Article

Differential Functional Adaptations to Short-Term Low-, Moderate-, and High-Repetition Weight Training

Authors:
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.

Abstract

Previously untrained young men (n = 38) were compared in terms of selected changes in leg function following 7 weeks of differential repetition exposures during heavy-resistance training. Subjects were randomly placed into 1 of 4 groups. Groups I, II, and III completed 3 workouts per week, including a warm-up and 4 sets of squats for a 3-5 repetitions maximum (3-5RM), 13-15RM, or 23-25RM, respectively. A fourth (control) group did not participate in formal physical training during this interim. Selected tests of leg function included dynamic constant external resistance (DCER) squat strength, isokinetic knee extension and flexion peak torque at both 60 and 300 x *S-1, and vertical jump. Following the 7-week training period, both DCER squat strength and knee extension peak torque at 60 [middle dot]-S-1 were significantly increased in all 3 treatment groups more (p < 0.01) than in the control group. In addition, squat strength was improved more in group I than in group III (p < 0.05). No significant differences (p > 0.05) were found between any of the 4 groups for changes in either vertical jump distance, knee extension and flexion peak torque at 300 [middle dot]-S-1, or knee flexion peak torque at 60 [middle dot]*S-1. These results indicate that short-term low-, moderate-, and high-repetition heavy-resistance squat training programs have little effect on jumping distance or high-velocity strength but do enhance DCER squat strength and maximal low-velocity knee extension strength. In addition, the low-repetition program appears to be superior to the high-repetition program for improving squat strength. The absence of improvements in vertical jump distance and fast-velocity isokinetic knee extension and flexion peak torque suggests that short-term DCER weight training, performed as described above, may have minimal direct impact on "explosive" physical activities for young men having limited training experience. (C) 1999 National Strength and Conditioning Association

No full-text available

Request Full-text Paper PDF

To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.

... 367). Three studies (19)(20)(21) are cited. ...
... Weiss and colleagues reported the effects of resistance training with different ranges of repetitions on muscular strength in one publication (21) and hypertrophy in another (22). They randomly assigned 44 males (18-30 years), who were not previously engaged in any systematic physical training, to one of three training groups or a control group. ...
... The three training groups significantly increased isokinetic knee-extensor strength (percent change not reported), with no significant difference among the groups. They also significantly increased 1 RM squat, with the 3-5 RM group showing a significantly greater increase than the 23-25 RM group, but not significantly greater than the 13-15 RM group (21). Weiss et al. (22) reported quadriceps muscle thickness using ultrasound. ...
Article
Full-text available
In February 2002, the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) published a Position Stand entitled Progression Models in Resistance Training for Healthy Adults. The ACSM claims that the programmed manipulation of resistance-training protocols such as the training modality, repetition duration, range of repetitions, number of sets, and frequency of training will differentially affect specific physiological adaptations such as muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, and endurance. The ACSM also asserts that for progression in healthy adults, the programs for intermediate, advanced, and elite trainees must be different from those prescribed for novices. An objective evaluation of the resistance-training studies shows that these claims are primarily unsubstantiated. In fact, the preponderance of resistance-training studies suggest that simple, low-volume, time-efficient, resistance training is just as effective for increasing muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, and endurance - regardless of training experience - as are the complex, high-volume, time-consuming protocols that are recommended in the Position Stand. This document examines the basis for many of the claims in the Position Stand and provides an objective review of the resistance training literature.
... Studies that reported the effects of training with different amounts of resistance (Harris et al. 2004;Vincent et al. 2002;Hortobagyi et al. 2001;Bemben et al. 2000;Chestnut & Docherty 1999;Faigenbaum et al. 1999;Graves et al. 1999;Masuda et al. 1999;Weiss et al. 1999;Hisaeda et al. 1996;Kerr et al. 1996;Taaffe et al. 1996;Pruitt et al. 1995;Stone & Coulter 1994;Schmidtbleicher & Haralambie 1981;Withers 1970;O'Shea 1966;Berger 1963Berger , 1962aBerger , 1962b) strongly support the previously discussed acute neurophysiological responses reported by Behm and colleagues (2002). ...
... For example, there are studies that compared 2 RM, 6 RM and 10 RM free-weight bench press (Berger 1963), 2 RM, 10 RM and 12 RM bench press (Berger 1962a), 2 RM and 10 RM bench press (Berger 1962b), 2-3 RM, 5-6 RM and 9-10 RM free-weight squats (O'Shea 1966), 3-5 RM and 13-15 RM barbell squats (Weiss 1999), 4 RM and 10 RM for seven upper-body exercises (Bemben et al. 2000), 7-10 RM and 15-20 RM knee extension exercise (Graves et al. 1999), 4-6 RM and 15-20 RM knee extension (Hisaeda et al. 1996), 3 RM, 5 RM and 7 RM for three upper-and lower-body free-weight exercises (Withers 1970), and 6 RM, 9 RM and 15 RM upper-body and lower-body free-weight and machine exercises (Harris et al. 2004). They all reported no significant difference in the strength gains among the various groups using different amounts of resistance (RMs) for training ( Table 2). ...
... Recommendations to train with very heavy resistance (loads heavier than 6 RM), because they purportedly result in superior strength gains, are based on a faulty premise (an invalid reverse inference of the J Exerc Sci Fit • Vol 6 • No 2 • 2008 Table 1. Summary of authors who recommended heavier-isbetter resistance training based on an incorrect application of the size principle Brown et al. 2007 Kraemer & Gomez Kraemer & Vingren 2007Kraemer & Newton 2000Kraemer & Bush 1998Hatfield et al. 2006Fleck & Kraemer 1997Shimano et al. 2006 Fleck & Kraemer 1996Toigo & Boutellier 2006Zatsiorsky 1995Bird et al. 2005Stone 1993Crewther et al. 2005Schmidtbleicher 1992Fry 2004 Fleck Kraemer & Ratamess 2004Kraemer et al. 1988Peterson et al. 2004Fleck & Kraemer 1987Kraemer 2003Garhammer 1987Rhea et al. 2003Stone & O'Bryant 1984Fleck 2002Kraemer 1983Hasegawa et al. 2002Palmieri 1983Hoffman 2002Berger 1982Kraemer 2002Stone 1982Haff & Potteiger 2001 Atha 1981 Faigenbaum et al. 1999 6-8 RM and 13-15 RM Graves et al. 1999 7-10 RM and15-20 RM Masuda et al. 1999 40-80% 1 RM and 90% 1 RM Weiss et al. 19993-5 RM and 13-15 RM Hisaeda et al. 19964-6 RM and 15-20 RM Kerr et al. 1996 8-10 RM and 20-25 RM Taaffe 2-3 RM, 5-6 RM and 9-10 RM Berger 1963 2 RM, 6 RM and 10 RM Berger 1962a 2 RM, 10 RM and 12 RM Berger 1962b 2 RM and 10 RM size principle) and have very little supporting evidence. The question is whether the incorrect application was unintentionally created and perpetuated because of a misunderstanding, or whether it was intentionally created and perpetrated in order to support a preconceived opinion. ...
Article
Full-text available
The size principle states that motor units are recruited in an orderly manner from the smaller (lower threshold) to the larger (higher threshold) motor units, and that the recruitment is dependent on the effort of the activity. Greater recruitment produces higher muscular force. However, the pervasive faulty assumption that maximal or near maximal force (very heavy resistance) is required for recruitment of the higher-threshold motor units and optimal strength gains is not supported by the size principle, motor unit activation studies, or resistance training studies. This flawed premise has resulted in the unsubstantiated heavier-is-better recommendation for resistance training. ( J Exerc Sci Fit  Vol 6  No 2  67-86  2008)
... 367). Three studies (19)(20)(21) are cited. ...
... Weiss and colleagues reported the effects of resistance training with different ranges of repetitions on muscular strength in one publication (21) and hypertrophy in another (22). They randomly assigned 44 males (18-30 years), who were not previously engaged in any systematic physical training, to one of three training groups or a control group. ...
... The three training groups significantly increased isokinetic knee-extensor strength (percent change not reported), with no significant difference among the groups. They also significantly increased 1 RM squat, with the 3-5 RM group showing a significantly greater increase than the 23-25 RM group, but not significantly greater than the 13-15 RM group (21). Weiss et al. (22) reported quadriceps muscle thickness using ultrasound. ...
