Regulating Workout Intensity: Percentage vs RPE vs RIR

Training intensity – how hard you’re pushing in each set – can be regulated in different ways. Three popular methods are percentage-based training, RPE (Rate of Perceived Exertion), and RIR (Reps In Reserve). Each method defines how to select weights or effort for your lifts, and each has its own pros, cons, and ideal uses. Below, we break down what each method means, how it works in practice, the advantages and disadvantages, who benefits most from each, and how you can even combine them for a flexible training approach.

Percentage-Based Training

Percentage-based training uses a percentage of your one-repetition maximum (1RM) to determine the weight for each exercise. In practice, you first test or estimate your 1RM for a lift, then use a fraction of that for your working sets. For example, a program might prescribe “Bench Press – 3 sets of 8 reps at 70% of 1RM.” If your bench 1RM is 200 lbs, 70% would be about 140 lbs for those sets. Many strength programs use this method, setting target percentages each week (e.g. a progression from 70% to 80% to 90% 1RM for fewer reps over a cycle) to gradually increase intensity. Percentage-based programming has been a tried-and-true approach for decades in weightlifting and powerlifting training.

Pros: Percentage prescriptions provide clear, objective targets. The numbers don’t lie – you know exactly what weight to put on the bar, which adds structure and consistency. This makes it easy to plan long-term progressions and periodization. Coaches and athletes can map out cycles (light, moderate, heavy weeks) very precisely using %1RM. In short, it offers objectivity and structured progression, allowing you to track improvements by hard numbers. It’s also straightforward for beginners: as long as you know your max (or a training max), the program calculates the weights for you.

Cons: The biggest drawback is rigidity – percentages don’t adjust day-to-day. They assume your strength on paper is the same in the gym, which might not account for fatigue, poor sleep, or other factors that day. If your true ability is down (or up), a fixed percentage could overshoot (or undershoot) the ideal intensity. In fact, research shows that rigid %1RM prescriptions often led lifters to hit failure in training when fatigue was high. Inflexible percentages can thus push you too hard on a bad day (risking form breakdown or injury) or hold you back on a good day. Another con: to keep percentages accurate, you need to re-test your 1RM periodically, which can be time-consuming or disruptive – especially for beginners whose maxes increase rapidly.

Best For: Percentage-based training works well for those who thrive on structure and measurable goals. Novice lifters often benefit from the clarity of percentages, since it removes guesswork and builds a foundation of progressive overload. It’s a staple for powerlifters and Olympic weightlifters peaking for competition, where hitting specific loads is crucial. It’s also useful in blocks of training far from failure – for example, doing volume at 70% – because small performance fluctuations won’t meaningfully derail the workout. However, purely percentage-based plans may be less ideal when daily performance varies greatly, or for advanced lifters who need more flexibility.

RPE (Rate of Perceived Exertion)

RPE is a subjective scale (typically 1–10 in lifting) that rates how hard a set feels – essentially, your perceived effort. An RPE 10 means maximum effort (you couldn’t do any more reps); RPE 9 means you maybe had 1 rep in reserve, RPE 8 means you had about 2 reps left, and so on. In weight training, this scale is closely tied to how many reps in reserve you have at the end of a set. RPE was originally developed in endurance exercise research, but lifters adapted it as a form of autoregulation – adjusting training intensity based on how you feel that day.

In practice, RPE-based programming might say: “3 sets of 5 at RPE 8.” You warm up and choose a weight that makes your last rep of each set feel like 8/10 effort – hard, but with a couple reps left in the tank. For example, if you know you can normally squat 100 kg for 5 reps at all-out effort (that would be 5 reps @ RPE 10), an RPE 8 target means you should use around 90 kg for 5 reps, leaving a margin of 1–2 reps unused. Because RPE is subjective, it teaches you to listen to your body. On a strong day, RPE 8 might correspond to a heavier weight; on a fatigued day, you’ll use less weight to hit RPE 8. The goal is that the effort is consistent even when strength fluctuates. Coaches often use RPE for top sets (e.g. “single @ RPE 8” means work up to one fairly heavy rep that still isn’t a max) or for guiding how hard accessory exercises should be. Over weeks, you might increase the RPE target (e.g. week 1 RPE 7, week 2 RPE 8, etc.) to gradually push effort higher as you adapt.

Pros: RPE brings individualization and adaptability to training. It adjusts for daily fluctuations in strength, energy, or stress – letting you scale the weight to what “feels right” that day. This auto-regulation can prevent overreaching: you’re less likely to force reps your body isn’t ready for, reducing risk of burnout or injury. It also works across different exercises and sports (not just lifting) since it’s a general effort scale – you can use RPE for cardio, circuits, etc., making it a versatile tool. For experienced lifters, RPE is excellent to push on good days and back off on bad days, maximizing progress while managing fatigue. It makes training more “flexible” and responsive, which many find empowering. Lastly, RPE can break the monotony of strict numbers – it introduces variety because the load can vary session to session within the target effort range.

