How Many Reps Was That? Again?

by W. Hock Hochheim

World renown knife instructor Dwight Mclemore coaches a student.

How Many Reps, Again?
I was watching a gun training DVD last week and the featured, world famous instructor issued the statement,

"It takes 3, 000 to 5,000 repetitions to burn a movement into your body's muscle memory."

There were those magic numbers again, I thought. "3,00 to 5,000." Again and again. It has become muscle memory chakra just to regurgitate those very stats. I've heard those numbers repeated hundreds of times through the last thirty years. I certainly have heard it repeated by police trainers. In the week before I read the words of Officer Tom Crydell (I've changed the name here) writing in a Tactical Response magazine, police journal,

"Excellence then is not an act, but a habit. It has been said that it requires 3,000 to 5,000 repetitions to develop "muscle memory" or a subconscious response to an external stimuli.

While we know that our brain is the only part of our body that has the ability to retain

memory, the consistent application and practice of these active listening skills allows us

the ability to incorporate them into our daily communication patterns and ensure that

they are available to us during critical hostage negotiation processes."

In this example, Tom has extrapolated the numbers to audible listening skills. He suggests we practice... listening... 5,000 times? To what exactly? How exactly?

Then we hear the numbers again from hundreds of martial arts instructors, I fear they have heard police quote the stats and they think that we are some reliable, source. But the numbers also leave the enforcement, military and martial fields into sports. A famous golf instructor said,

"It has also been determined that it takes between 3000 and 5000
repetitions of a movement pattern to learn an exercise."

A baseball training academy said,

"Hitting instructors have noted that it takes between 3000 and 5000
repetitions to ingrain the muscle memory needed to hit a baseball."

I have even read about a horse jockey school applying these mysterious numbers over to training horses! I await news from the flea circus!

These are some common examples of how the "3,000 to 5,000 reps" concept has permeated and fermented into the professional training psyche. Sound like a lot of reps, even for horses and fleas. But, it can get worse, one of my student's physical trainers told him it took 8,000 repetitions to adequately learn a new physical move. Now we are up to 8,000! I know not this mysterious trainer or from where this new number originates, just that he is out...working and prosthelitizing.

For a common citizen, this seems like an unimportant statistic except for sports coaches to ponder, but to a professional trainer of police, soldiers, and security specialists the idea of implementing 3,000 or more of repetitions is overwhelming given the budgetary restraints of training time and money. Expectations are lowered. Courses are dumbed down to ape man level, all under the crushing idea that a single physical tactic will take 3,000 to - now 8,000 - repetitions to become effective. Quote these figures to many training administrators and some will throw their hands up in anguish, toss in the towel and surrender to the inept stupidity of man.The curse of the layman.

"Layman" means a person who is a non-expert in a given field of knowledge. While one might be the king of the rifle range, a trophy-winning pistol shooter, or might be able explain the chemical mixture of pepper spray in a rainstorm, or win a UFC fight, most of us are laymen in the related fields of psychology, physiology and motor skill learning.

As you can see from these given examples, the 3,00 to 5,000 stats follow the opening layman remarks, "everyone knows that...," or "it has been said," or "It has been determined." All warning flag statements to me. Well, I had to ask myself, "Where do these magic numbers actually come from?" Ever the skeptic of dogma, I took a deeper look. I learned that while many layman hear these numbers regurgitated, few if any know the true story and facts behind them and guess what? When you do discover the truth? Almost every layman is wrong.

The root study, the industry standard research that experts refer to comes from a 1941 book called Motor Learning by Doctors Richard Schmidt with Craig A. Wrisberg, followed by Schmidt's consistently updated book editions called Performance and Motor Control And Learning with Dr. Timothy D. Lee, along with a rotating collection of new research studies. I urge everyone in the training industry to read these books. The good doctors have many medical and psychological eggs to fry in these volumes as they cover lab tests, sports, injury recover, performance enhancement and challenges involving the handicapped. They are often used as college textbooks.

In Motor Learning, Dr. Schmidt states with a flurry of charts and studies that it requires approximately 300-500 repetitions to develop a new motor pattern. Conversely, once bad or inadequate habits are already in place, he states it takes about 3000-5000 repetitions to erase and correct a bad motor pattern. Layman readers and regurgitators please take note, 300 to 500 repetitions, not thousands. Hundreds. For some reason, many trainers and writers have latched on to a reverse misunderstanding of this study.

"Layman readers and regurgitators please take note,

300 to 500 repetitions, not thousands."

Approximately. About. Most. Three words always gingerly placed in and around all statistical studies. Next comes my anecdotal approximate/about/most position based my own personal teaching experience. I shall start with the aforementioned, warning-flag phrase, "everyone knows" but I do strongly believe that "everyone really knows" that people come in all shapes and sizes, strengths and skills. In the last two decades I have taught hand, stick, knife and gun tactics to thousands of people worldwide. As I look over a crowd of practitioners in seminars now, I am well aware that each student will have a different, learning repetition ratio. One might really "get" something with only 75 reps, another person may take 6,000. Another, even 10,000. Thus, these statistical means and averages are created inside a broad continuum. I myself, with black belts in several martial arts, have noted that I can obtain a healthy, working knowledge on a new takedown or movement within about 150 exercises. But, start me on ice skating and it will take decades.

No matter how long or short it requires to first burn a pattern into one’s muscle memory, all skills are perishable and need to be exercised with some frequency that is - once again, different for each person. Generalized means studies for the masses may be established as general guidelines for such refreshment. Remember, the "masters" be they in golf, cooking, baseball, piano, or karate...practice forever. The Masters lose count and just practice for practice sake. That's why they are masters.

Do I believe wholeheartedly in these Schmidt numbers? No. I think they are high for both new and correctional training. But, such individuality aside, we have leaned here that some respected experts report the averaged numbers 300 to 500 repetitions are needed to learn something new, not 3,000 to 5,000. I remain fascinated that no one questioned these low or high numbers and I remain fascinated that so many people picked the wrong end of this study to quote and re-quote! Look at the pessimistic results of their error.

Yes, you can train new people, or people new to a certain movement, with a mere ten percent of time and effort that the previously abused layman figures suggest. Ten Percent! Trainers! Start your engines! You may now pick up the towels you've previously tossed in abject surrender!

W. Hock Hochheim is a military, police and martial arts vet, who teaches hand, stick, knife and gun seminars in 9 allied countries around the world. He can be reached at hock.hochheim@sbcglobal.net

Got an opinion? Talk about it on HocksCombatForum.

Return to master article page.