Article
Full-text available
JEPonline 2004;7(3):1-60. In February 2002, the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) published a Position Stand entitled Progression Models in Resistance Training for Healthy Adults. The ACSM claims that the programmed manipulation of resistance-training protocols such as the training modality, repetition duration, range of repetitions, number of sets, and frequency of training will differentially affect specific physiological adaptations such as muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, and endurance. The ACSM also asserts that for progression in healthy adults, the programs for intermediate, advanced, and elite trainees must be different from those prescribed for novices. An objective evaluation of the resistance-training studies shows that these claims are primarily unsubstantiated. In fact, the preponderance of resistance-training studies suggest that simple, low-volume, time-efficient, resistance training is just as effective for increasing muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, and endurance—regardless of training experience—as are the complex, high-volume, time-consuming protocols that are recommended in the Position Stand. This document examines the basis for many of the claims in the Position Stand and provides an objective review of the resistance training literature.
... The load required to increase maximal strength in untrained individuals is fairly low. Loads of 45-50% of 1 RM (and less) have been shown to increase dynamic muscular strength in previously untrained individuals (9,33,255,268). Light loads that can be lifted a maximum of 15-25 repetitions have been shown to increase strength in moderately trained individuals (227). It appears greater loading is needed with progression. ...
... Evidence statement and recommendation. Evidence category A. It is recommended that novice to intermediate individuals train with loads corresponding to 60-70% of 1 RM for 8-12 repetitions and advanced individuals cycle training loads of 80-100% of 1 RM to maximize muscular strength (9,33,96,206,225,227,255,268). ...
Article
SUMMARY In order to stimulate further adaptation toward specific training goals, progressive resistance training (RT) protocols are necessary. The optimal characteristics of strength-specific programs include the use of concentric (CON), eccentric (ECC), and isometric muscle actions and the performance of bilateral and unilateral single- and multiple-joint exercises. In addition, it is recommended that strength programs sequence exercises to optimize the preservation of exercise intensity (large before small muscle group exercises, multiple-joint exercises before single-joint exercises, and higher-intensity before lower-intensity exercises). For novice (untrained individuals with no RT experience or who have not trained for several years) training, it is recommended that loads correspond to a repetition range of an 8-12 repetition maximum (RM). For intermediate (individuals with approximately 6 months of consistent RT experience) to advanced (individuals with years of RT experience) training, it is recommended that individuals use a wider loading range from 1 to 12 RM in a periodized fashion with eventual emphasis on heavy loading (1-6 RM) using 3- to 5-min rest periods between sets performed at a moderate contraction velocity (1-2 s CON; 1-2 s ECC). When training at a specific RM load, it is recommended that 2-10% increase in load be applied when the individual can perform the current workload for one to two repetitions over the desired number. The recommendation for training frequency is 2-3 dIwkj1 for novice training, 3-4 dIwkj1 for intermediate training, and 4-5 dIwkj1 for advanced training. Similar program designs are recom- mended for hypertrophy training with respect to exercise selection and frequency. For loading, it is recommended that loads corresponding to 1-12 RM be used in periodized fashion with emphasis on the 6-12 RM zone using 1- to 2-min rest periods between sets at a moderate velocity. Higher volume, multiple-set programs are recommended for maximizing hypertrophy. Progression in power training entails two general loading strategies: 1) strength training and 2) use of light loads (0-60% of 1 RM for lower body exercises; 30-60% of 1 RM for upper body exercises) performed at a fast contraction velocity with 3-5 min of rest between sets for multiple sets per exercise (three to five sets). It is also recommended that emphasis be placed on multiple-joint exercises especially those involving the total body. For local muscular endurance training, it is recommended that light to moderate loads (40-60% of 1 RM) be performed for high repetitions (915) using short rest periods (G90 s). In the interpretation of this position stand as with prior ones, recommendations should be applied in context and should be contingent upon an individual's target goals, physical capacity, and training
... A repetition maximum continuum has been supported. 5,18,23,84 The concept simply implies that specified loads are required for specific training effects. High-intensity training involves few repetitions, whereas low-intensity endurance training requires much higher repetitions (eg, 20-25 RM). ...
... Using loads of 45% to 50% of 1 RM (and lower) has been shown to increase dynamic muscular strength in novice lifters. 14,78,84 Increased loads appear to be needed with progression. The novice to intermediate athlete should train with loads of 60% to 70% of 1 RM for 8 to 12 repetitions. ...
Article
Full-text available
Clinicians are constantly faced with the challenge of designing training programs for injured and noninjured athletes that maximize healing and optimize performance. Periodization is a concept of systematic progression-that is, resistance training programs that follow predictable patterns of change in training variables. The strength training literature is abundant with studies comparing periodization schemes on uninjured, trained, and untrained athletes. The rehabilitation literature, however, is scarce with information about how to optimally design resistance training programs based on periodization principles for injured athletes. The purpose of this review is to discuss relevant training variables and methods of periodization, as well as periodization program outcomes. A secondary purpose is to provide an anecdotal framework regarding implementation of periodization principles into rehabilitation programs. A Medline search from 1979 to 2009 was implemented with the keywords periodization, strength training, rehabilitation, endurance, power, hypertrophy, and resistance training with the Boolean term AND in all possible combinations in the English language. Each author also undertook independent hand searching of article references used in this review. Based on the studies researched, periodized strength training regimens demonstrate improved outcomes as compared to nonperiodized programs. Despite the evidence in the strength training literature supporting periodization programs, there is a considerable lack of data in the rehabilitation literature about program design and successful implementation of periodization into rehabilitation programs.
... Some studies have reported that loads of 45-50% of 1 repetition maximum (1RM) in adults, young men and women, has lead to an increase in dynamic muscular strength following 7 to 20 weeks of resistance training at a rate of 3 days per week (Sale et al., 1990, Stone and Coulter, 1994, Weiss et al., 1999). It appears that resistance training frequency of twice per week was sufficient to can induce strength gains in adolescents. ...
... Strength gains of 74% has also been reported in 10 years old children following progressive resistance training for 8 weeks at a rate of 2 sessions/week (Faigenbaum et al.,1993). Weiss et al. (1999) found that resistance trained groups were trained three per weeks with 4 sets of squats exercise were significantly increased in knee extension peak torque at 60º/s but not in knee flexion peak torque. The majority of previous pediatric studies have examined concentric isokinetic knee extension and flexion torques only (De Ste Croix et al., 2003). ...
... thus with a greater rate of force development and power. found statistically significant post-training improvements in jump height (Adams et al. 1992;Wilson et al. 1993;Wilson et al. 1996), two found no notable changes (Weiss et al. 1999;Weiss et al. 2000) while another study found a statistically significant improvement for one training group (fast squat) but not for another (slow squat) [Morrisey et al. 1998]. In addition, the studies that found a posttraining improvement in CMJ jump height report substantially different percentage improvements ranging from 5-21%. ...
... That is, those with a longer training history would not be expected to experience as large a training effect as novices. However, novice weight lifters were utilised in the studies by Weiss et al. (1999) and Weiss et al. (2000), and neither found a posttraining change in CMJ jump height. Morissey et al. (1998) found a statistically significant increase in CMJ jump height in a group utilising a fast tempo squat but no statistically significant difference for those utilising a slow squat. ...
Article
Background: Countermovement jump (CMJ) ability is an important contributor to successful performance in many sports. While the drop jump, squat, jump squat and power clean training exercises are each purported to enhance maximal CMJ jump height, there are generally inconsistent findings regarding their effectiveness at doing so. The resounding implication of this is that a coach cannot be sure as to which training exercise will be most effective at enhancing their athletes’ CMJ jump height. In an attempt to address this issue a biomechanical diagnostic and prescriptive pathway has been proposed that may allow the pre-training identification of the most effective exercise to enhance a given group’s, subgroup’s or individual’s CMJ jump height. The current study aims to test the efficacy of the proposed pathway with a single acute research study and two training studies. Methods: All three studies required a kinetic and kinematic analysis of the CMJ and each training exercise under examination (study 1: drop jump, jump squat, squat and power clean; study 2: low amplitude drop jump; study 3: larger amplitude drop jump). From ground reaction force and motion data, kinetic, kinematic and coordination parameters were calculated at the whole body, hip, knee and ankle. Correlation analysis was used to identify CMJ performance related factors (PRFs) while tests of statistical difference were used to identify the acute training stress experienced by CMJ PRFs. Findings: Study one indicated that the proposed pathway may provide a means by which to identify the most effective exercise to enhance a given group’s, subgroup’s or individual’s CMJ jump height. However, these findings were based on the results (statistical relationships and differences) of an acute study, which required verification with training studies. The combined results of study two and study three (drop jump training intervention studies) did not support the efficacy of the proposed pathway. This was due to the fact that (a) CMJ PRFs were not necessarily true CMJ performance determining factors, and (b) the acute pretraining stress experienced by a given CMJ PRF did not necessarily give an insight into its subsequent post-training change. Conclusion: Based on findings ‘a’ and ‘b’ (above) the use of the proposed pathway to identify the most effective exercise to enhance a given group’s, subgroup’s or individual’s CMJ jump height cannot be supported.
