickbacks with 140 kgs, that explains why my pressing is so bad. I think Frota has it right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prilipin's chart is the most objective tool to deal with volume questions.  It's based off Oly lifters, and how many overall reps needed for them to incur enough training stimulus.  That also explains why there are never more than 6 reps in a set.  According to Prilipin, more than 6 reps caused the form to break down to the point where it wasn't quality practice.

 

Use the reps/set column to set the rep range, and figure out how many sets are necessary using the total range or Optimal columns.  To work it out on paper let's take 5x5.  That's a total of 25 reps.  Looking in the Optimal column the closest percentage range is <70%.  Again, better to start with 60% and work up to 70%.

 

Then you look at 3x5, or 15 total reps.  That's a perfect match for 80-90%, except that row suggests no more than 2-4 reps per set.  That suggests it's better to hit the 70-80% range (not the optimal number but within the total range) with sets of 5.

 

The closest match at 3x3 would be the 90+% range, but the recommended number of reps is 1-2.  3x3 intensity range would probably be better in the 80-90% range, but push it more towards the higher end of it.  Honestly, a 5x2 at 90% might be a touch better--particularly with deadlifts.

 

My copy of Prlipin's chart is slightly different on the details but mostly the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AdamW   

I think 5x5 is probably around 75-80%, 3x5 is about 80-85%, 3x3 around 85-90%. 60% for 5x5 is way too low, I'm pretty sure I could just do one set of 25 and get it over with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jasper   

I think 5x5 is probably around 75-80%, 3x5 is about 80-85%, 3x3 around 85-90%. 60% for 5x5 is way too low, I'm pretty sure I could just do one set of 25 and get it over with.

I always thought of the same percentages, no reason why, just because it sounds/feels about right. Very interesting topic, Rob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ghost   

Going purely from my own experience, the 3x3 should be a lot closer to 90-95% than 85-90% of 1RM. Seeing as I can DL 10x3 with 87% of 1RM.

And again, 80% for 3x5 AND 5x5 seems awfully low, at least with my 10x5 @ 80% squats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys are seriously overthinking this. Just try out whatever weight, if it´s too easy, add more. Should it be too heavy to complete your sets (with good enough form), you wanna use less. If you go down in volume, you go up in intensity. That is all the magic.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AdamW   

You guys are seriously overthinking this. Just try out whatever weight, if it´s too easy, add more. Should it be too heavy to complete your sets (with good enough form), you wanna use less. If you go down in volume, you go up in intensity. That is all the magic.

 

Juggerswolik ftw. Lifting weights is easy. Lift heavy, eat lots of food, get lots of sleep. No other details are important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys are seriously overthinking this. Just try out whatever weight, if it´s too easy, add more. Should it be too heavy to complete your sets (with good enough form), you wanna use less. If you go down in volume, you go up in intensity. That is all the magic.

 

 

Juggerswolik ftw. Lifting weights is easy. Lift heavy, eat lots of food, get lots of sleep. No other details are important.

 

Don't listen to either of these bro's, they know nothing, I repeat nothing about lifting heavy...

 

Rob, 5x5 to the power of 10/pi x circumference off your glutes.

 

x5 x4 x3 x2 x1

____________

+1 +2 +3 +4 +5

 

Squared

 

= 1rm...

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AdamW   

Hahahahaha.... awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Boola   

From smolov i know that if you can do 10x3 at a certain weight, ten triples that is, you should be able to do that weight you can do ten triples on divided by 0.85.

 

So if you can do ten triples at 100 kg you should be able to do (100/0.85=117.64 kg 1 rep max).

 

Hope this helps even if it did not answer your question perfectly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As has been said before by people I think this is very difficult. A simple 5-rep max or 3-rep max, while difficult, would give more accurate estimations I think. The problem with estimating from 5x5, for example is that people respond drastically differently to volume. Before I did volume work, my 5x5 max was actually like my 9 rep max, but as the sets went on my performance rapidly dropped, whereas now my 5x5 is probably my 6 rep max.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Boola   

3x5 equals 80% of 1 rm and 5x5 equals 75-80% of 1rm. Source: 5x5 and 3x5 as a percentage of 1 rm

I have also logged my sessions recently since februari 2016 and it seems that this sums up really well. Down below are my last 5x5 weight used before a max attempt and how much of rm this is (decimals).

 

Max Attempts 5x5 1rm Percent
       
20160325      
Back squat 100 150 0.6666666667
BTNPP 85 105 0.8095238095
Bench press 102.5 120 0.8541666667
       
20160507      
Back squat 120 160 0.75
Bench press 105 130 0.8076923077
       
20160610      
Back squat 135 180 0.75
Bench press 107.5 135 0.7962962963
       
20160821      
Back squat 145 190 0.7631578947
BTNPP 92.5 110 0.8409090909
Bench press 110 140 0.7857142857
       
20161019      
Back squat 145 195 0.7435897436
BTNPP 92.5 110 0.8409090909
Bench press 110 145 0.7586206897

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×