Minimums: What They Are And How To Use Them

Minimums: What Are They And How Can We Use Them?

In a recent Instagram post, I spoke about the concept of intensity “minimum,” and how they can be an invaluable tool in your training arsenal.

But, first… what is a minimum? Effectively, your minimums are the most reliable loads that you can consistently hit in a given rep range.

For example, let’s say you typically train triples in your Back Squat training, as that’s what you’ve perceived to be the biggest bang for your strength buck. If you take an indefinite approach of a top set triple at an 8 RPE during your strength phases, you’d surely see volatility in the absolute loads of those sets across a given 6-20 week training phase. The “minimum” is the load at which you become confident that you can reliably hit (at the target RPE or less) on a week to week basis.

Take the below graphic as an example data set of a lifter who has a 3RM PR of 445 lb

Take the below graphic as an example data set of a lifter who has a 3RM PR of 445 lb:

At first glance, what you probably notice is that these loads are all over the place. And, it’s probably difficult to discern whether or not progress is being made. But, upon closer evaluation, it becomes apparent that this lifter’s “minimum” rises from 365 to 375 over the course of 20 weeks. They are reliably and consistently able to hit at least 375 lbs by week 20, even though that strength increase might not yet manifest as rep PRs in that lift (remember - we’re in a strength phase, *NOT* a preparatory or performance phase).. 

Ultimately, we’d love a much larger dataset to draw from, but the logic still applies.

This is a concept that I’ve borrowed from the late Glenn Pendlay and applied to my own coaching & training. See, in olympic weightlifting, it’s near universal that we’re maxing out once per week, where we get to see improvements more acutely because these are highly technical lifts that typically require frequent practice at intensities that are above 85%. So, if you go from reliably making 85% without missing or technical deviation, to reliably making 90% without missing or technical deviation, the “minimum” has risen.

I’ve simply taken that logic, applied it to priority strength lifts, and made a concerted effort to stretch out the window with which I prefer to look through during an athlete’s training.

“But, Craig!! If it’s not manifesting as PRs, why should we care?!”

Glad you asked. Because now you get to read a mini-diatribe about how I hate the current state of strength coaching in this industry and its preference for repeatedly trying to “perform,” instead of actually building strength. All to often, we’re seeing heavier and heavier sets, with more and more technical deviations that *are not* manifesting as performance increases in competition or preparatory phases.

Using the concept of raising your minimums, instead of trying to PR all the F’ing time, will surely improve top end strength when the time comes to test it.

I know this concept is going to feel tricky and backwards to some. That’s okay! We’ve got a great team of coaches at Compound Performance who can help you navigate and make sense of the very normal fluctuations in day to day, or week to week training.

Hope this was useful for some of you!

Talk Soon,

Coach Craig.