... The completed number of proper repetitions was recorded for each set and used to calculate VL for each set of both exercises. Highintensity loads (e.g., 4RM) performed over repeated trials have been recommended with respect to strength development (2,24). The TS protocol was designed to reflect the common practice of stressing 1 muscle group via multiple sets, before moving on to another muscle group. ...
... It would appear that under either training design implemented in the current research, the prescribed rest interval did not allow for a level of physiological recovery (e.g., resynthesis of intramuscular phosphocreatine and adenosine triphosphate and removal of detrimental metabolites) adequate to return the body to a state in which a similar amount of work could be performed in subsequent sets. It has been suggested that the rest interval necessary to maintain VL is dependent on the magnitude of the load and, specifically, that submaximal (i.e., ,90% of 1RM) loads performed to failure require longer rest intervals as compared to maximal (i.e., 1RM) loads (24). As the present study was constrained by a 4RM load, it is possible that a load of greater intensity (i.e., 1-3RM) may allow for VL maintenance over repeated sets using either of the prescribed rest intervals in the current study. ...
Article
Full-text available
The objective of this study was to investigate the acute effects on volume load (VL) (load × repetitions) of performing paired set (PS) vs. traditional set (TS) training over 3 consecutive sets. After a familiarization session 16 trained men performed 2 testing protocols using 4 repetition maximum loads: TS (3 sets of bench pull followed by 3 sets of bench press performed in approximately 10 minutes) or PS (3 sets of bench pull and 3 sets of bench press performed in an alternating manner in approximately 10 minutes). Bench pull and bench press VL decreased significantly from set 1 to set 2 and from set 2 to set 3 under both the PS and TS conditions (p < 0.05). Bench pull and bench press VL per set were significantly less under TS as compared to PS over all sets, with the exception of the first set (bench pull set 1) (p < 0.05). Session totals for bench pull and bench press VL were significantly less under TS as compared to PS (p < 0.05). Paired set was determined to be more efficient (VL/time) as compared to TS. The data suggest that a 2-minute rest interval between sets (TS), or a 4-minute rest interval between similar sets (PS), may not be adequate to maintain VL. The data further suggest that PS training may be more effective than TS training in terms of VL maintenance and more efficient. Paired set training would appear to be an efficient method of exercise. Practitioners wishing to maximize work completed per unit of time may be well advised to consider PS training.
... There were no differences between the two groups in strength or cross-sectional muscle area gains over 10 wk (17). A study by Weiss et al. (74) of 38 untrained men compared four sets of squats at either 3RM to 5RM, 13RM to 15RM, or 23RM to 25RM for 7 wk and found significant improvement in squat strength in all groups compared with that in a group that did not exercise. However, there was significantly greater improvement in the 3RM-to-5RM group than that in the 23RM-to-25RM group, with average 1RM squat increase of 75.0 and 34.1 kg, respectively (74). ...
... A study by Weiss et al. (74) of 38 untrained men compared four sets of squats at either 3RM to 5RM, 13RM to 15RM, or 23RM to 25RM for 7 wk and found significant improvement in squat strength in all groups compared with that in a group that did not exercise. However, there was significantly greater improvement in the 3RM-to-5RM group than that in the 23RM-to-25RM group, with average 1RM squat increase of 75.0 and 34.1 kg, respectively (74). Another study of 30 resistance-trained collegiate baseball players evaluating low-resistance exercise (40% to 60% 1RM) versus high-resistance exercise (70% to 90% 1RM) revealed greater gains in 1RM squat in the high-resistance group (39). ...
Article
Multiple organizations recommend that resistance exercise be part of an adult health and fitness regimen. Extensive research has been done over the years on how to appropriately use a resistance exercise program to increase strength and power for general health and improve athletic performance. This article will review the literature on the components of a resistance exercise program and the recommendations for increasing strength and power in healthy adults.
... The completed number of proper repetitions was recorded for each set and used to calculate VL for each set of both exercises. High-intensity loads (e.g., 4RM) performed over repeated trials have been recommended with respect to strength development (2,27). The TS protocol was designed to reflect the common practice of stressing 1 muscle group via multiple sets before moving on to another muscle group. ...
... The RI necessary to maintain Bpress repetitions would appear to be dependent on the magnitude of the load. Specifically, submaximal (i.e., ,90% of 1RM) loads performed to failure would seem to require somewhat longer RIs as compared to maximal (i.e., 1RM) loads (8,27). Weir et al (26) found a 1-minute RI adequate to perform a 1RM over 2 sets. ...
Article
The objective of this study was to investigate the acute effects of performing paired set (PS) vs. traditional set (TS) training over 3 consecutive sets on volume load (VL) and electromyographic (EMG) activity of the pectoralis major, anterior deltoid, latissimus dorsi, and trapezius muscles. Following a familiarization session 16 trained males performed 2 testing protocols using 4 repetition maximum loads: TS (3 sets of bench pull [Bpull] followed by 3 sets of bench press [Bpress] performed in approximately 20 minutes) or PS (3 sets of Bpull and 3 sets of Bpress performed in an alternating manner in approximately 10 minutes). Bpull and Bpress VL decreased significantly from set 1 to set 2 and from set 2 to set 3 under both conditions. There was no difference between VL per set, or over the sessions, between the 2 conditions. PS was determined to be more efficient (VL/time) as compared to TS. EMG activity of the 4 monitored muscles was not different for the 2 conditions or within each condition over the 3 sets. However, there was a significant within-set response in EMG activity in the Bpress exercise. The data suggest that a 4-minute rest interval between sets may not be adequate to maintain VL using either protocol. The data further suggest that PS training may be as effective as TS training in terms of VL maintenance and more effective in terms of efficiency. The comparison of EMG activity between the PS and TS protocols suggests that the level of neuromuscular fatigue does not differ under the 2 conditions. PS training would appear to be an effective method of exercise with respect to VL maintenance and efficiency.
... As such any reported changes in maximal strength and/or power may simply reflect differences in volume between interventions, rather than the specific kinematic and kinetic characteristics associated with a particular training scheme. Unfortunately, the greater majority of research in this area does not equate volume between schemes (Bauer, Thayer & Baras, 1990;Fatouros et al., 2000;Harris et al., 2000;Jones & Rutherford, 1987;Jones, Bishop, Hunter & Fleisig, 2001;Lyttle et al., 1996;Schmidtbleicher & Buehrle, 1987;Weiss, Coney & Clark, 1999;Weiss & Relyea, 2001;Wenzel & Perfetto, 1992;Wilson, Newton, Murphy & Humphries, 1993) and consequently many of the suggested conclusions and applications are fundamentally flawed. ...
... Unfortunately, the great majority of research does not adopt such an approach (Bauer et al., 1990;Fatouros et al., 2000;Harris et al., 2000;Lyttle et al., 1996;Schmidtbleicher & Buehrle, 1987;Weiss et al., 1999;Weiss & Relyea, 2001;Wenzel & Perfetto, 1992) and as a result many of the suggested conclusions and practical applications, based upon this data, are fundamentally flawed. Research that has used this approach (equal volume training) have reported similar changes in strength and muscle CSA across a range of loading (e.g. ...
... The load required to increase maximal strength in untrained individuals is fairly low. Loads of 45-50% of 1 RM (and less) have been shown to increase dynamic muscular strength in previously untrained individuals (11,78,218,243,253). It appears greater loading is needed with progression. ...
... At least 80% of 1 RM is needed to produce any further neural adaptations and strength during resistance training in experienced lifters (96). Several pioneering studies indicated that training with loads corresponding to 1-6 RM (mostly 5-6 RM) was most conducive to increasing maximal dynamic strength (19,194,253). Although significant strength increases have been reported using loads corresponding to 8 -12 RM (46,147,163,232), this loading range may not be as effective as heavy loads for maximizing strength in advanced lifters. ...
