Why is using RPE important for hybrid programming?
Is RPE missing from your Hybrid training?
Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE) is the perceptual effort of an athlete when performing a task. In training an RPE score may be used by a coach or an athlete to determine the perceived effort when performing a particular exercise or a whole training session. The RPE scale was first devised and used by psychologist Professor Gunnar Borg. In its original form the RPE scale ranged from 6 (no exertion at all) to 20 (maximal exertion) as it was based on the high correlation between the scale and heart rate. Borg also devised a generalised version of the scale (Borg CR10) which ranges between 0 and 10 which, likely owing to the ease of its use, is now widely used in performance training and monitoring. In this section I will be referring to the CR10 scale when discussing RPE.
RPE has become more popular in recent years with coaches looking to gain subjective data from their athletes. An athlete’s perceived effort will be derived from how they are feeling before, during and after the exercise or session, which means a lot of different physiological responses can contribute to this feeling of effort. This will include heart rate, speed of movement, muscle soreness and stiffness, and psychological fatigue, just to name a few. Because of this, RPE is often used as a measure of internal load. This can be tracked as a method of load management, like tracking the loads, set and reps (external load) of any strength training athlete.
RPE can be both descriptive and prescriptive. For example, if you programme squats for your athlete at RPE8, they choose a load they perceive will make the exercise feel 8/10 in terms of effort (prescriptive). Conversely, RPE can be used after the session when the athlete reflects on the effort to perform a training session (descriptive). Often, descriptive RPE can be used to determine the effort of the training sessions (session RPE) or can be used to describe the perceived effort of a part of a training session. These RPE values are often multiplied by session duration to determine time spent at this intensity of internal load.
Because of its simplicity and feasibility in tracking the progression of an athlete the RPE scale is a very beneficial tool for hybrid athletes. Gathering these data gives you a story of how the athlete is responding to the training, giving you better insight on how to auto-regulate training. For example, you can prescribe the same RPE for several weeks in row when preforming back squats, but the loads lifted can continue to increase. That is because the athlete has adapted to the training the previous week and therefore will add more load to the bar to achieve the same RPE the next week. It’s a great example of the athlete self-regulating progression. Similarly, RPE can be effectively used to auto-regulate training to accommodate fatigue. If the hybrid athlete is feeling particularly fatigued, whether that is from training or from indirect factors like work and family, then the athlete will self-select lower loads which still elicits the internal load and perceived stress response of the same RPE. The internal load is still challenging so as to progress the athlete, but the loads used to do that are altered based on how the athlete is feeling.
However, despite it being simple to use, it is difficult to master and takes time and practise. Many psychological factors can influence our use of RPE. Our ego or motivational factors can cause us to overshoot our prescribed RPE values, or perceive higher intensities to be of lower effort, which if done too regularly could be problematic for the compounding effect of fatigue. Also, in the excellent Progress Theory episode with Dr Shaun McLaren, he discusses the perceptual factors which can affect our judgement of effort, particularly task end point. Intervals or tempo runs during our endurance training are longer in duration if compared to sets of strength training exercises. Because of this duration our perception of effort will likely change throughout the interval and be affected by our distance from the end of the set (task end point). This makes prescriptive effort for endurance training more difficult because it is harder to maintain a consistent effort over a longer time, which can also be affected by how long it takes you to finish the interval.
I think RPE should form the basis of all training programmes. Despite some difficulties initially, its ease of use, flexibility of use for auto-regulating training, and using the subjective data for insight on how the athlete is feeling or adapting, makes it essential for individualised training programming. To overcome the issues discussed in the previous section I like to use further exercise specific descriptors. So rather than asking the athlete ‘how did that feel out of 10?’ I would use further information to help the athlete guide their perception of effort based on performance markers. These can be:
· Additional, exercise specific descriptors for the scale
· Data from other tests (Step test, 3 minute all out test, for example)
Let’s use an example using endurance training.
As we increase the intensity of endurance training and move through each training intensity domain our ventilatory responses start to change. At the first threshold, the amount of lactate that accumulates in the blood starts to become greater than lactate being cleared, which causes an increased breathing rate as the body tries to expel the increased CO2 caused by increased buffering of acid metabolites. Because of this it is harder to maintain a conversation once you’re exercising above the first threshold. In the heavy domain your body can still achieve a steady state (heart rate becomes consistent etc) so you can still communicate a few words, but the increased breathing rate makes this more difficult. If we increase exercise intensity and pass threshold 2 into the severe domain, lactate accumulation exponentially rises, further increasing breathing rate. It is here that O2 demands are greater than what is being delivered to the working muscles so breathing rate increases considerably. It is why we struggle to talk at all when training above threshold 2 in the severe domain.
