T Nation

Ever Heard of Plates Less Than 2.5 Lbs?

I still don’t get what is so wrong with adding reps until you are at the top end of your rep range, then add weight and start at the bottom of the range again. Is it much easier to get the same amount of reps with 2 added lbs than to get one extra rep with last weeks weight?

No one said there was anything wrong with what you have described, when it can be done.

And generally for a beginner, yes, after adding weight (and the reps dropping) each week can see an extra rep or sometimes better.

[quote]josh86 wrote:
Completely pointless thread. [/quote]

Thanks for you insight, dick.

Hopefully you never have to rehab a traumatic injury like some of us have.

[quote]ucallthatbass wrote:
josh86 wrote:
Completely pointless thread.

Thanks for you insight, dick.

Hopefully you never have to rehab a traumatic injury like some of us have.[/quote]

I have, more than once…and I fail to see how asking if people have heard of plates less than 2.5 lbs has anything to do with that. This thread is an attempt for the OP to feel better about himself by finding out that he’s not the only one who never heard of them (they were brought up by I believe MODOK in the previous thread, and with good cause). His thread about adding weight every workout was stupid too, people fucking over analyze everything on this forum. Its ridiculous as hell. The previous thread did nothing but probably cause newbs to think “Omg I shouldn’t even try to add weight every workout because its not possible to do it every time”…and this one will accomplish, probably nothing.

I find them useful with Oly lifting

I didn’t think that .5kg made much of a differnce until I was snatching it;
it made the difference a bad lift and a perfect timing new PR.

  • 1kg is + 1kg :slight_smile:

[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
fuck, lol[/quote]

never seen below 2.5, but I’m a stupid little bitch.

Elieko makes friction plates that slip outside of the collar for meets. Goes all the way down to .5kg for competition sets. They’re a bitch to load

I bought a set from Piedmont Design Associates (although I believe the owner died, thought they were shutting down the business after everything was sold). Do a Google search for “fractional plates”.

Yes, itty bitty plates are used for setting records.

[quote]Sabastian525 wrote:
I like the gym that spray painted everything under 10 pounds a bright pink. Implying that unless you are a pussy or have a pussy, you don’t have any business putting these on an olympic bar. Competitions aside, of course.

-Sab[/quote]

That must be a gym with really stupid owners. That’s probably the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard about weightlifting.

[quote]165StateChamp wrote:
Sabastian525 wrote:
I like the gym that spray painted everything under 10 pounds a bright pink. Implying that unless you are a pussy or have a pussy, you don’t have any business putting these on an olympic bar. Competitions aside, of course.

-Sab

That must be a gym with really stupid owners. That’s probably the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard about weightlifting. [/quote]

LOL. I’m pretty sure it was Dave Tate that wrote an article over at EliteFTS saying he does this. If I think of it later when I’m home I’ll try to find the article.

[quote]MODOK wrote:
Mr.Purple wrote:
I still don’t get what is so wrong with adding reps until you are at the top end of your rep range, then add weight and start at the bottom of the range again. Is it much easier to get the same amount of reps with 2 added lbs than to get one extra rep with last weeks weight?

Yes, it requires a lot more strength gain to do that. If you can do it, its a GREAT way to progress. But once you start reaching your limit strength, its a little hard. Example from my training journal-

6/14/2009

Bench Press 417 x 6

6/15/2009

Bench Press 419 x 6.5 (fail on rep 7)

No way in hell I could do 417 x 7, but I did get 419 x 6 pretty good because:

417 x 7 = 2919 lbs lifted

419 x 6 = 2514 lbs lifted. Big difference. But, its improvemnet over

417 x 6 = 2502 lbs lifted.

See what I’m saying?[/quote]

Yep, I get it, and I should have just thought it through myself. lol

Thanks for explaining, and I guess I can get by without micro loading for a while yet then.

[quote]josh86 wrote:
165StateChamp wrote:
Sabastian525 wrote:
I like the gym that spray painted everything under 10 pounds a bright pink. Implying that unless you are a pussy or have a pussy, you don’t have any business putting these on an olympic bar. Competitions aside, of course.

-Sab

That must be a gym with really stupid owners. That’s probably the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard about weightlifting.

LOL. I’m pretty sure it was Dave Tate that wrote an article over at EliteFTS saying he does this. If I think of it later when I’m home I’ll try to find the article. [/quote]

I thought Jack Reape does that in his gym. I thought I saw it somewhere in some thread in a galaxy far, far away.

[quote]ukrainian wrote:
josh86 wrote:
165StateChamp wrote:
Sabastian525 wrote:
I like the gym that spray painted everything under 10 pounds a bright pink. Implying that unless you are a pussy or have a pussy, you don’t have any business putting these on an olympic bar. Competitions aside, of course.

-Sab

That must be a gym with really stupid owners. That’s probably the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard about weightlifting.

LOL. I’m pretty sure it was Dave Tate that wrote an article over at EliteFTS saying he does this. If I think of it later when I’m home I’ll try to find the article.

I thought Jack Reape does that in his gym. I thought I saw it somewhere in some thread in a galaxy far, far away.[/quote]

Rick Hussey doesn’t do that and I’d follow him before Dave Tate or Jack Reape. Also, that’s just insulting.