Article
Full-text available
American College of Sports Medicine Position Stand on Progression Models in Resistance Training for Healthy Adults. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. Vol. 34, No. 2, 2002, pp. 364-380. In order to stimulate further adaptation toward a specific training goal(s), progression in the type of resistance training protocol used is necessary. The optimal characteristics of strength-specific programs include the use of both concentric and eccentric muscle actions and the performance of both single- and multiple-joint exercises. It is also recommended that the strength program sequence exercises to optimize the quality of the exercise intensity (large before small muscle group exercises, multiple-joint exercises before single-joint exercises, and higher intensity before lower intensity exercises). For initial resistances, it is recommended that loads corresponding to 8-12 repetition maximum (RM) be used in novice training. For intermediate to advanced training, it is recommended that individuals use a wider loading range, from 1-12 RM in a periodized fashion, with eventual emphasis on heavy loading (1-6 RM) using at least 3-min rest periods between sets performed at a moderate contraction velocity (1-2 s concentric. 1-2 s eccentric). When training at a specific RM load, it is recommended that 2-10% increase in load be applied when the individual can perform the current workload for one to two repetitions over the desired number. The recommendation for training frequency is 2-3 d.wk(-1) for novice and intermediate training and 4-5 d.wk(-1) for advanced training. Similar program designs are recommended for hypertrophy training with respect to exercise selection and frequency. For loading, it is recommended that loads corresponding to 1-12 RM be used in periodized fashion, with emphasis on the 6-12 RM zone using 1- to 2-min rest periods between sets at a moderate velocity. Higher volume, multiple-set programs are recommended for maximizing hypertrophy. Progression in power training entails two general loading strategies: 1) strength training, and 2) use of light loads (30-60% of 1 RM) performed at a fast contraction velocity with 2-3 min of rest between sets for multiple sets per exercise. It is also recommended that emphasis be placed on multiple-joint exercises, especially those involving the total body. For local muscular endurance training, it is recommended that light to moderate loads (40-60% of 1 RM) be performed for high repetitions (> 15) using short rest periods (< 90 s). In the interpretation of this position stand, as with prior ones, the recommendations should be viewed in context of the individual's target goals, physical capacity, and training status.
... La carga requerida para incrementar la fuerza máxima en sujetos no entrenados es relativamente baja. Así, cargas del 45-50% 1RM (y menores) han demostrado su utilidad para mejorar la fuerza muscular dinámica en sujetos previamente no entrenados (Anderson, Kearney, 1982;Gettman, Ayres, Pollock, Jackson, 1978;Sale, Jacobs, MacDougall, Garner, 1990;Stone, Coulter, 1994;Weiss, Coney, Clark, 1999). Al parecer, a medida que los sujetos van mejorando, son necesarias nuevas cargas más elevadas. ...
... Los primeros estudios representativos en relación a la carga indicaron que entrenando con cargas correspondientes a 1-6 RM (repeticiones máximas), normalmente 5-6 RM, se producía un efecto mayor para incrementar la fuerza máxima dinámica (Berger, 1962;O'Shea, 1966;Weiss, Coney, Clark, 1999). ...
Article
Full-text available
El entrenamiento de la fuerza muscular debe constituir necesariamente una parte importante de los programas de actividad física en el campo de la salud, especialmente si tenemos en cuenta las serias consecuencias que la ausencia de movimiento derivada del modelo de vida sedentario imperante produce en la reducción de la función muscular. Ahora bien, hasta la fecha las indicaciones y recomendaciones generales respecto a aspectos metodológicos como la organización y estructuración de las cargas, la intensidad, la recuperación, el volumen, la frecuencia de estimulación, etc., de este tipo de entrenamiento eran poco concretas y excesivamente genéricas en este campo. En este artículo recogemos parte de las principales conclusiones de estudios específicos así como de importantes trabajos de revisión publicados en los últimos años.
... The load required to increase maximal strength in untrained individuals is fairly low. Loads of 45-50% of 1 RM (and less) have been shown to increase dynamic muscular strength in previously untrained individuals (11,78,218,243,253). It appears greater loading is needed with progression. ...
... At least 80% of 1 RM is needed to produce any further neural adaptations and strength during resistance training in experienced lifters (96). Several pioneering studies indicated that training with loads corresponding to 1-6 RM (mostly 5-6 RM) was most conducive to increasing maximal dynamic strength (19,194,253). Although significant strength increases have been reported using loads corresponding to 8 -12 RM (46,147,163,232), this loading range may not be as effective as heavy loads for maximizing strength in advanced lifters. ...
Article
Full-text available
In order to stimulate further adaptation toward a specific training goal(s), progression in the type of resistance training protocol used is necessary. The optimal characteristics of strength-specific programs include the use of both concentric and eccentric muscle actions and the performance of both single- and multiple-joint exercises. It is also recommended that the strength program sequence exercises to optimize the quality of the exercise intensity (large before small muscle group exercises, multiple-joint exercises before single-joint exercises, and higher intensity before lower intensity exercises). For initial resistances, it is recommended that loads corresponding to 8-12 repetition maximum (RM) be used in novice training. For intermediate to advanced training, it is recommended that individuals use a wider loading range, from 1-12 RM in a periodized fashion, with eventual emphasis on heavy loading (1-6 RM) using at least 3-min rest periods between sets performed at a moderate contraction velocity (1-2 s concentric, 1-2 s eccentric). When training at a specific RM load, it is recommended that 2-10% increase in load be applied when the individual can perform the current workload for one to two repetitions over the desired number. The recommendation for training frequency is 2-3 d x wk(-1) for novice and intermediate training and 4-5 d x wk(-1) for advanced training. Similar program designs are recommended for hypertrophy training with respect to exercise selection and frequency. For loading, it is recommended that loads corresponding to 1-12 RM be used in periodized fashion, with emphasis on the 6-12 RM zone using 1- to 2-min rest periods between sets at a moderate velocity. Higher volume, multiple-set programs are recommended for maximizing hypertrophy. Progression in power training entails two general loading strategies: 1) strength training, and 2) use of light loads (30-60% of 1 RM) performed at a fast contraction velocity with 2-3 min of rest between sets for multiple sets per exercise. It is also recommended that emphasis be placed on multiple-joint exercises, especially those involving the total body. For local muscular endurance training, it is recommended that light to moderate loads (40-60% of 1 RM) be performed for high repetitions (> 15) using short rest periods (< 90 s). In the interpretation of this position stand, as with prior ones, the recommendations should be viewed in context of the individual's target goals, physical capacity, and training status.
... Since the 1960's, a number of studies were conducted to determine an appropriate and effective resistance training protocol with various sets and repetitions to increase muscle strength and size (Lawrence, 1999;Krieger, 2010). Although many investigators have used different types of resistance training protocols (Cholewa et al., 2014;Frohlich, M., Emrich, E., & Schmidtbleicher, D, 2010), it is still debatable whether a high-volume or low-volume training protocol is preferable to induce muscular hypertrophy and increase muscle strength. ...
... Mitchell et al. (2001) also reported that three different resistance training protocols (80% of 1RM with one set, 80% of 1RM with three sets and 30% of 1RM with 3 sets) elicited the increase of MVC in all training condition with no between-condition differences. Lawrence et al. (1999) also conducted a study using with low (4 sets/3-5RM), moderate (4 sets/13-15RM), and high-repetition (4 sets/23-25RM) squats training three times per week for 7 weeks. The results indicated all training groups significantly increased MVC compared with baseline and CON and the low-repetition group improved more than did the high-repetition group. ...
... Resistance training has become popular among prepubescent and adolescents over the last decade and has received attention as an important component of youth fitness programme (Picosky et al., 2002). Some studies have reported that loads of 45-50% of 1 repetition maximum (1RM) in adults, young men and women, has lead to an increase in dynamic muscular strength following 7 to 20 weeks of resistance training at a rate of 3 days per week (Sale et al., 1990, Stone and Coulter, 1994, Weiss et al., 1999). It appears that resistance training frequency of twice per week was sufficient to can induce strength gains in adolescents. ...
... f twice per week was sufficient to can induce strength gains in adolescents. However, the duration and intensity of the training programme varied (Falk and Tenenbaum, 1996). Strength gains of 74% has also been reported in 10 years old children following progressive resistance training for 8 weeks at a rate of 2 sessions/week (Faigenbaum et al.,1993). Weiss et al. (1999 found that resistance trained groups were trained three per weeks with 4 sets of squats exercise were significantly increased in knee extension peak torque at 60º/s but not in knee flexion peak torque. The majority of previous pediatric studies have examined concentric isokinetic knee extension and flexion torques only (De Ste Croix et ...
Article
Full-text available
The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of a 12 week (2 days per week) resistance training programme at an intensity of 50% of 1RM in adolescent males (13-16 years old) male taekwondo athletes on their isokinetic peak torque and anaerobic power. The intervention group (n=12) aged 14±1 years, participated in the prescribed resistance training programme along with the existing taekwondo skill/drill training (2 days/week), while the control group (n=11) aged 14±1 years, participated in an existing taekwondo skill/drill training only. Anaerobic power was estimated from Wingate anaerobic test. An isokinetic dynamometer (Biodex multi-joint system 3 pro, New York) was used in the collection of data from the knee (flexion/extension) and hip (flexion, extension, abduction and adduction) joints. Mean anaerobic power and peak anaerobic power in the intervention group increased 9% and 10%, respectively. However, these two variables in the control group significantly decreased from mid training to post training (11.5% and 16% respectively), (p
... High-intensity loads (e.g. 3-to 6-RM) have been recommended with respect to strength development (Berger, 1962; Weiss, Coney, & Clark, 1999). Depending on the training session, 1–4 sets of 3–6 throws at 40% of bench press 1-RM were prescribed for bench press throw in both protocols. ...
