The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
whereas when they look at rpe validity in advanced lifters it tends to be much more accurate much more accurate so there was actually a study I was in a powerlifting meet where they had a tiendo unit on the bar and they were measuring our bar velocity and they were asking us to rate our RP after every attempt and they found that RP as validated by velocity data was a pretty good measure in that population of power power lifters because they've taken so many sets near failure
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
whereas when they look at rpe validity in advance lifter it tends to be much more accurate much more accurate so there was actually a study I was in a powerlifting meet where they had a tendo unit on the bar and they were measuring our bar velocity and they were asking us to rate our RP after every attempt and they found that rpe as validated by velocity data was a pretty good measure in that population of powerlifters because they've taken so many sets near failure
they found that rpe uh as validated by velocity data was a pretty good measure in that population of powerlifters because they've taken so many sets near failure