Load Management 2- Prilepin's Chart, INOL: A Perfected System

Introduction

Load Management is all the rage these days. From the NBA to high school gyms, it's a buzzword that sparks debate — especially when modern athletes take rest days and former legends call it soft. But in truth, "load management" is nothing new. Baseball managers have been rotating pitching staffs for over a century — that’s load management. Smart coaches have always regulated stress and recovery to get the most out of their athletes.

In my previous article, "Load Management Part 1 – The Stress System: Understanding the Stress Response in Strength Training," I laid out the biological and neurological pathways that allow us to adapt to training stress. Now, we’ll move deeper into the application of Load Management through a system rooted in math, evolution, and decades of strength science.

Training — NOT exercise — is strategic Load Management.

My purpose with StratFit is to create a complete system of Applied Mathetics and a technological platform that empowers coaches and athletes to precisely manage the loading of training and competition across all modalities and at all levels. Prilepin's chart is my point of departure in this quest.

Prilepin’s Chart: A Foundation for Load Management in Strength Training

The foundational intellectual tool for organizing weight training is Prilepin’s Chart.

Alexander Sergeyevitch Prilepin, a Russian coach and scientist, optimized the long-term training of elite weightlifters in the former USSR from 1975 to 1985.

To create his chart, Prilepin analyzed decades of training logs and competition results of highly qualified European weightlifters.

He compared training intensities and volumes with competition outcomes, building a chart that defined the minimal, optimal, and maximal reps for a single set and entire workouts for various exercises (e.g., Snatch, Clean, Olympic Squat). The table is below.

Intensity	Reps Per Set	Optimal Total Reps	Range of Reps
55% - 65%	3 to 6	24	18 to 30
70% - 80%	3 to 6	18	12 to 24
80% - 90%	2 to 4	15	10 to 20
90%	1 to 2	7	4 to 10

The chart aimed to ensure each session promoted adaptation while allowing for consistent daily training. Initially designed to manage loading from the Snatch and Clean & Jerk, powerlifters soon adopted Prilepin’s chart to control Squat, Bench press, and Deadlift loads, and athletes using barbell programs for strength, power, and muscle mass did the same.

As discussed in the previous article on stress, the intensity and amount of training are the key Loading variables. Prilepin’s chart significantly advanced the prescription and regulation of training Loads.

INOL: A Quantitative Tool for Load Management

The next step in applying Prilepin’s chart was synthesizing intensity and rep values into a singular metric.

Hristo Hristov developed the Intensity Number of Lifts (INOL) score to use Prilepin’s principles more precisely.

Hristov noted that Prilepin’s upper limit Number Of Lifts (NOL,“Range of Total Reps” in the table), and corresponding intensity often summed to around 100, especially at higher intensities. 

Intensity	Number Of Lifts	Intensity + NOL
60	30	90
70	24	94
80	20	100
90	10	100

 *Prilepin Number of Lifts Score (right-hand column)

This observation led to the INOL equation:

INOL = Reps / (100 - Intensity)

Intensity is based on a tested or estimated 1 rep maximum (1RM) strength level for a specific exercise. Let's look at 10 reps at 70% of 1RM:

Step 1

100 - 70(%) = 30

Step 2

10 / 30 = 0.33

The INOL value for this exercise is .28

Now the same process with 6 reps at 80% of 1RM:

Step 1

100 – 80(%) = 20

Step 2

6 / 20 = 0.3

The INOL value for this exercise is 0.3

Finally, 3 reps at 90% of 1RM:

Step 1

100 – 90(%) = 10

Step 2

3 / 10 = 0.3

100 – 90% = 10 3 / 10 = 0.3 INOL

The INOL value for this exercise is also 0.3 

Guidelines for INOL Values

Below are some guidelines for single workout and weekly total INOL values based on Hristov's recommendations:

Daily Single Exercise INOL Guidelines:

INOL Score	Routine Guidelines
< 0.4	Very easy, too few reps or sets, not stimulating
0.4 - 1.0	Optimal if you are not trying to accumulate fatigue
1.0 - 2.0	Tough but good for overall loading phases
> 2	Pretty brutal, very limited use

Weekly Single Exercise INOL Guidelines:

INOL Score	Weekly Guidelines for an Exercise or Muscle Group
< 2	Easy, good after hard weeks or competition
2.0 - 3.0	Difficult but good for overall training phases
3.0 - 4.0	Very hard, lots of fatigue, good for shock cycles
> 4	Only for the very advanced

Taking INOL a Step Further

Using the INOL, it is possible to determine Prilepin's optimal number of total reps for a whole exercise and in individual sets in a single workout with any given intensity. Applying the INOL score equation to Prilepin's table, we find that an INOL score of 0.8 is optimal for a whole exercise, and 0.2 is optimal for a single set across all intensities. The results are in the third table below.

Prilepin did not prescribe more than six reps per set for any intensity due to the highly technical nature of competitive weightlifting lifts. I will expand the reps per set here to make it more relevant for powerlifting, bodybuilding, and CrossFit.

Prilepin's Chart, INOL, and Load Management- Increased Precision

There is only one problem with the INOL score equation. The maximum Intensity + the number of lifts (NOL) for intensities below 80% is not exactly 100. The table below shows that the intensity + Prilepin’s upper NOLs for 70% is 94, and for 55% it is 85. The INOL score equation will return increasingly approximate loads as the intensity decreases. For this reason, the minuend (the number from which another number is subtracted) in the denominator (the number by which another number is divided) of the INOL equation must increase as intensity decreases.

Here is where we perfected this system at StratFit.