[quote]MODOK wrote:
Bench Press 419 x 6.5 (fail on rep 7)

No way in hell I could do 417 x 7, but I did get 419 x 6 pretty good because:

417 x 7 = 2919 lbs lifted

419 x 6 = 2514 lbs lifted. Big difference. But, its improvemnet over

417 x 6 = 2502 lbs lifted.

See what I’m saying?[/quote]

I’ve seen this argument before. At first glance, it makes sense. But, frankly, I think it’s nonsense math. You simply can’t compare those quantities like that. You may be right in your conclusion, and I certainly believe it to be right, that at certain strength levels it is easier to add 5 lbs than a rep, but I really don’t think what you’ve calculated proves it.

Let’s say you DID get 417 x 7 = 2919 lbs lifted. That’s 417 extra pounds of work done. If you want to compare those quantities like that, then 417x7 is the same as 487x6. I don’t think you’ll agree that this is true. 487x6 is much stronger.

If you use standard 1RM estimators (a better method to support your point could be made using these formulas), which are relatively accurate, even those show that 417x7 “does not equal” 487x6.

On-topic: I have heard of, and used, 2.5 lb plates. I never really bothered to use them. They’re not necessary, but I definitely can see their utility, ESPECIALLY when using DB’s. However, I don’t think they’re so great when used in a commercial gym.

I recall reading somewhere that commercial gym 45 lb plates tend to be off up to 1 lbs. If you go in one day, and bench “315”, you’re probably not actually benching 315 lbs. It could be off by as much as 6 lbs. You might only be benching 309! Another day, you may grab all the 45# plates that are 1 lbs heavier than they should be. Now you’re benching 321 lbs!

The weight of a typical microplate loading is going to be only 2.5#'s. However, this isn’t large enough to offset the difference you’re already experiencing because of the weight inaccuracies of the large plates.

[quote]goochadamg wrote:

I recall reading somewhere that commercial gym 45 lb plates tend to be off up to 1 lbs. If you go in one day, and bench “315”, you’re probably not actually benching 315 lbs. It could be off by as much as 6 lbs. You might only be benching 309! Another day, you may grab all the 45# plates that are 1 lbs heavier than they should be. Now you’re benching 321 lbs!

[/quote]

This is why I take a scale with me every time I go to the gym. No point in lifting heavy ass weights if you ‘really’ don’t know how much you’re lifting in the first place.

If you thought people give you funny looks when you bring chains or bands in.
Just wait till you bring a scale in…and start weighing plates, luckily I’ve never been asked to leave.

[quote]xb-C wrote:
goochadamg wrote:

I recall reading somewhere that commercial gym 45 lb plates tend to be off up to 1 lbs. If you go in one day, and bench “315”, you’re probably not actually benching 315 lbs. It could be off by as much as 6 lbs. You might only be benching 309! Another day, you may grab all the 45# plates that are 1 lbs heavier than they should be. Now you’re benching 321 lbs!

This is why I take a scale with me every time I go to the gym. No point in lifting heavy ass weights if you ‘really’ don’t know how much you’re lifting in the first place.

If you thought people give you funny looks when you bring chains or bands in.
Just wait till you bring a scale in…and start weighing plates, luckily I’ve never been asked to leave.
[/quote]

I see from your blog you weighed 170 lbs at 6’4 (In may, so, maybe you’re 180~ now). Anyway, this problem doesn’t concern you, as a 1/45 per lb of weight variance isn’t a problem when you’re only using the 10 lb plates. :wink:

[quote]165StateChamp wrote:
ukrainian wrote:
josh86 wrote:
165StateChamp wrote:
Sabastian525 wrote:
I like the gym that spray painted everything under 10 pounds a bright pink. Implying that unless you are a pussy or have a pussy, you don’t have any business putting these on an olympic bar. Competitions aside, of course.

-Sab

That must be a gym with really stupid owners. That’s probably the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard about weightlifting.

LOL. I’m pretty sure it was Dave Tate that wrote an article over at EliteFTS saying he does this. If I think of it later when I’m home I’ll try to find the article.

I thought jackreape does that in his gym. I thought I saw it somewhere in some thread in a galaxy far, far away.

Rick Hussey doesn’t do that and I’d follow him before Dave Tate or Jack Reape. Also, that’s just insulting.[/quote]

I also think that doing that to the weights is completely pointless. Besides, I’m not strong enough to do that yet. I need those 5lbs.

hey for you smart people out there

ever heard of a function where you can calculate improvement adding a rep to a given weight versus adding weight to a given rep number, volume wise

it would be a nice tool

(edit) forget about that

The problem is that there is no direct comparison.

The closest I think one can come to that sort of thing is to know for a given exercise what is the most weight you can use for given numbers of reps.

For example, if you can do 2 work sets (this is just an example, of course you don’t have to be doing that particular thing) of 3 with 90 lb, and you can do 2 work sets of 5 with 80 lb, and – of course all these in different workouts so fatigue is not a factor – 2 work sets of 9 with 60 lb, then you could figure that in your case, on this exercise, a change of one rep corresponds to a change of about 5 lb. At least with regard to the 3-9 rep range.