I'm getting back into the whole fitness thing, so I need to know how I should track my progress. Weight, reps, and sets are a good start, and each of them can be directly graphed against the date. One problem is that graphing all of them together might give a false impression of how well things are going because as the weight increases, the number of sets and reps will naturally decrease. Anybody can bench 50lbs at 10 reps, but doing 100lb at 5 reps is more than twice as hard, and 150lbs at however many reps is even harder than that; they can't be directly compared. Another problem is that the number of reps in a set continually decreases when working out the same day. One can start off a day doing 10 reps at a certain weight, but end the day with just 1 rep at that weight; weight training for the day ends when you can't even do 1 rep. I'm thinking I can multiply the terms together to get some kind of number, X, for example. Weight being lifted/pushed would obviously be the most important because it shows overall strength. Reps are second most important because it shows endurance. Sets would be last because that only shows ability to recover. How should the terms be weighted? Logs? Multiply terms with coefficients? Multiply terms with different exponents? Adding reciprical terms the same way as adding electrical resistances in parallel? So far the formula I like the most goes a bit like this [tex]X = [1 \ + \ ln(R)](W^e) \ + \ .......[/tex] X is the number for comparing, R is reps for a given set, e is e, and W is weight. The expression can keep going forever where each set (term) is added the same way. The [1 + ln(R)] term is to account for doing more reps at once being better, but not that much better (overall strength is the goal here). Thoughts, opinions? Suggestions on a different formula? Don't ask why e is used so much; I just really like e.