I noticed that the most precisely correlating values in Prilepin’s table are the high-end NOLs for a given range and the low-end intensity for that range. By determining the percentage 100 is over these high-end NOLs + Low-End Intensities, we determine the percentage the minuend should be increased in the INOL equation for these intensities.

We then increase Hristov’s static Minuend (100) by the appropriate percentage to return the most accurate value. The accurate minuends to reflect Prilpin's logic are in the table below.

Intensity (% of 1 RM)	High End NOL for Range	I + NOL	% 100 over I + NOL	Accurate Minuend
90	10	100	0%	100
70	24	94	6.38%	106.38
55	30	85	17.65%	117.65

This precise minuend for every intensity should be known as the Prilepin Minuend. At StratFit, we use a special equation to return the correct minuend for every intensity.

Adding the Prilepin Minuend to the INOL equation greatly increases precision. We can now calculate the precise INOL of training sets, activities, sessions, days, microcycles, mesocycles, periods, and even training years. Completely accurate optimal INOLs and the corresponding reps and sets for the same intensities as displayed in the table below.

We should still use Prilepin’s prescriptions for the number of reps per set for weightlifting exercises (snatch, clean, jerk, and their variations), but this updated total number of reps is a more precise quantity according to the underlying principles of his table. The reps per set in the table above are accurate for powerlifting and bodybuilding training and hypertrophy exercises for weightlifting (squats, presses, rows).

We can round the number of sets for convenience, but it is best to do the prescribed number of sets with the optimal reps per set, then do one set with fewer reps to complete the total optimal number. For instance, an optimal whole Squat exercise with 60% intensity would look like this: 

Intensity: 60

Total Reps: 43

Optimal Reps Per set: 11

Sets: 3.9

Set 1: 11 Reps

Set 2: 11 Reps

Set 3: 11 Reps

Set 4: 10 Reps

The table below compares the original optimal reps and sets from the INOL score concept and the updated abstract internal loading concept. Experienced lifters (weightlifters, powerlifters, bodybuilders, CrossFitters) and coaches will testify that the updated idea has the most utility for optimizing training loads.

Intensity	Optimal Total INOL Score	Optimal Total Reps	Updated Optimal Total Reps	Optimal Set INOL Score	Original Reps Per Set	Updated Reps Per Set	Original Sets	Updated Sets
60	0.8	32	43	0.2	8	11	4	3.9
65	0.8	28	36	0.2	7	9	4	4
70	0.8	24	30	0.2	6	7	4	4.3
75	0.8	20	24	0.2	5	6	4	4
80	0.8	16	18	0.2	4	5	4	3.6
85	0.8	12	13	0.2	3	3	4	4.3
90	0.8	8	8	0.2	2	2	4	4
95	0.8	4	4	0.2	1	1	4	4

Using Prilipen’s Logic for Whole Workouts and Training Weeks

Coaches typically use Prilepin’s Table and the INOL to govern each exercise's daily and weekly loads in isolation.

However, we can easily use Histerov’s recommendations and the INOL results corresponding to Prilepin’s Minimal, Optimal, and Maximal total reps/number of lifts (NOL) to determine corresponding total workout and day-level values, including different exercises.  The following table contains the values.

Grade	Day	Day	Week	Week
Single Exercise	Single Exercise	All Training	Single Exercise	All Training
Maximal	2	6	4	18
Submaximal	1.6	4.8	3.2	14.4
Supraoptimal	1.2	3.6	2.4	10.8
Optimal	0.8	2.4	1.6	7.2
Suboptimal	0.6	1.8	1.2	5.4
Supraminimal	0.4	1.2	0.8	3.6
Minimal	0.2	0.6	0.4	1.8

I expanded Histerov’s Logic for Abstract Loads/INOLs at the single exercise level to include a complete Minimal-Optimal-Maximal scheme since this was the lexicon of Prilepin.  Notice the single exercise values align with Histerov’s logic above.  If we multiply each Single Exercise (Day) value by three, we get a logical value for a training day with various exercises.  It is common for powerlifters to perform the three competitive lifts (squat, bench press, and deadlift) in every session, which is the logic behind the multiplication.

I used the same x3  logic for the day-to-week level.  These values will empower coaches and athletes to precisely control loading for training activities, days, and weeks.

In the following article, I will show how we can use this system and actual Work performed in a rep, set, day, and week to determine an Actual Training Load value we can use for precise long-term training programming. In another article, I will show how we integrate cardio and other forms of training into the complete StratFit schema.

Conclusion

The StratFit system is rooted in the groundbreaking work of Alexander Prilepin and Hristo Hristov and provides a perfected, complete framework for managing weight training loads. By integrating Prilepin’s Chart and the INOL score, athletes and coaches can fine-tune training regimens to optimize performance and minimize injury risks. 

Introducing the Prilepin Minuend further refines this approach, allowing for precise adjustments based on intensity levels. Prilepin's Chart, INOL and Training Loading: A Perfected System- This comprehensive system not only honors the legacy of its creators but also offers a practical, science-based method for advancing athletic training in weightlifting, powerlifting, bodybuilding, and beyond.

📚 References

• Prilepin, A. S. (1975). The preparation of the USSR weightlifting team.

• Hristov, H. (2005). How to Design Strength Training Programs using Prilepin's Table.

• Soligard, T., Schwellnus, M., Alonso, J.-M., et al. (2016). How much is too much? (Part 1): International Olympic Committee consensus statement on Load in sport and risk of injury. British Journal of Sports Medicine.

• Kiely, J. (2012). Periodization paradigms in the 21st century: evidence-led or tradition-driven? International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance.

Let me know if you'd like to see how this integrates into our digital tools or training templates in the StratFit system.