Prilepin's Table

[pjtrainer]

agreed thanks for posting great explanation!

[WRT10328]

@SupremeSportsPT

just a support comment for this video for skeptics of this table, I'm a Kinesiology major and I pretty much paid $500 for a prof with 2 post-docs in weight lifting to tell me how this table works. and work it does

this table works. the soviets were geniuses when it came to this stuff.

[PlatzSquatz]

Some Russians may have used Prilepin's training guidelines (others, trained by other Soviet coaches, certainly did not). And they all got creamed for three decades by tiny Bulgaria, which rejected the Soviet system entirely. One suspects that this "works" in the sense that lots of training programs "work." Optimal, or even better than others? Who knows? You won't find many Russian WL coaches using this stuff today.

[SupremeSportsPT]

@PlatzSquatz Agreed. Nobody said this was the only way to train.

[KORZAHK]

you make it sound like you never lift to failure. how do you get maximum results if you don't lift to failure, and why do the total number of sets at any given percentage vary; what are the usual number of sets?

[SupremeSportsPT]

@KORZAHK We do NOT lift to failure in the competitive lifts (SQ, BP, DL) unless we're in the off-season or trying something new. When you train to failure, your form gets sloppy and you're reinforcing a bad motor pattern. Our objective is to become as technically proficient as possible. I'd rather nail two perfect doubles, then do a sloppy set of four. The number of sets varies upon the lifter, where they are in their preparation for a contest, how they feel that specific day, etc.

[KORZAHK]

@SupremeSportsPT thank you

[fabienRw1]

thanks for posting this

[SupremeSportsPT]

@fabienRw1 You are very welcome.

[TheMightyClaybear]

This is absolute fucking GOLD!!!!!!

[SupremeSportsPT]

@TheMightyClaybear Glad u like. :-)

[SupremeSportsPT]

@ColonialPatriot1776 Not for single joint because again it's unlikely you'd max out on a single joint movement and therefore if you didn't max out, what number would you base your percentages from? As for all of the other movements, we aren't quite as scientific. We definitely pay attention to cycling our volume and intensity but again, how do you max out on a Glute Ham Raise, for example? The fact is we simply try to improve via sets, reps, or weight lifted. I hope that makes sense.

[SupremeSportsPT]

@ColonialPatriot1776 When you say accessory movements, are you referring to compound movements like floor press, front squat, barbell rows, etc.? Or single joint movements like triceps extensions, etc.? The reason you typically don't use this chart for accessory movements is b/c you wouldn't typically take a 1RM on a barbell row or a triceps extension, etc. Remember also that accessory movements mean "in addition to" so they are added onto your main movements...kinda like a supplement.

[acer9reca]

so is this table only for compound movments like deadlifts squats benchpress overheadpress? what about going to failure on a set? does this not apply? and what about excersies like barbell curls or lat pull downs, does this table apply to these excersises? thanks

[SupremeSportsPT]

@acer9reca Correct. This is for compound movements (SQ, BP, DL, Snatch, CnJ, etc.). This table does not apply to accessory movements like curls, pulldowns, etc. People rarely max out on these movements. Our powerlifters and Olympic lifters never go to failure on the competition lifts because that usually induces breakdowns in form which reinforces a negative motor pattern. The only movements we'd ever go to failure on are smaller movements like DB presses, rows, triceps, curls, etc.

[acer9reca]

@SupremeSportsPT Thank you. I will try to make a routine using this table. I was going to failure on all exercises. doing 2-3 sets at 6 reps

[Polarcupcheck]

@acer9reca If you notice one thing. When working 3 sets to failure with about 3-5 minutes rest between sets, the total reps usually falls around the optimum or a little above for that intensity on the table.

For me

3 RM (5 min.) - 1x3, 1x2, 1x2 = 7 reps

7 RM (3 min.) - 1x7, 1x5, 1x4 = 16 reps

9 RM (5 min.) - 1x9, 1x7, 1x5 = 21 reps

What you really need to do is track your volume and see what works for you.

[Polarcupcheck]

@acer9reca...Continued....I found that using this table for one exercise for a set of muscle groups (push or pull) 3x a week (M,W,F) was not enough to make the fastest progress. When I doubled the volume, I made daily small gains. Oddly enough, I'm playing with sets to failure, now. I need to give it a month or two to make a good comparison. Keep in mind, there are very little guidelines on the weekly and monthly volume used in the creation of the table. You just need to experiment.

[cubencis]

great explanation. thank you

[nicksavage1981]

awesome video!!!

[MotherSuperior1000]

I don't even know how many times I have quoted this video in training forums. Thanks for putting this up.

