Why Prilepin’s Chart Is Not So Relevant for Strength Training

1. What is Prilepin’s chart?

Prilepin’s chart—a popular go-to for many athletes and coaches—lays out the so-called “ideal” repetition ranges and sets at different intensity levels (based on percentages of your 1RM) that you should aim for in each training session. The idea? Maximize effectiveness and dodge overtraining. Sounds great, right?

Except, here’s the thing: when it comes to strength athletes, bodybuilders, powerlifters, or even the average person, I find Prilepin’s chart to be pretty much useless. But before you toss it in the trash, let’s take a closer look at how Prilepin’s chart was developed and who it was meant for in the first place. Spoiler alert: it wasn’t designed with you in mind.

2. How was Prilepin’s chart invented?

Alexander Sergeyevitch Prilepin (A.P. Prilepin) developed Prilepin’s Chart during his tenure as a coach for the Soviet Union's weightlifting team in the 1960s and 1970s. At that time, weightlifting was the most researched sport, serving as a key battleground for measuring strength and advancing research amid the intense competition between the Eastern and Western blocs. The Prilepin’s chart is rooted in extensive empirical research and careful observation of elite Soviet weightlifters over a decade. Prilepin meticulously tracked their training routines, honing in on how different numbers of repetitions at various intensities (based on percentages of an athlete’s one-rep max) correlated with improvements in strength and performance.

Through this data-driven approach, Prilepin identified specific repetition ranges and set schemes that consistently produced the best results in terms of strength gains without leading to overtraining or injury. He noticed that there were optimal ranges of repetitions at different intensity levels where athletes could maximize their training effectiveness—lifting enough to stimulate strength adaptations but not so much that it would lead to excessive fatigue or diminished performance.

3. Survirvivorship Bias

Survivorship bias is when you focus only on the successes or those who made it through, completely ignoring those who didn’t survive or succeed. This kind of oversight can lead to skewed conclusions because your data is based only on a select group that had the perfect conditions and genetic makeup to thrive. Take World War II, for example. Engineers studied the damage on surviving bombers to decide where to add armor. They saw the most damage on certain areas and suggested reinforcing those spots. But statistician Abraham Wald pointed out a crucial oversight: they should actually armor the less-damaged areas. The planes that took hits in the more damaged zones never made it back, showing that missing data can be just as important as what you see.

So, why does this matter for Prilepin’s Chart? Because it was developed by studying a very narrow pool of exceptional athletes who survived and excelled under the multi-year Soviet training regime, which usually started at the age of 7-10. The chart’s recommendations are based on this elite group’s experiences, potentially overlooking the countless others who didn’t make it through the same grueling programs. This means Prilepin’s Chart may not be as universally applicable as it seems, particularly for those outside this narrow, high-performing cohort.

4. Specifically designed for weightlifting only

Prilepin’s Chart was crafted by observing weightlifters, for weightlifters, and by weightlifters. And let’s be clear: weightlifting is a sport with incredibly specific demands and extreme technical complexity. I’m not talking about your average high school coach showing power cleans to a bunch of pumped-up football players. I’m referring to Olympic-level weightlifting, where precision, timing, and explosive power are everything.

In weightlifting, technique and power are crucial. To develop these effectively, you can’t be using maximal or near-maximal loads all the time. Technique and power are best developed at around 70-80% of your 1RM. This already makes Prilepin’s Chart less relevant for those aiming to build strength, muscle, or improve power outside the realm of weightlifting.

Another point: weightlifting isn’t about grinding out reps. You often see lifters struggling through bench presses, squats, or chin-ups, taking up to 10 seconds to complete a rep. Now, imagine grinding through a snatch in the same way—absurd! In weightlifting, it’s simple: you either nail the lift, or you don’t. This means most training happens in submaximal ranges, further diminishing the chart’s utility for other training goals.

While Prilepin’s Chart has historical value and may provide insights for Olympic weightlifting, it isn’t a catch-all solution for everyone. For those engaged in different strength sports or general fitness, relying solely on this chart might limit your progress. Instead, a more individualized approach—one that considers your specific goals, training context—will likely yield better results. Don’t be swayed by outdated methods; tailor your training to what works best for you.