Cons: The flip side of subjectivity is inconsistency or inaccuracy, especially if you’re not used to RPE. Estimating your effort or how many reps you have left is a skill – novices often struggle with it. One person’s “9 out of 10 effort” might be another’s 7. Beginners might underrate RPE (stopping too early) or overrate (grinding too hard) because they lack reference points. Even experienced lifters can have bias; for example, you might subconsciously hold back to avoid discomfort yet call it RPE 10. In short, RPE can be unreliable if the lifter misjudges their exertion. It requires honesty and experience to use well. Additionally, some training contexts demand precise loads (like Olympic lifts) where a vague “effort 8/10” might not be as useful as a percentage. RPE also doesn’t directly tell you how much weight to use – it’s a feeling. This freedom can overwhelm those who prefer clear guidance or numbers. For these reasons, RPE is often introduced after a base of training experience is built.

Best For: RPE-based training is ideal for intermediate to advanced lifters who know their bodies and want to auto-regulate intensity. If your goal is strength or powerlifting and you’re past the newbie stage, RPE allows you to make progress without maxing out too often, adjusting load to keep each session productive. It’s also popular in programs focused on hypertrophy or general fitness, where listening to your fatigue levels can improve recovery. People who value flexibility and personalization in their workouts tend to thrive with RPE – for example, if you have a variable schedule, varying sleep or stress, RPE lets you account for that (where a fixed percentage wouldn’t). That said, beginners can use RPE in a learning capacity (to start gauging effort), but they might need guidance to calibrate their RPE correctly. Overall, use RPE if you want your day-to-day performance to guide your training load, and you’re comfortable with a bit of subjective judgment in your program.

RIR (Reps In Reserve)

RIR stands for “reps in reserve,” which literally means how many repetitions you could have done but left in the tank at the end of a set. If you finish a set and feel you could do two more reps before hitting failure, that was 2 RIR. This concept was popularized in strength training by coach Mike Tuchscherer as a practical way to quantify effort for lifters. In fact, RIR is essentially another way to express RPE: an RPE 10 means 0 RIR (no reps left); RPE 9 means ~1 RIR; RPE 8 means ~2 RIR, etc.. Many lifters find it intuitive to think in terms of “how many reps could I still do?” rather than assign a numerical effort score. RIR gives a clear picture of proximity to muscular failure.

In the gym, using RIR might look like: “Do 3 sets of 10 reps with 2 RIR.” You choose a weight that lets you complete about 10 reps, stopping when you estimate you have two good reps left in you. If you accidentally hit rep 10 and realize you had 5 more in the tank, the weight was too light – you’d increase it next time. Conversely, if you hit muscle failure on rep 10 (0 RIR), you overshot – you’d use a lighter weight or stop at 8 reps to leave 2 RIR as prescribed. For example, imagine you’re curling a weight and at 8 reps your biceps are burning; you push and manage 10 reps but know you could maybe grind out 2 more if you had to – that’s roughly a 2 RIR set. If the program wanted 1 RIR, you’d go closer to failure, stopping when you think only one rep is left in reserve. By focusing on reps left, RIR-based training ensures everyone is working at a similar relative intensity, even if absolute weights differ. A beginner might bench 100 lbs for 8 reps at 2 RIR, while an advanced lifter does 200 lbs for 8 reps at 2 RIR – both are pushing with the same closeness to their limit, which levels the effort across individuals.

Pros: RIR is very straightforward: it directly ties training to how close you get to failure, which is a key driver of strength and muscle gains. It encourages a lifter to push hard (especially when RIR numbers are low) but also to stop short of failure, balancing intensity and safety. This method often results in high-quality effort – when programs call for RIR 3-2-1-0, the lifter naturally has to explore their limits and put in honest hard work. Many find RIR easier to grasp than RPE, since saying “leave 2 reps in the tank” is less abstract than “train at 8/10 effort.” In practice, RIR can be very autoregulative: as you get stronger or have a good day, you’ll do more reps or use more weight to still leave the same RIR; on a fatigued day, you might hit the target reps and stop earlier, thus implicitly reducing load or volume. Over time, RIR self-adjusts the training stimulus so you’re always within a effective intensity range for growth. Notably, RIR is excellent for hypertrophy (muscle growth) training – research and coaching experience suggest that training within 1–3 reps of failure is ideal for muscle gains. RIR-based instructions ensure you hit that “sweet spot” of effort without necessarily counting on a 1RM percentage. It puts focus on how the set feels and the true effort output, which can be more relevant than the absolute load for muscle-building purposes. Lastly, because RIR is essentially an objective form of RPE for lifters, it carries similar benefits: it’s adaptive and personalized. As one review put it, RIR is a “more intuitive and objective way” to apply the RPE concept in strength training.

