T Nation

What's Your Current Training Volume?

What is it?

I figured out my average total workload per week with pause ATG front squats alone, and I had:

6165 lbs. worth of lifting (warm ups not included)

I just wanna get a good idea of how much newbs, intermediates, advanced athletes have as far as total workload PER WEEK.

Thanks for posting!

edit: i read it as including pause front squats with everything else, not just those alone.

i’m a loser.

sorry OP.

This week 14,762 lbs. for squats, including all lifts performed at roughly 60% or higher.

It’s not really all that meaningful a calculation is it? I did front squats only this morning and totaled close to 7000 lbs because of high reps, but lower reps higher weight would have kicked my ass.

Good point.

I should say that all of my reps were in the 5 or fewer range for squats so you know what intensity range I was working in for most of that volume.

[quote]debraD wrote:
It’s not really all that meaningful a calculation is it? I did front squats only this morning and totaled close to 7000 lbs because of high reps, but lower reps higher weight would have kicked my ass.[/quote]

I am mainly talking about the reps that are done for strength. Of course, alot of people can go up to 10,000 lbs. worth of workload in one workout while using the bar for 222 repetitions. That’s like doing 11 repetitions for 20 sets…

I’m only referring to the sets that are mainly for STRENGTH and/or POWER training purposes.

Thanks for posting though Debra. Your back looks sexy.

[quote]HolyMacaroni wrote:
edit: i read it as including pause front squats with everything else, not just those alone.

i’m a loser.

sorry OP.

[/quote]

NO! You’re not a loser. You’re a T-MAN! You and everyone else in this forum are equally awesome! I mean it.

I agree with deb :wink:

26,055 for two squat workouts. Tomorrow mornings squat session will put it at 34,335 (it took me twenty minutes and two calculators to figure that up).

It’s just a number. Personally, I would rather have a big squat day than big total volume day.

…mmmmmmmm Deb…

Guys, can you please post your current training experience and stats WITH your workload? I need extra details.

[quote]undesired08 wrote:
…it took me twenty minutes and two calculators to figure that up…[/quote]

I didn’t have a calculator. You don’t want to know how long it took me or how many fingers and toes I had to use…

[quote]Checkmate wrote:
undesired08 wrote:
…it took me twenty minutes and two calculators to figure that up…

I didn’t have a calculator. You don’t want to know how long it took me or how many fingers and toes I had to use…[/quote]

lol

[quote]Checkmate wrote:
undesired08 wrote:
…it took me twenty minutes and two calculators to figure that up…

I didn’t have a calculator. You don’t want to know how long it took me or how many fingers and toes I had to use…[/quote]

LOL! I would have had to stop after 19 (missing a toe).

Like people have been saying, volume almost isn’t that meaningful of a metric to measure your workout. You alluded to this, and Checkmate nailed it: it’s all about lifts of high intensity. For the Russians it meant lifts over 60%. It could (and should) be broken down further into 60-69%, 70-79%, 80-89%, etc. lifts.

Doing it this way also removes the need for tonnage and allows you to calculate volume based on the number of lifts alone, broken down into zones of intensity. Buy A System of Multi-Year Training in Weightlifting to get it from the horse’s mouth.

[quote]TYPE2B wrote:
Guys, can you please post your current training experience and stats WITH your workload? I need extra details.[/quote]

I am a former “advanced” level lifter who basically hasn’t done serious shit for a long time, at least not continuously. I have had several “comes backs,” then work takes over for months at a time and kills all the progress back I had been making to advanced level again.

So right now I am doing a beginner’s routine for a couple months (with some alterations) to get as much of my strength levels back as I can (and some of my lost body weight), and when that no longer works, onto an intermediate level program for as long as it takes after that to get back to advanced.

My present stats are 5’7" 160 lbs., down from 182 at my peak. I lift heavy 3x per week and do GTG/GPP work for 2 sets of 5 with 70% of my previous day’s work sets 3 times per week.

I worked out “heavy” today (a relative term) with 3 set of 5 with 225 ATG squats (which means tomorrow I do 2x5 at 157.5).

I just looked at my numbers again and it makes me sad. To think what was once toy weight to me is now a “work set”

(sigh)

[quote]Yoda-x wrote:
Like people have been saying, volume almost isn’t that meaningful of a metric to measure your workout. You alluded to this, and Checkmate nailed it: it’s all about lifts of high intensity. For the Russians it meant lifts over 60%. It could (and should) be broken down further into 60-69%, 70-79%, 80-89%, etc. lifts. Doing it this way also removes the need for tonnage and allows you to calculate volume based on the number of lifts alone, broken down into zones of intensity. Buy A System of Multi-Year Training in Weightlifting to get it from the horse’s mouth.[/quote]

lol. I think I know where you’re going. Christian Thibaudeau has created a revised version of the Prilepin table in his book “Black Book of training secrets”.

[quote]Checkmate wrote:
I just looked at my numbers again and it makes me sad. To think what was once toy weight to me is now a “work set”

(sigh)[/quote]

Makes you think about what you could do if you were a pro in any sport, actor, or independently wealthy so that you could work out all the time… But, in the real world, work and family are more important.

I know what you are saying, undesired.

I remember several years ago, going to see an ART specialist that often worked with the PLers in my gym. He was located right in Westwood blocks from UCLA and worked with a lot of Bruin athletes. He was working with some kid getting him ready for the NFL combines around the time I came to see him (cannot remember the kid’s name, but he was in the secondary and I think went in the 2nd or 3rd round).

The doc asked me how my training was going and I told him what my last squat workout was. Right as I did that, the kid called about an appointment. The doc told the kid that he had a 32 y/o 170 lb. Jewish attorney who was squatting whatever weight I was squatting at the time.

I could hear the kid through the receiver saying “HOLY SHIT!! NO FUCKING WAY! THAT IS WAY MORE THAN ME!”

I have to admit, that was one of my prouder moments.

I’ll get there again soon enough (of course now I’ll be a 38 y/o)

Total tonnage or workload is a nice figure to use, but average intensity also needs to be measured.

Example taken from a post on Lyle McDonald’s site:

Example:
“240x5 280x5 320x5 360x5 400x5, for a total volume of 8000 lbs. The same volume is accomplished with 320x5x5”

assuming good form, say 400x5 is a 5RM, thus = 100% effort
so 360x5 = (360/400)^(# greater than 1) = call it 85%*
so 320x5 = (320/400)^(# greater than 1) = call it 70%*
the rest are crap

so 320x5x5 is like 5x5 @ ~ 70% effort … maybe decent for hypertrophy, but that’s going to suck for strength

both examples provide the same volume
the first has much better potential for strength gains
the second has much better potential for wasting your time

[quote]Checkmate wrote:
I know what you are saying, undesired.

I remember several years ago, going to see an ART specialist that often worked with the PLers in my gym. He was located right in Westwood blocks from UCLA and worked with a lot of Bruin athletes. He was working with some kid getting him ready for the NFL combines around the time I came to see him (cannot remember the kid’s name, but he was in the secondary and I think went in the 2nd or 3rd round).

The doc asked me how my training was going and I told him what my last squat workout was. Right as I did that, the kid called about an appointment. The doc told the kid that he had a 32 y/o 170 lb. Jewish attorney who was squatting whatever weight I was squatting at the time.

I could hear the kid through the receiver saying “HOLY SHIT!! NO FUCKING WAY! THAT IS WAY MORE THAN ME!”

I have to admit, that was one of my prouder moments.

I’ll get there again soon enough (of course now I’ll be a 38 y/o)[/quote]

Hahaha. Good one.