Because of these changes in ventilation, we can then use the following descriptors of verbal communication as proxies for estimating which training intensity domain we are currently exercising in.
Before threshold 1 - Maintain a conversation without becoming breathless
Before threshold 2 - Can speak in short sentences but it requires constant effort
After threshold 2 - Very difficult to maintain 2-3 words, if any
We can then assign the RPE scale to this model (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Assigning RPE values based on the increase in blood lactate concentration as exercise intensity increases.
What I personally like about this approach is that it gives the athlete a guide to what training in each domain should feel like, and they can use the verbal descriptors as a method of checking they are training in the correct domain. As an example, I use a quote from American author Jack London, which I repeat every kilometre to check how breathless I am at the end of saying the quote out loud. For my low intensity runs, if I am breathless or finishing the last sentence is a bit of a struggle, then I know I am moving too fast and I slow down. I have caught myself running too fast many times, despite the effort feeling easy (usually it is because I am listening to music, which I find can skew my perception of effort at times). I would recommend choosing a 2-3 sentence quote for you to use. It needs to be long enough so that it represents a brief conversation, which you can use to estimate you are training below the first threshold. If it is too short, it may lead you to overestimate your effort. You can also use the first line of the quote for your training in the heavy domain. And if you can barely say the quote at all, you know you are training in the severe domain.
The use of RPE in this model also brings context to the effort required for exercising in each domain. A common mistake many runners make is performing their easy runs (moderate domain) too intensely (heavy domain). You could even ask a runner to give an RPE value for an easy run and they will give a response which is higher than the effort they should be giving their easy runs. Using the RPE scale in figure 1 gives low-intensity endurance training a rating between 2-4, a recommendation I’ve been using since my Progress Theory episode with S&C coach Sean Seale. This is much lower than what most people expect an easy run to be rated, but this is deliberate. Aiming for an RPE3 for your intensity run stops you running too fast (almost on the side of caution) and will set you in the correct training domain to develop the aerobic qualities for which you are aiming. Doing this alongside using verbal cues to help determine your training intensity makes this an effective method for programme prescription which is easy to follow for the athlete.
There are also many ways you can test performance and use these data to enhance your training programming. However, not everyone has the technology to perform complex testing. If you are new to training this is something you can build up over time as you become more familiar with your training and how you adapt. I’d definitely recommend eventually doing some form of testing to show you are training correctly and you are progressing in the right direction. But, regardless of experience, everyone can use RPE programming. RPE is the foundation of programming because it can be used so effectively and incorporated within training and testing methodologies. Its use can guide with the use of descriptors and be informed through data collection, whether through testing by tracking metrics such as speed and heart rate or testing protocols like a step test. We can pick and choose how much of this information we use to guide our training, yet RPE always forms the basis of it. It is for this reason I use RPE in my coaching and training.
The other main reason I like to use RPE as the basis of my programming for hybrid training is that it can be used across both strength and endurance components. Strength training is usually programmed using metrics like loads lifted and barbell velocity, whereas endurance training use power output, speed, and heart rate. These are all different units and can all be influenced by fatigue or progressive overload in different ways, which makes it hard to progressively programme for each component of hybrid training. Using RPE means I can programme sessions for both strength and endurance components using the same metric, making it easier to monitor progression and make auto-regulated changes to the programme. This aligns nicely with the training principle of programming ‘hot sessions’ as the key focus of a training week. I might have one hot session each for strength and endurance, where RPE reaches 8 or 9, and then the other sessions consist of RPE ranging from easy (2-4) to moderate (5-7). This way I know when the intensity of effort, regardless of exercise type, is going to be highest. I can then programme the week to ensure freshness and recovery around the high RPE sessions are protected.
Keep embracing creativity
Dr Phil Price
🌐 Website - https://www.theprogresstheory.com/
🎥 Youtube - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu1W0i8daXZbxEAeV17eMGw
📸 Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/drphilprice/?hl=en
Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? head to www.kult.media
HMN24 - Fuelling human performance - Optimise your day by checking out their amazing supplements - Use phil10 for 10% at checkout - https://hmn24.com/