[SupremeSportsPT]

@MotherSuperior1000 Your welcome and thank you very much for your kind words. I'm glad you found this useful.

[mastermehoff6]

thanks for making such a great video ..... one question how would you use this leading up to a meet? do you pyramid up with the percentages each week or just alternate back and forth from high volume low intensity to low volume high intensity. and is it different from raw to geared anything would help please message me .

[IrishMarc1]

Good summary.

[SupremeSportsPT]

Thank you sir.

[madaozeki]

Excellent summary! Thanks for posting this :) One comment about the Olympic lifts was a bit off-target I thought: it's not that the Olympic lifts have no eccentric portion that makes it possible to work much higher volume with singles and doubles over 90%; rather, it's that the limiting factor in an Olympic lift isn't raw strength, but rather ability to generate power. The weights used (especially) for the snatch are FAR below a lifters max squat or dead, so a 90% weight is "light" in some sense

[madaozeki]

@madaozeki ...which makes it possible to take a short break, reset, and go again and again and again, for many more singles or doubles than you could do with a 90%+ squat, for example. For this same reason, Olympic lifts under 80% load typically have little to no training effect whatsoever, so are only used in warmup. Finally, high-rep sets (more than 3) on the Olympic lifts are practically never used by competent athletes for similar reasons.

[SupremeSportsPT]

Agreed. Thanks for sharing.

[Polarcupcheck]

@madaozeki You make an interesting point. The thing is, when guys are going for record lifts, essentially 1 rep max, many are fighting hard out of the overhead squat position. It would be hard to say that the lift was nothing more than speed of bar technique at work. I agree, though, nobody cleans what they back squat, or deadlift.

If what you say is true, when sticking to the table, you might want to shift the percentages lower for all percent ranges. Personally, I haven't found it...

[Polarcupcheck]

@Polarcupcheck ...to be necessary. You can make good gains by doing 70% on up as specified.

The more I think about it, I think the weakest link in the chain is the one to watch out for. Most people can partial squat way more than they can full squat. Yet, when they do full squats they get toasted by work that would be a joke in a partial range. To me, the back squat strength would be the strong link, and something in the snatch would be the weak link, and gets overstressed. I doubt it is...

[madaozeki]

@Polarcupcheck Right! In the snatch, the reason lifters fight out of the hole isn't because the overhead squat is tough; rather, it's that the bar is slightly out of position and they're fighting to maintain balance. Even on a max snatch, if the bar is in perfect position, the lifter will stand up like it's a joke. So the weak link on snatch IS technique-related, often to do with bar path. This might be a strength deficiency somewhere, but is just as likely remedied with slight technique tweaks.

[topformfitness]

Excellent... very comprehensive review of Prilepin's chart. I use it all the time with my athletes also, and you've explained it's application better than I've done. Thanks!

[SupremeSportsPT]

Your welcome. And thank you for the post. Best regards.

[ss4vegeta1]

Thanks Bro I have been looking this for a long time. 5 stars

[SupremeSportsPT]

You are very welcome.  I am glad the video was helpful. Best wishes in your training.

[Polarcupcheck]

My question about this table is the frequency of the workouts that were used in obtaining these numbers. I have yet to come across any information that suggest the weekly volume or the frequency, in addition to the rest between sets. I have also wondered how this stacks up against grease the groove.

Another thing, when you talked about altering it for powerlifting, and said you never did more than 3 singles in a workout, what other work was done in the workout for that exercise?

[SupremeSportsPT]

Rather than type something long-winded here, I'll email you with some answers.

[dezmoney19]

This was very helpful, Matt. Please also extend my thanks to Sioux-z.

[EricTalmant]

Very comprehensive, Matt!  Excellent presentation!

Eric

[SupremeSportsPT]

Thanks Eric!

[nuninu118]

This shit works! I am living proof! Thanks Matt-Ellen

[patrickhdonnelly]

Good info, great ending.

I look forward to see your facility tomorrow at the grand opening!

[Matgic1]

Very nice, Matt.

[SupremeSportsPT]

Thank you all for your kind remarks.

[irondawg50]

Basically what my squat cycle revolves around.  Good vid Matt.

[radairruse]

Aha! I've been eyeing this poster in the gym and wondering if I should start using it in my training. Thanks for clearing everything up!

[adarqui]

great vid..

propz.

[Blenderate]

Thanks for making this video, Matt. Very helpful.

[DJSTARER]

nice matt

[TheLiveMen07]

Bravo. This video was lucid, detailed and very informative. Thank you, for your efforts. I'm hoping to train via internet with Manuel. This video affirms my desire to do so; knowing that Manuel works alongside peers as serious as this video represents you as being is greatly encouraging.