Inter-Repetition Rest Impact on the Estimated Repetitions in Reserve at Various Loads and Proximities to Neuromuscular Failure

Abstract Ruiz-Alias, SA, Ramirez-Campillo, R, Leando Quidel-Catrilelbún, ME, García-Pinillos, F, and Pérez-Castilla, A. Inter-repetition rest impact on the estimated repetitions in reserve at various loads and proximities to neuromuscular failure . J Strength Cond Res 38(8): 1379–1385, 2024—The repetitions in reserve (RIR) estimation method allows for monitoring resistance training set volume. However, a significant bias is commonly observed when ending the set further from neuromuscular failure and using lower relative loads. Is unclear if implementing an IRR could improve its estimation validity. This study aimed to determine if the RIR estimation is influenced by the IRR at different relative loads and proximities to neuromuscular failure during the back squat (BQ) and bench press (BP) exercises. After a familiarization session, 19 male subjects (age, 21–26 years) completed an experimental session for each IRR configuration: IRR0 (without rest), IRR3 (3 seconds of rest), and SSIRR (self-selected rest [up to 5 seconds]). In each session, single sets to neuromuscular failure were performed at 3 relative loads (65% 1 repetition maximum [1RM], 75% 1RM, 85% 1RM) for BQ and BP exercises. Using the Estimated Repetitions to Failure scale, subjects estimated the RIR associated with a score of “5” and “2” (i.e., RIR-5 and RIR-2). The results revealed no interactions between the RIR estimation and IRR for BQ (RIR-5: p = 0.812; RIR-2: p = 0.084) or BP (RIR-5: p = 0.884; RIR-2: p = 0.944). Subjects provided valid estimations, with overestimation (BQ RIR-5: 0%; BQ RIR-2: 2.9%; BP RIR-5: 1.1%; BP RIR-2: 2.3%) or underestimation (BQ RIR-5: 14.9%; BQ RIR-2: 4%; BP RIR-5: 15.2% BP RIR-2: 8.2%) in few sets. In conclusion, the RIR estimation method seems valid, and the IRR (0–5 seconds) does not influence its validity at 65–85% 1RM loads nor proximities to neuromuscular failure (RIR-2, RIR-5).