Many lifters wonder whether their performance in the gym is normal. When performing multiple sets, many lifters will notice they can’t quite match the number of reps they got on the first set on set 2, 3, and so on. As a lifter and as a coach, knowing how much of a drop-off to expect can be informative. If you notice you have less of a drop-off than normal, for example, you may not be pushing sets as close to failure as you think. So, what’s considered “normal”?
That’s exactly what a meta-analysis by Nuzzo sought to determine. 29 studies that included at least 4 sets to failure with a fixed load were included (e.g. if your first set used 70% 1RM, you had to do all sets with 70% 1RM, allowing reps to drop). The percentage drop-off in reps per set across these studies was calculated.
For 4-set protocols, participants experienced the following average reductions in total reps per set.
For 5-set protocols, participants experienced the following average reductions in total reps per set.
For 6-set protocols, participants experienced the following average reductions in total reps per set.
You’ll notice that the drop-offs from set 1 to set 2, and set 2 to set 3, and set 3 to set 4, aren’t quite the same for these graphs.
While we can’t be perfectly sure, I suspect that’s due to a combination of two factors. For one, sampling variance – measured effects will cluster around the true effect, but won’t be perfectly spot-on every time. The second reason – and this is more of a hunch – is that lifters may put in a bit more/less effort depending on how many sets they have ahead of them. For example, if they know they have more sets ahead of themselves, they may subconsciously pace themselves, and take it a bit easier on the first couple of sets.
As a general heuristic, the authors suggest that set 2 repetitions are about 70% of set 1 reps. Set 3 repetitions are around 55% of set 1 reps. Set 4 repetitions are around 50% of set 1 reps. Set 5 reps are about 45% of set 1 reps. Every subsequent set seems to have similar reps, suggesting fatigue plateaus after about 5 sets at a given load.
Importantly, the exact drop-off to expect will likely depend on the individual’s characteristics and context. Things like:
- Cardiovascular fitness
- Rest times
- Proximity to failure
- Rep range
- Previous exercises performed/pre-existing fatigue
But, these are good ballpark estimates that you can use for your own training and coaching clients.
When a program calls for multiple sets on a single exercise, another question that commonly crops up is whether you should reduce weight on the bar, let proximity to failure increase, or simply let reps drop.
The answer is “it depends.” Unfortunately, we don’t really have direct research on the topic, measuring hypertrophy or strength gains from different outcomes.
Butwe can speculate a bit. For muscular strength, intensity – load on the bar – is closely associated with greater strength gains. On the flip side, neither increased proximity to failure nor higher reps seem beneficial. So, we’ll probably want to err on the side of maintaining weight, whilst allowing reps to drop.
For hypertrophy, on the other hand, intensity is more flexible. Similar muscle growth is observed between 5 to 50 reps per setprovided it’s pushed equally close to failure. Likewise, pushing a set closer to failure probably increases hypertrophy. As a general heuristic, dropping weight makes sense if your next set might go below 5 reps, or if you’re no longer hitting your target rep range. Alternatively, you can simply go closer to failure with each set, since this increases hypertrophy stimulus. Finally, if your reps will remain above 5, or in your target rep range, there’s nothing wrong with letting reps drop set-to-set vs getting a fixed number of reps.