Article
Full-text available
The objective of this study was to examine the chronic effects on strength and power of performing complex versus traditional set training over eight weeks. Fifteen trained males were assessed for throw height, peak velocity, and peak power in the bench press throw and one-repetition maximum (1-RM) in the bench press and bench pull exercises, before and after the eight-week programme. The traditional set group performed the pulling before the pushing exercise sets, whereas the complex set group alternated pulling and pushing sets. The complex set training sessions were completed in approximately half the time. Electromyographic (EMG) activity was monitored during both test sessions in an attempt to determine if it was affected as a result of the training programme. Although there were no differences in the dependent variables between the two conditions, bench pull and bench press 1-RM increased significantly under the complex set condition and peak power increased significantly under the traditional set condition. Effect size statistics suggested that the complex set was more time-efficient than the traditional set condition with respect to development of 1-RM bench pull and bench press, peak velocity and peak power. The EMG activity was not affected. Complex set training would appear to be an effective method of exercise with respect to efficiency and strength development.
... A 4RM was prescribed for Bpull for all sets in both protocols and was performed to failure, which was considered to have been reached when another repetition using proper technique could not be performed (22). A 4RM was chosen because high-intensity loads have been recommended for strength development (5,23). The total time required to complete the testing sessions, and the order in which the exercises were performed, differed between the 2 protocols. ...
Article
Full-text available
The objective of this study was to investigate the acute effects of performing traditional set (TS) vs. complex set (CS) agonist-antagonist training over 3 consecutive sets, on bench press throw (BPT) throw height (TH), peak velocity (PV), peak power (PP), bench pull volume load (VL), and electromyographic (EMG) activity. Eighteen trained men performed 2 testing protocols: TS comprising 3 sets of Bpull followed by 3 sets of BPT performed in approximately 20 minutes or CS comprising 3 sets of both Bpull and BPT performed in an alternating manner in approximately 10 minutes. Throw height, PV, PP, and EMG activity were not different within, or between, the 2 conditions. Bench pull VL decreased significantly from set 1 to sets 2 and 3, under both conditions. Decreases from set 1 to set 2 were 14.55 +/- 26.11 and 9.07 +/- 13.89% and from set 1 to set 3 were 16.87 +/- 29.90 and 14.17 +/- 18.37% under CS and TS, respectively. There was no difference in VL per set, or session, between the conditions. Although there was no augmentation of the power measures, CS was determined to have approximately twice the efficiency (ouput/time) as compared to TS. Efficiency calculations for VL, TH, PV, and PP are 103.47 kg.min, 26.25 cm.min, 1.98 m.s.min, 890.39 W.min under CS and 54.71 kg.min, 13.02 cm.min, 0.99 m.s.min, 459.28 W.min under TS. Comparison of EMG activity between the protocols suggests the level of neuromuscular fatigue did not differ under the 2 conditions. Complex set training would appear to be an effective method of exercise with respect to efficiency and the maintenance of TH, PV, PP, and VL.
... Exercises performed using free weights and weight-training machines use the same load for concentric and eccentric muscle actions and are referred to as dynamic constant external resistance (DCER) training (31). Although higher levels of force generation are possible during eccentric actions (5), the training load is normally set by the maximum concentric force. ...
Article
Full-text available
The purpose of this study was to compare the strength and neuromuscular adaptations for dynamic constant external resistance (DCER) training and dynamic accentuated external resistance (DAER) training (resistance training employing an accentuated load during eccentric actions). Male subjects active in resistance training were assigned to either a DCER training group (n = 10) or a DAER training group (n = 8) for 9 weeks. Subjects in the DCER group performed 4 sets of 10 repetitions with a load of 75% concentric 1 repetition maximum (RM). Subjects in the DAER group performed 3 sets of 10 repetitions with a concentric load of 75% of 1RM and an eccentric load of approximately 120% of concentric 1RM. Three measures reflecting adaptation of elbow flexors and extensors were recorded pretraining and posttraining: concentric 1RM, muscle cross-sectional area (CSA), and specific tension. Strength was assessed at midtraining periods. No significant changes in muscle CSA were observed in either group. Both training groups experienced significant increases in concentric 1RM and specific tension of both the elbow flexors and extensors, but compared with DCER training, DAER training produced significantly greater increases in concentric 1RM of the elbow extensors. These results suggest that, for some exercises, DAER training may be more effective than DCER training in developing strength within a 9-week training phase. However, for trained subjects, neither protocol is effective in eliciting muscle hypertrophy.
... Participants performed four sets of six to eight repetitions at 80% of 1RM, with 3 min recovery between sets. Existing evidence suggests that this prescription of training variables is ideal to promote maximal strength gains (Tan 1999, Weiss et al. 1999. Each repetition was executed with a 3-s eccentric phase immediately followed by a 3-s concentric phase, which was explicitly controlled through the use of an audible electronic metronome (set at 1 Hz). ...
Article
Paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation was used to investigate the influence of 4 weeks of heavy load squat strength training on corticospinal excitability and short-interval intracortical inhibition (rectus femoris muscle). Participants (n = 12) were randomly allocated to a strength training or control group. The strength training group completed 4 weeks of heavy load squat strength training. Recruitment curves were constructed to determine values for the slope of the curve, V50 and peak height. Short-interval intracortical inhibition was assessed using a subthreshold (0.7 × active motor threshold) conditioning stimulus, followed 3 ms later by a supra-threshold (1.2 × active motor threshold) test stimulus. All motor evoked responses were taken during 10% of maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVC) torque and normalized to the maximal M-wave. The strength training group attained 87% increases in 1RM squat strength (P < 0.01), significant increases in measures of corticospinal excitability (1.2 × Motor threshold: 116%, P = 0.016; peak height of recruitment curve = 105%, P < 0.001), and a 32% reduction in short-interval intracortical inhibition (P < 0.01) following the 4-week intervention compared with control. There were no changes in any dependent variable (P > 0.05) detected in the control group. Repeated high force voluntary muscle activation in the form of short-term strength training reduces short-interval intracortical inhibition. This is consistent with studies involving skilled/complex tasks or novel movement patterns and acute studies investigating acute voluntary contractions.
... Thus, if there are any differences in strength gain between the WBV training and conventional resistance training, it is difficult to detect it in previously untrained subjects. Regarding conventional resistance training, studies indicate that training at an intensity similar to 80-90% of 1 repetition maximum (1RM) is best for improving strength (4,64). The studies of Delecluse et al. (15) and Schlumberger et al. (55) did not carry out conventional resistance training in this intensity zone, so it can be claimed that it was not an optimal strength training regime. ...
Article
The purpose of this investigation was to compare the performance-enhancing effects of squats on a vibration platform with conventional squats in recreationally resistance-trained men. The subjects were 14 recreationally resistance-trained men (age, 21-40 years) and the intervention period consisted of 5 weeks. After the initial testing, subjects were randomly assigned to either the "squat whole body vibration" (SWBV) group (n = 7), which performed squats on a vibration platform on a Smith Machine, or the "squat"(S) group (n = 7), which performed conventional squats with no vibrations on a Smith Machine. Testing was performed at the beginning and the end of the study and consisted of 1 repetition maximum (1RM) in squat and maximum jump height in countermovement jump (CMJ). A modified daily undulating periodization program was used during the intervention period in both groups. Both groups trained at the same percentage of 1RM in squats (6-10RM). After the intervention, CMJ performance increased significantly only in the SWBV (p < 0.01), but there was no significant difference between groups in relative jump height increase (p = 0.088). Both groups showed significant increases in 1RM performance in squats (p < 0.01). Although there was a trend toward a greater relative strength increase in the SWBV group, it did not reach a significant level. In conclusion, the preliminary results of this study point toward a tendency of superiority of squats performed on a vibration platform compared with squats without vibrations regarding maximal strength and explosive power as long as the external load is similar in recreationally resistance-trained men.
... At least 80% of 1 RM is needed to produce any further neural adaptations and strength during resistance training in experienced lifters (96). Several pioneering studies indicated that training with loads corresponding to 1– 6 RM (mostly 5– 6 RM) was most conducive to increasing maximal dynamic strength (19,194,253). Although significant strength increases have been reported using loads corresponding to 8 –12 RM (46,147,163,232), this loading range may not be as effective as heavy loads for maximizing strength in advanced lifters. ...