Cons: Estimating reps in reserve, like using RPE, requires experience and honesty. Beginners often have a hard time knowing how many more reps they could do – they might quit with plenty left (thinking they had none) or conversely might grind until failure unexpectedly. Seasoned lifters get better at judging RIR accurately, but until then there’s a learning curve. Thus, RIR shares the subjectivity drawback: two lifters might both stop at “1 RIR” yet one had more in the tank than they realized. Another limitation is that RIR is mainly applicable to standard set-and-rep lifting and not to every type of exercise. It doesn’t translate well to activities like timed circuits, sprinting, or even very low-rep max attempts. For example, you can’t easily assign “RIR” to a 100m sprint or a plank hold, nor is it practical for a set of 30 light weight reps (where fatigue makes it hard to gauge how many more you could do). Mike Tuchscherer, who coined RIR in lifting, noted that outside the normal lifting context (e.g. strongman carries, or sets with incomplete rest), RIR becomes tricky to apply. Additionally, an athlete could intentionally or unintentionally miscount their reserve reps (due to motivation or pain tolerance), making the stimulus less consistent. In essence, RIR is a great tool but limited to rep-based training and still relies on the athlete’s perception. Some lifters might also find it mentally challenging to consistently push near failure; it requires a high level of effort when RIR targets are low, which can be taxing if not managed with recovery.

Best For: RIR is particularly favored in bodybuilding and hypertrophy-focused programs, where the goal is to maximize muscle fiber recruitment by getting close to failure (0–3 RIR) without necessarily doing a true max-out on every set. It works for any lifter aiming to increase muscle size or endurance by ensuring each set is challenging enough. RIR is also useful for general strength training as a form of autoregulation – many powerlifters use an RIR approach in accessory lifts or volume work to ensure they accumulate enough effort without overdoing it. Lifters who prefer a more instinctive or “go by feel” style often like RIR, because once they know the target RIR, they just rep out until they feel they’re at that limit. Conversely, very analytically minded lifters might pair better with RPE or percentages, but in practice RIR and RPE are so closely related that you can choose the one that clicks for you. If you enjoy training hard and want to learn to gauge your limits, RIR is a fantastic method. Just remember it’s most effective once you have a baseline of training experience – it takes some trials to know what, say, “2 reps left” truly feels like.

Combining and Adapting These Methods

The good news is, you don’t have to pick only one of these intensity-regulation methods. In fact, modern programs often blend percentage-based prescriptions with RPE/RIR to get the best of both worlds. Since each method has strengths, combining them can provide structure and flexibility. For example, a powerlifting program might prescribe: “Paused Deadlift – 3×4 @ 65% 1RM or RPE 6.5.” In this case, 65% 1RM is the starting guideline, but you’re encouraged to adjust the weight up or down so that it feels about 6.5 RPE (somewhere between RPE 6 and 7) if that percentage feels too easy or hard. This kind of dual prescription uses percentage for a ballpark and RPE to fine-tune on the day. Another approach is to use percentages on core lifts and RPE/RIR on accessory lifts. For example, a beginner program can set the big compound exercises with percentage-based progression, but the smaller isolation moves are done at a target RPE (or RIR) instead. This ensures the main lifts have stable, planned loads to drive strength up, while the less critical exercises are auto-regulated based on how the athlete feels (preventing under- or over-training those muscles).

You can also periodize the use of these methods. In earlier training phases or for novice lifters, you might stick more to percentages to build a base. As training advances, RPE/RIR can be layered in to allow more flexibility. Many advanced strength programs use RPE for top sets and then percentages for back-off sets. For example, you might work up to a heavy single at RPE 8 (the weight will depend on that day’s condition), then do back-off volume at, say, 80% of that single or 70% of your known max. This way, RPE helps set the intensity ceiling for the day, and percentages ensure you still get the intended volume work. RIR can be similarly combined: a program might prescribe a range of reps (say 8–12) with a certain RIR, effectively letting stronger days hit higher reps in the range and weaker days hit the lower end.

Ultimately, all these methods are tools to manage intensity. A flexible training approach might use whichever tool fits the context: percentages for precision and progression tracking, RPE when subjective adjustment is needed, and RIR to push effort in a controlled way. Scientific findings support autoregulating training whenever appropriate – for instance, one study found RIR-based and velocity-based approaches allowed lifters to maintain higher volume and avoid failure, without increasing next-day fatigue, compared to a fixed %1RM approach. The takeaway is that a hybrid strategy can make your training both effective and adaptable. You might start with a percentage plan but keep an eye on RPE/RIR as you train – if something feels off the chart (too hard or too easy), you adjust. By understanding all three methods, you can be a more informed lifter and get the most out of your workouts, every time you hit the gym.

‍