In a previous post, I made my best argument for why the 45 lb weight plate shouldn’t exist. I actually had to cut that post up because it got too long; this post is the second part of my weight plate analysis. The last post was about what plate weights should exist, while this one will deal with choosing weights among the ones that do exist. This will come in two parts. First, I’ll consider the case where you have an effectively infinite supply of weight plates, like at a gym, and figure out which of the standard set of 2.5, 5, 10, 25, 35, and 45 lb plates are the most and least useful.
When thinking of the value of each plate, I was willing to bet that the 35 lb plate would be the least useful because of its spot as a less common weight. My findings weren’t so sure. The measure of usefulness I used was the maximum possible reduction of number of plates needed to achieve a total weight that each plate could provide. I know that was a mouthful, so let me explain: thanks to the 10 lb plate, we can use just two plates (10 + 10) to achieve 20 lb, when we would need four (5 + 5 + 5 + 5) to achieve 20 lb otherwise – this is a reduction of two plates used. The table below shows the max reduction for each weight, and an example of that reduction.
As you might expect, the largest and smallest weights are the most important weights by this metric. The smallest is crucial because, unlike the rest, it can’t be replaced by a combination of the rest of the plates. Reciprocally, if you had a long enough barbell, you could use just 2.5 lb plates to achieve any weight you can achieve with an entire set. The largest is also important because in theory it can replace an infinite number of plates. Of course human strength limits the actual number, but it still can cause a reduction of 2 plates at the relatively low weight of 90 lb (35 + 35 + 10 + 10 ---> 45 + 45). As expected, 35 came in as one of the two weakest performers in this test. The other was, somewhat surprisingly, 5 lb.
To be fair, many people incrementally increase or decrease the weight on heavy exercises like squats by using multiple 5 lb plates. This is a reasonable practice, but in the world where a weight is chosen at the start and no increments are made, there is a strong case for 5 lb being the least useful weight. Both the 5 and the 35 lb plate can only cause a reduction of one plate used, so the next test was to find the weights which would allow this reduction to happen. The findings are as follows: the 5 lb plate only causes a reduction at 5, 15, 30, and 40 lb, while the 35 lb plate causes a reduction at 35, 40, 60 and any multiple of 45 plus either of those three. This means that, up to 80 lb, both have the same number of total weights where they cause a reduction, and beyond 80 lb, 35 is the only of the two that causes any reductions. So, if you are able to use 85 or more pounds on one side of a bar, the 5 lb plate is the least useful weight, ignoring the incremental practice mentioned before.
Because of the practice of increasing or decreasing lifts with 5 lb plates, I would still give the 5 lb plate the nod over the 35 lb plate for usefulness, but it was a surprise to me that the 5 lb plate was even in the discussion of least useful. I would say the gym community got it right by having the 35 lb plate as the least common of the standard set.
As I mentioned, the above analysis was done under the assumption that you had as many of any plate as you could possibly need, which is a fair assumption for a well-stocked gym. The other case is the people who have their own weight set in their house or garage. They would probably want to minimize the number of plates they need. To explore different options in this case, I took the standard set and removed one or two of the plate weights and found out the lowest number of each plate that would allow all weights in increments of 2.5 lb to be achieved. The 2.5 and 45 lb plates were always assumed to be a part of the set for the same reasons listed above of why they’re the most important two.
I didn’t include the number of 45 lb plates required, because in any given set, the weights that get used to achieve 2.5 - 42.5 lb can just be tacked onto the proper number of 45 lb plates to achieve any higher number, so the number of 45 lb plates needed depends on how heavy the person can lift, but the number of other plates won’t need to change to accommodate that. The table below shows the 6 sets I considered, A-F, with the black cells showing which plates couldn’t be used in that set. The only plate that was ever not used, even in a set that it was allowed to be used in was the 35 lb:
The green and red columns denote the sets with the fewest and most plates, respectively. Set D only needs 5 plates, E requires 7, and all the other sets require at 6 plates. This makes a case for set D being the best one. The only set that I could see being argued over D would be C. C has 2 more 10 lb plates and D has one more 25 lb plate, and otherwise they’re the same. The total weight C requires is less than D, but, as shown earlier, the 25 lb plate is pretty useful, as it can reduce the number of plates used by up to 2 per side. I personally would take set D for this reason, but set C is also a solid choice if trying to minimize the weights bought. Either way, there won’t be a 35 lb plate in the mix, so I’d say that suggests it is the least important to own. A final note on this: If there had been a set in the table above that allowed for all the weights of a normal set, it would copy set D, as the addition of a 35 lb plate wouldn’t achieve anything that set D can’t already do, or reduce any of the plates already needed.
So, last time I argued that the 45 lb plate should be replaced with a 55 lb plate. This time, assuming (unfortunately) that the standard plate weights are the only options available, I have argued that the 35 lb plate is the least valuable for a gym or an individual to have.
Bonus thought of the day: Even the highest achievers in the world don't have any super powers or any more hours in a day than you. Seems obvious, but I just recently actually thought about that and what it means.
Write a comment
custom essay writing service (Tuesday, 29 August 2017 03:53)
I am very happy to read this. This is the kind of manual that needs to be given and not the random misinformation that’s at the other blogs. Appreciate your sharing this best posting.
Collin (Thursday, 24 October 2019 13:45)
Hi Kellen,
Excellent articles!!
Why do you recommend 2 sets of 5 lb plates (4 total)? Are there weights you couldn’t hit without that extra set of 5s?
Extreme minimalist here.
Thank you!
Eric (Friday, 22 May 2020 12:03)
It seems that you have considered the number of plates on a bar, but not considered the number of weights necessary for a complete set.