Article
Full-text available
In order to stimulate further adaptation toward a specific training goal(s), progression in the type of resistance training protocol used is necessary. The optimal characteristics of strength-specific programs include the use of both concentric and eccentric muscle actions and the performance of both single- and multiple-joint exercises. It is also recommended that the strength program sequence exercises to optimize the quality of the exercise intensity (large before small muscle group exercises, multiple-joint exercises before single-joint exercises, and higher intensity before lower intensity exercises). For initial resistances, it is recommended that loads corresponding to 8-12 repetition maximum (RM) be used in novice training. For intermediate to advanced training, it is recommended that individuals use a wider loading range, from 1-12 RM in a periodized fashion, with eventual emphasis on heavy loading (1-6 RM) using at least 3-min rest periods between sets performed at a moderate contraction velocity (1-2 s concentric, 1-2 s eccentric). When training at a specific RM load, it is recommended that 2-10% increase in load be applied when the individual can perform the current workload for one to two repetitions over the desired number. The recommendation for training frequency is 2-3 d·wk-1 for novice and intermediate training and 4-5 d·wk-1 for advanced training. Similar program designs are recommended for hypertrophy training with respect to exercise selection and frequency. For loading, it is recommended that loads corresponding to 1-12 RM be used in periodized fashion, with emphasis on the 6-12 RM zone using 1- to 2-min rest periods between sets at a moderate velocity. Higher volume, multiple-set programs are recommended for maximizing hypertrophy. Progression in power training entails two general loading strategies: 1) strength training, and 2) use of light loads (30-60% of 1 RM) performed at a fast contraction velocity with 2-3 min of rest between sets for multiple sets per exercise. It is also recommended that emphasis be placed on multiple-joint exercises, especially those involving the total body. For local muscular endurance training, it is recommended that light to moderate loads (40-60% of 1 RM) be performed for high repetitions (> 15) using short rest periods (< 90 s). In the interpretation of this position stand, as with prior ones, the recommendations should be viewed in context of the individual's target goals, physical capacity, and training status.
... Healthy sedentary individuals usually respond to any type of exercise (28,29) and can attain a 40% increased muscle strength in 4 weeks, whereas longer periods of exercise are necessary to obtain the same effects in more trained individuals (23). An exercise intensity of 40 -50% of 1 repetition maximum (1 RM) is sufficient to obtain increased strength in untrained individuals, whereas 80% of 1 RM is needed for more trained persons (30,31). According to the literature, it appears that untrained individuals benefit from both single-and multiple-set exercise (32) and that it is necessary to exercise 2-3 times per week to increase muscle strength (33). ...
Article
To investigate the benefits and safety of an intensive muscular training program in patients with chronic polymyositis (PM) and dermatomyositis (DM). Nine patients with chronic PM or DM (median age 53 years, range 44-61) were included. Assessments of impairment (10-15 voluntary repetition maximum [VRM], the Functional Index 2 [FI-2], the Grippit, and pain rated on the Borg CR-10 scale), activity limitation (Myositis Activities Profile), and participation restriction (patients' disease impact on well-being) were performed 4 weeks prior to baseline, at baseline, and after 7 weeks of exercise. A 6-item core set of disease activity measures was administered and muscle biopsy samples of vastus lateralis were obtained at baseline and after 7 weeks of exercise. Response criteria at an individual level were set for disability and disease activity. The patients exercised 3 days per week for 7 weeks on loads allowing 10 VRM. On a group level there were no significant differences between assessments at 4 weeks before baseline compared with baseline. The group improved significantly regarding 10-15 VRM and FI-2 at 7 weeks compared with baseline (P < 0.05). All patients were responders with respect to impairment and 2 were activity limitation responders whereas participation restriction remained unchanged in all. Two patients were responders with reduced disease activity and no patient had signs of increased muscle inflammation in the muscle biopsy sample after 7 weeks of exercise. Patients with chronic, stable PM and DM can perform this intensive resistive exercise program with beneficial effects on impairment and activity limitation without increased muscle inflammation.
... The subjects in the study of Sedano et al. (75) had limited experience of resistance training; thus, it could be expected that any resistance training intervention would have a positive effect on performance. This is similar to the findings of previous studies on subjects with limited resistance training experience (17,73,79,82). Three studies in this review involved subjects with no experience of resistance training (6,12,38), and 5 studies involved subjects with very little experience (e.g., "had not participated in resistance training for 6 months") (28,31,46,52,62). ...
... Another aspect of exercise prescription and strength gain needing consideration is the utility of higher repetitions and lower repetition sets. As indicated by the ACSM position stand of prescribing 8–15 repetitions for strength improvement[14]and experimental findings demonstrating that low repetitions sets are more effective in increasing strength[15], this remains another contentious area of strength training prescription. This variability of recommendations is largely due to basing exercise prescriptions on research that has been performed on previously untrained subjects[2,9]. ...
... Consequently it is not possible to reconcile these findings, as differences in experimental methodology confound the issue. Further research is required to clarify the role of inter-muscle differences in activation with single-and multi-joint exercises across varying training intensities to determine whether such a mechanism influences the findings of the present and previous studies ((32, 37). 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 Strength gains between groups were consistent with the concept of a strength-endurance continuum (11,62). Although LL did increase maximal muscle strength, HL resulted in greater increases in both 1RMBP (6.5 vs. 2.0%, respectively) and 1RMBS (19.6 vs. 8.8%, respectively). ...
Article
Full-text available
The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of low- versus high-load resistance training (RT) on muscular adaptations in well-trained subjects. Eighteen young men experienced in RT were matched according to baseline strength, and then randomly assigned to 1 of 2 experimental groups: a low-load RT routine (LL) where 25-35 repetitions were performed per set per exercise (n = 9), or a high-load RT routine (HL) where 8-12 repetitions were performed per set per exercise (n = 9). During each session, subjects in both groups performed 3 sets of 7 different exercises representing all major muscles. Training was carried out 3 times per week on non-consecutive days, for 8 total weeks. Both HL and LL conditions produced significant increases in thickness of the elbow flexors (5.3 vs. 8.6%, respectively), elbow extensors (6.0 vs. 5.2%, respectively), and quadriceps femoris (9.3 vs. 9.5%, respectively), with no significant differences noted between groups. Improvements in back squat strength were significantly greater for HL compared to LL (19.6 vs. 8.8%, respectively) and there was a trend for greater increases in 1RM bench press (6.5 vs. 2.0%, respectively). Upper body muscle endurance (assessed by the bench press at 50% 1RM to failure) improved to a greater extent in LL compared to HL (16.6% vs. -1.2%, respectively). These findings indicate that both HL and LL training to failure can elicit significant increases in muscle hypertrophy among well-trained young men; however, HL training is superior for maximizing strength adaptations.
... Eğitimsiz bireylerde maksimum kuvveti artırmak için gerekli yük düşüktür. 1MT'ın %45-50'sinde yapılan kuvvet eğitiminin eğitimsiz bireylerde dinamik kas kuvvetini artırdığı gösterilmiştir (36,37). Eğitimli bireylerde kas kuvvetinde gelişim görmek için 1 MT'ın %80'inde eğitim yapmak gerekebilmektedir (38). ...
Chapter
Full-text available
... Resistance training is an established method to improve physical fitness and enhance sport performance. Increasing the external load, number of repetitions, and duration of a resistance training session may lead to differential muscular strength gains within the athlete (Weiss, Coney, & Clark, 1999). Resistance training performance gains are specific to the movements performed and are generally due to muscle hypertrophy and improved coordination (Rutherford, 1988). ...
Article
Sport-specific resistance training, through limb loading, can be a complimentary training method to traditional resistance training by loading the working muscles during all phases of a specific movement. The purpose of this study was to examine the acute effects of skating with an additional load on the skate, using a skate weight prototype, on kinematics, kinetics, and muscle activation during the acceleration phase while skating on a synthetic ice surface. 10 male hockey skaters accelerated from rest (standing erect with knees slightly bent) under four non-randomized load conditions: baseline 1 (no weight), light (0.9 kg per skate), heavy (1.8 kg per skate), and baseline 2 (no weight). Skating with additional weight caused athletes to skate slower (p < 0.001; η² = 0.551), and led to few changes in kinematics: hip sagittal range of motion (ROM) decreased (2.2°; p = 0.032; η² = 0.274), hip transverse ROM decreased (3.4°; p < 0.001; η² = 0.494), ankle sagittal ROM decreased (2.3°; p = 0.022; η² = 0.295), and knee sagittal ROM increased (7.8°; p < 0.001, η² = 0.761). Overall, weighted skates decreased skating velocity, but athletes maintained similar muscle activation profiles (magnitude and trends) with minor changes to their skating kinematics.
... Typically in RE, there is an inverse relationship between the load and the volume (i.e. as the load increases the number of repetitions decreases). Loads of below 50% 1RM have been shown to increase dynamic muscular strength in untrained individuals [27,28]. Hakkinen et al. [26] reported that at least 80% 1RM was required to stimulate further neural adaptations and strength during RE in experienced weight lifters. ...
