Traditionally, repetitions in each set are performed in sequence with no rest between repetitions and therefore has been defined as traditional set structure (TS). One potential strategy to overcome this problem is to implement rest redistribution (RR) and high frequency rest redistribution (HFRR) protocols which consist of more frequent rest periods compared to TS. The purpose of this study was to compare the influence of TS, RR and HFRR set structures on RPE, velocity and power decrement during a high volume back squat session where the total time, number of repetitions, and load were equal across structure protocols. 26 strength-trained males (age 28 ± 5.44, body mass 84.6 ± 10.5 kg, 1RM-to-body-mass ratio 1.82 ± 0.33) reported to the lab four times to perform 1RM testing and three experimental sessions with their respective protocols. Each protocol was performed with 70% of participants’ predetermined 1RM. The order of each protocol was randomized. The results showed significant differences between the protocols where HFRR was superior to RR (p<0.05, ES=0.61) and TS (p<0.05, ES=0.81) while attempting to prevent velocity decrement across the repetitions. In addition, the same was observed in power measures compared to RR (p<0.05, ES=0.56) and TS (p<0.05, ES=0.71) respectively. Significantly lower RPE scores were observed in HFRR compared with RR (p<0.01, ES=0.88) and TS (p<0.01, ES=1.99). Differences between RR and TS were not observed in velocity (p>0.05, ES=0.12) and power decrement (p>0.05, ES=0.12) while significantly lower RPE scores were observed in RR compared to TS (p>0.05, ES=0.93). With the higher RPE scores and decreases in velocity and power observed in TS and RR, HFRR appears to be a more appropriate protocol when the goal is to maximize velocity and power and reduce RPE scores of an athlete. Coaches should be aware of potential velocity/power decrement and higher RPE scores associated not only with TS, but to a lesser extent with RR. Therefore, shorter but more frequent rest periods should be utilized to ensure maximum training adaptation while keeping total training time the same.