For example, with 4x45, 2x25, 2x10, 2x5, and 2x2.5, (12 total plates) and a 45 lb bar, you can accomplish any weight multiple of 5 from 45 lbs up to 310 lbs. That's valuble, and if the 45s were replaced by 55 or 60, then you would need to add additional weights to the collection.
In fact, i'm pretty confident that if my only goal was to hit every increment of 5 between 100 and 300, assuming a constant price per pound, I think that {2.5, 5, 10, 25, 45} would allow a cheaper set of weights than the options that replace 45 with 55 or 60.
Re: Eric (Tuesday, 01 September 2020 19:37)
I think your comment might have been meant for the previous post that this was an extension of, as this one is assuming we use 45 lb as the max plate.
That post was more framed around what would be best for gyms, not individuals, but what you said is a valid concern for individuals with weights at home. So that is one point in favor of 45lb plates - thanks for the input!
-Kellen
Re: Collin (Tuesday, 01 September 2020 19:40)
It's probably too late at this point, sorry for missing this comment.
Either way, the second 5 would be needed to get to 20/side: 5 + 5 + 10. You could also go with a second 2.5 to achieve the same thing (2.5 + 2.5 + 5 + 10), which would be slightly less overall weight, but still the same number of plates
-Kellen
Jan (Thursday, 04 February 2021 06:38)
So... How does this work out with the metric sizes of 1.25/2.5/5/10/15/20/25 kg? They seem to complement eachother a bit better compared to the lbs disks due to the 5kg steps.
If I would skip the 20, one pair of each would be enough it seems!
Re: Jan (Sunday, 07 February 2021 18:08)
Yup, 1.25 + 2.5 + 5 + 10 + 15 + 25 = 58.75. Any increment less than 60kg that would use a 20kg plate could be replaced with a 15+5. Beyond that, you'd need more weights, probably 25s.
Rack (Tuesday, 09 February 2021 07:01)
I'm also a big fan of the 55 pound plate. If you have to add a plate to the {2.5, 5, 10, 25} set to cover 20 and 22.5 pounds a side, I'd much rather have another 10 over another 5. If you're going to add a 10, then you can cover every weight from 2.5 to 52.5 a side, so you might as well exchange 45s for 55s. Finding a nice regular-sized, non-calibrated, non-bumper 55 pounder in the US is harder than it looks, though. A 25kg plate would do in a pinch, but I want a plate that says 55 pounds on the side, damnit!
Anyway, back to the 35 pounders. What if there was, say, overwhelming demand for gym equipment and the only plates that happened to be in stock in quantity were 35 pounders and you were forced to use them for your set, what would you get? For me, a bumper 35 (full 450mm diameter) would look pretty attractive! And since you're dealing with bumpers, do they have a plate that might prove useful that regular iron sets do not have? They do, the 15 pound bumper!
Between the 35s and 15s, all you'd need is to dig up pairs of 2.5, 5 and 10 pounders (bumper or otherwise) to make a full {2.5, 5, 10, 15, 35} set, and it would cover every 2.5 pound increment from 2.5 to 67.5. After that, expansion is easy, just add another pair of 35s! Sleeve space might be at a premium with so many bumper plates a side; get skinny ones.
Rack (Tuesday, 09 February 2021 07:25)
As far as metric plates, I'd cut out the 15kg plates along with the 20kg plates, and just have another pair of 5kg plates. This {1.25, 2.5, 5, 5, 10} subset is still 23.75kg, and the next increment would be, you guessed it, 25kg. This minimal set would be useful for kilo lifters in a pound gym, because as long as there are 55s around to pretend to be 25kg plates, you can use this set to make a full "kilo" set to complement a {1.25, 2.5, 5, 10, 10, 25, 55} pound set.
There is something else you can do with these pound and kilo sets but it goes beyond nonsense into sheer madness. I'll give you a hint: half-pound increments.
Rack (Wednesday, 10 February 2021 05:51)
"to make a full {2.5, 5, 10, 15, 35} set, and it would cover every 2.5 pound increment from 2.5 to 67.5"
Oops, forgot the 1.25 pounders! Now that works.
Re: Rack (Wednesday, 10 February 2021 13:21)
Glad I'm not the only 55lb plate fan out there!
Your logic on 15kg plates seems correct to me - anything that needed a 15 could use a 5+10 instead, except if you needed both a 15 & 10kg plate, but that would never be necessary if you have 25kg plates.
Rack (Wednesday, 09 March 2022 14:57)
I saw a YouTube comment that hinted at the madness that could be unleashed with a combined pound and kilo set, and it goes something like this.
1kg is around 2.2lb, so 1kg is 2.2 times 1lb. 2lb times 1.1 is also 1kg. 10% more. This works for any 1xkg and 2xlb pair. 2.5kg is 5.5lb, 5+0.5lb. 1.25kg is 2.75lb, 2.50+0.25lb. 5kg is 11lb, 10+1.0lb.
To add a half pound on the bar, just replace a 2.5lb plate with a 1.25kg plate on each side, easy peasy!
Rack (Sunday, 18 June 2023 01:39)
pastebin dot com slash 4Vr4m8Gp
Not sure if the URL will get filtered or not, so it's broken up.
It's just a list of weights that take the unholy pound-kilogram union to its limits. If you have quarter pound (0.25 lb) plates and eighth kilogram (0.125 kg) plates and up, you can make 0.05 lb increments if you so wanted.
A lot of combinations involve removing 5.00 pounds then putting back 5.xx to 9.xx pounds, where xx is some multiple of 5, but any 0.05 pound increment above 4.50 pounds is achievable.
Jose Garcia (Friday, 08 December 2023 21:34)
Dump the 35s, add an extra pair of 10s. The bar looks better with 10s when loaded at 175 or 265.