Article
Resistance Exercise (RE) is a widely practiced activity both in leisure time and in training periods for competitive athletes. Recent advanced in molecular biology and muscle physiology has elucidated some of the mechanisms that regulate muscle growth. However, these molecular advances require application in acute program variables of RE. Therefore, we present an updated paradigm of resistance exercise variables and the effect manipulating these has on signalling pathways and hormonal response to optimise RE adaptations. We herein explore the effect of altering (i) choice of exercise; (ii) order of exercises performed; (iii) load (weight/resistance); (iv) volume (i.e. repetitions x sets x load) and (v) rest period between sets. Manipulating these variables has a consequential effect on signalling pathways, hormone response and neural adaptations that may influence protein synthesis and therefore gradual protein accretion leading to increased muscle size and strength.
... Hypertrophy-specific training has been defined by moderate repetitions (i.e., 8-12) at a moderate intensity (i.e., 65%-75% of one-repetition maximum (1RM)) (Baechle and Earle 2008;Chestnut and Docherty 1999;Goto et al. 2004), whereas strength-specific training is typically characterized by low repetitions (i.e., ≤6) performed at a high intensity (i.e., ≥80% of 1RM) (Baechle and Earle 2008;Chestnut and Docherty 1999;Goto et al. 2004). These recommendations are generally based on the strength training continuum from Anderson and Kearney (1982), who demonstrated that low repetitions produced superior strength compared with high repetitions (Anderson and Kearney 1982;Campos et al. 2002;Holm et al. 2008;Weiss et al. 1999). Conversely, this spectrum specifies high repetitions to a greater degree than low repetitions to enhance muscular endurance (Anderson and Kearney 1982;Campos et al. 2002). ...
Article
The overarching aim of this study was to compare volume-equated high repetition daily undulating periodization (DUPHR) vs. a low repetition daily undulating periodization (DUPLR) program for muscle performance. Sixteen college-aged (23±3yrs) resistance-trained males were counterbalanced into one of two groups: 1) DUPHR (n=8), with a weekly training order of 12 repetitions (Day 1), 10 repetitions (Day 2), and 8 repetitions (Day 3) or 2) DUPLR (n=8), with a weekly training order of 6 repetitions (Day 1), 4 repetitions (Day 2), and 2 repetitions (Day 3). Both groups trained 3x/wk. for 8 weeks on non-consecutive days with pre- and post-training testing during weeks 1 and 8. Participants performed only the squat and bench press exercises each session. Changes in one-repetition maximum (1RM) strength, muscle thickness (MT), and muscle endurance (ME) were assessed. Both groups significantly increased 1RM strength for both squat and bench press (p<0.01), however, no group differences existed (p>0.05). Similarly, both groups experienced significant increases in chest, lateral quadriceps distal, and anterior quadriceps MT (p<0.05), but no change was present in either group for lateral quadriceps mid MT (p<0.05). No group differences were discovered for changes in MT (p>0.05). ME did not significantly change in the squat or bench press for either group (p>0.05), however, for squat ME, a moderate effect size was observed for DUPHR (0.57) vs. a trivial effect for DUPLR (0.17). Our findings suggest, in previously trained males, training volume is a significant contributor to strength and hypertrophy adaptations, which occur independent of specific repetition ranges.
... Strength gains between groups were consistent with the concept of a strength-endurance continuum (11,62). Although LL did increase maximal muscle strength, HL resulted in greater increases in both 1RMBP (6.5 vs. 2.0%, respectively) and 1RMBS (19.6 vs. 8.8%, respectively). ...
Article
The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of low- versus high-load resistance training (RT) on muscular adaptations in well-trained subjects. Eighteen young men experienced in RT were matched according to baseline strength, and then randomly assigned to 1 of 2 experimental groups: a low-load RT routine (LL) where 25-35 repetitions were performed per set per exercise (n = 9), or a high-load RT routine (HL) where 8-12 repetitions were performed per set per exercise (n = 9). During each session, subjects in both groups performed 3 sets of 7 different exercises representing all major muscles. Training was carried out 3 times per week on non-consecutive days, for 8 total weeks. Both HL and LL conditions produced significant increases in thickness of the elbow flexors (5.3 vs. 8.6%, respectively), elbow extensors (6.0 vs. 5.2%, respectively), and quadriceps femoris (9.3 vs. 9.5%, respectively), with no significant differences noted between groups. Improvements in back squat strength were significantly greater for HL compared to LL (19.6 vs. 8.8%, respectively) and there was a trend for greater increases in 1RM bench press (6.5 vs. 2.0%, respectively). Upper body muscle endurance (assessed by the bench press at 50% 1RM to failure) improved to a greater extent in LL compared to HL (16.6% vs. -1.2%, respectively). These findings indicate that both HL and LL training to failure can elicit significant increases in muscle hypertrophy among well-trained young men; however, HL training is superior for maximizing strength adaptations.
... In several of the studies of exercise in myositis, patients improved with aerobic exercise/endurance training not only in terms of muscle endurance and aerobic capacity but also with regard to isometric or dynamic muscle strength [7,13,20]. An exercise load of 40-50% of maximal strength is sufficient to improve muscle strength in healthy sedentary individuals, whereas further high-intensity strength training is required to achieve the same result in more physically active and well-trained individuals [53]. Patients with PM and DM have reduced aerobic capacity and muscle function compared to age-, gender-and physical activity-matched healthy control subjects [7,54] which probably explains the positive nonspecific exercise response. ...
Article
Full-text available
There is growing evidence to support the safety and efficacy of exercise in patients with adult and juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies. Five randomized controlled trials including adult patients with polymyositis and dermatomyositis (DM) and additional open studies have demonstrated reduced impairment and activity limitation as well as improved quality of life. In addition, recent studies have shown reduced disease activity assessed by consensus disease activity measures and reduced expression of genes regulating inflammation and fibrosis. Furthermore, exercise could improve muscle aerobic capacity as shown by increased mitochondrial enzyme activity. These data suggest that intensive aerobic exercise and resistance training could reduce disease activity and inflammation and improve muscle metabolism. Encouraging results have been reported from available open studies including patients with inclusion body myositis (IBM) and juvenile DM, indicating reduced impairment, activity limitation and improved quality of life also in these patients. Larger studies are needed to increase understanding of the effects of exercise in patients with active, recent-onset polymyositis and DM as well as in patients with IBM and juvenile DM.
... A total of 13 studies were identified that investigated low-versus high-load training in accordance with the criteria outlined (see Figure 1). Three studies (Leger et al., 2006;Weiss, Coney, & Clark, 1999 had to be omitted from analysis due to lack of adequate data thereby leaving 10 studies for analysis. Figure 1 shows a flowchart of the literature search. ...
Article
Full-text available
Abstract There has been much debate as to optimal loading strategies for maximising the adaptive response to resistance exercise. The purpose of this paper therefore was to conduct a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials to compare the effects of low-load (≤60% 1 repetition maximum [RM]) versus high-load (≥65% 1 RM) training in enhancing post-exercise muscular adaptations. The strength analysis comprised 251 subjects and 32 effect sizes (ESs), nested within 20 treatment groups and 9 studies. The hypertrophy analysis comprised 191 subjects and 34 ESs, nested with 17 treatment groups and 8 studies. There was a trend for strength outcomes to be greater with high loads compared to low loads (difference = 1.07 ± 0.60; CI: -0.18, 2.32; p = 0.09). The mean ES for low loads was 1.23 ± 0.43 (CI: 0.32, 2.13). The mean ES for high loads was 2.30 ± 0.43 (CI: 1.41, 3.19). There was a trend for hypertrophy outcomes to be greater with high loads compared to low loads (difference = 0.43 ± 0.24; CI: -0.05, 0.92; p = 0.076). The mean ES for low loads was 0.39 ± 0.17 (CI: 0.05, 0.73). The mean ES for high loads was 0.82 ± 0.17 (CI: 0.49, 1.16). In conclusion, training with loads ≤50% 1 RM was found to promote substantial increases in muscle strength and hypertrophy in untrained individuals, but a trend was noted for superiority of heavy loading with respect to these outcome measures with null findings likely attributed to a relatively small number of studies on the topic.
... Some studies used single set protocols while others employed multiple sets with various modalities such as free weights and machines. The researchers compared loads such as 2RM, 6RM and 10RM free-weight bench press (27); 2RM, 10RM and 12RM bench press (28); 2RM and 10RM bench press (29); 2-3RM, 5-6RM and 9-10RM free-weight squats (30); 3-5RM and 13-15RM barbell squats (31); 6RM, 9RM and 15 RM for three lower-body and five upper-body machine exercises (32); 4RM and 10RM for seven upper-body free-weight exercises (33); etc. All 82 resistance training studies in Table 1 reported no significant difference in strength gains between groups; that is, a heavier resistance did not produce significantly greater strength gains. ...
... Another aspect of exercise prescription and strength gain needing consideration is the utility of higher repetitions and lower repetition sets. As indicated by the ACSM position stand of prescribing 8–15 repetitions for strength improvement [14] and experimental findings demonstrating that low repetitions sets are more effective in increasing strength [15], this remains another contentious area of strength training prescription. ...
Article
Full-text available
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of increasing the volume of weight-training from one to three sets upon body composition and muscular strength. Methods: Sixteen male weight-trainers volunteered to act as subjects and were randomly assigned to one of two training groups. Supervised weight-training targeting the upper body was conducted three times per week for eight weeks using one set (n = 8) or three sets (n = 8) of six repetitions to fatigue. Subjects were measured before and after the training intervention for (1) strength performance (N and kg) and (2) adiposity (sum of seven skinfold thicknesses in mm). Results: Both training groups improved significantly (20.7%) in terms of muscular strength (P < 0.05) with no differences being observed between the one set (21.98% increase) and three set group (20.71% increase) after the training interventions (P > 0.05). Significant decreases were also observed for skinfold measures in the one set group (P < 0.05). Conclusions: One set of high intensity resistance training was as effective as three sets for increasing the strength of muscle groups in the upper body. The one set protocol also produced significantly greater decreases in adiposity.
Article
Full-text available
El término periodización hace referencia a la variación entre la intensidad y el volumen de entrenamiento, y según los datos disponibles en la actualidad es extremadamente importante para obtener ganancias óptimas en el entrenamiento de la fuerza muscular. En este artículo recogemos parte de las principales conclusiones de estudios específicos desarrollados sobre diferentes modelos de periodización aplicados al entrenamiento de fuerza, así como de importantes trabajos de revisión publicados en los últimos años, con la intención de identificar si realmente este sistema es más efectivo que otros modelos de organización del entrenamiento de la fuerza.
Article
Full-text available
A great deal of literature has investigated the effects of various resistance training programmes on strength and power changes. Surprisingly, however, our understanding of the stimuli that affect adaptation still remains relatively unexplained. It is thought that strength and power adaptation is mediated by mechanical stimuli, that is the kinematics and kinetics associated with resistance exercise (e.g. forces, contraction duration, power and work), and their interaction with other hormonal and metabolic factors. However, the effect of different combinations of kinematic and kinetic variables and their contribution to adaptation is unclear. The mechanical response to single repetitions has been investigated by a number of researchers; however, it seems problematic to extrapolate the findings of this type of research to the responses associated with a typical resistance training session. That is, resistance training is typified by multiple repetitions, sets and exercises, rest periods of varying durations and different movement techniques (e.g. controlled and explosive). Understanding the mechanical stimuli afforded by such loading schemes would intuitively lead to a better appreciation of how various mechanical stimuli affect adaptation. It will be evident throughout this article that very little research has adopted such an approach; hence our understanding in this area remains rudimentary at best. One should therefore remain cognizant of the limitations that exist in the interpretation of research in this field. We contend that strength and power research needs to adopt a set kinematic and kinetic analysis to improve our understanding of how to optimise strength and power.
Article
Full-text available
TIBANA, R. A.; PRESTES, J.; NASCIMENTO, D. C.; BALSAMO, S. Comparison of the number of repetitions and perceived exertion between multi-joint and single-joint exercise at different intensities in untrained women. Brazilian Journal of Biomotricity, v. 5, n. 2, p. 96-105, 2011. The aim of the present study was to analyze the relationship between the total number of repetitions performed, perceived exertion (OMNI-RES, RPE) and selected percentage of repetition maximum (1RM) in untrained women. Nine women (age: 23.44 ± 5.81 years, height: 164 ± 0.05 cm, body mass: 63.86 ± 8.83 kg, BMI: 23.59 ± 2.51 kg.m2, percentage (%) fat: 25.89 ± 6.98%) with at least 6 months without training were selected. The experimental protocol consisted in carrying out 60, 80 and 90% of 1RM in two different exercises: multi-joint (leg press) and single-joint (knee extension), both unilaterally. Data were collected in five phases and the order of the tests was randomized. The first two phases were to test and verify the reliability (test-retest) of 1RM. Throughout the third, fourth and fifth phase, three tests were performed in two different exercises 60, 80 and 90% of 1RM separated by at least 48 hours. As expected, results indicated that subjects performed more repetitions at 60% 1RM compared to 80 and 90% of 1RM in both exercises. In the leg press exercise more repetitions were performed as compared with the leg extension, in all percentages of 1RM. In conclusion, the number of repetitions in a percentage of 1RM is influenced by the muscle mass involved and exercise type.
Article
Full-text available
The purpose of this paper was to conduct a systematic review of the current body of literature and a meta-analysis to compare changes in strength and hypertrophy between low- versus high-load resistance training protocols. Searches of PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and Scopus were conducted for studies that met the following criteria: 1) an experimental trial involving both low- (≤60% 1 RM) and high- (>60% 1 RM) load training; 2) with all sets in the training protocols being performed to momentary muscular failure; 3) at least one method of estimating changes in muscle mass and/or dynamic, isometric or isokinetic strength was used; 4) the training protocol lasted for a minimum of 6 weeks; 5) the study involved participants with no known medical conditions or injuries impairing training capacity. A total of 21 studies were ultimately included for analysis. Gains in 1RM strength were significantly greater in favor of high- versus low-load training, while no significant differences were found for isometric strength between conditions. Changes in measures of muscle hypertrophy were similar between conditions. The findings indicate that maximal strength benefits are obtained from the use of heavy loads while muscle hypertrophy can be equally achieved across a spectrum of loading ranges.
Thesis
Full-text available
This study compared the effects of dynamic and static core training programs on speed, agility, related anaerobic power tests, core stability tests and body composition measurements in recreational soccer players. A static (n = 14) and dynamic (n = 13) training group performed three 30 min sessions per week for eight weeks meanwhile attended normal soccer training sessions with a control group (n = 11). Effects of different core training regimes were compared after eight weeks the with repeated measures MANOVA (p<0,05) for field, core stabilization and body composition tests. Sprint (10m-30m), agility (505-Arrowhead), vertical and standing long jump scores did not increased in any groups and no difference found between groups. Neither group demonstrated difference for body composition measurements (weight, body mass index, waist/hip ratio, body fat percentage) for repeated test scores and between groups comparisons. Two experiment groups improved in dynamic and static core stabilization tests except the plank test (for plank test, dynamic and conrtol group has the same score) while control group did not changed. Core stabilization tests showed that the improvements of experiment groups affected by the movement specifity and static training group increased static test scores (plank 23,8% - back isometric 28,9% - leg raise 15,6%) while dynamic training group increased mostly the dynamic test scores (sit-up 21,2%, push up 16,2%). Results indicate that both training types improved movement related measures of core stability but did not transfer into any anaerobic skills and body composition. Core stability training is not generate sufficient stimulus to improve power and strength dependent performance skills like sprint and agility and not required to be the main part of soccer conditioning programs.
Article
The objective of this study was to investigate the accuracy of eleven prediction equations and one prediction table when estimating isoinertial knee extension and leg press one repetition maximum (1-RM) performance in subjects with knee injuries and knee osteoarthritis. Study Design: A descriptive quantitative research study was undertaken utilizing a cross-sectional design. Background: Traumatic injuries and osteoarthritis are common musculoskeletal pathologies that can disrupt normal function of the knee joint. A frequent sequela of these pathologies is quadriceps femoris muscle weakness. Such weakness can contribute to disability and diminished levels of functional and recreational activity. Therefore, safe and accurate methods of measuring maximal strength are required to identify and quantify quadriceps strength deficits. One option proposed in the literature is the use of 1-RM prediction equations which estimate 1-RM performance from the number of repetitions completed with sub-maximal loads. These equations have been investigated previously using healthy populations and subjects with calf muscle injuries. However, to date, no known study has investigated their accuracy in individuals with joint pathologies. Method: Machine-weight seated knee extension and seated leg press exercises were investigated in this study. Twenty subjects with knee injuries and 12 subjects with knee OA completed the testing procedures for the knee extension exercise. Nineteen subjects with knee injuries and 18 subjects with knee OA completed the testing procedures for the leg press exercise. All subjects attended the testing venue on three occasions. At the first visit a familiarization session was carried out. At the second and third visits each subject was randomly assigned to perform either actual or predicted 1-RM testing for both of the exercises. Twelve different prediction methods were used to estimate 1-RM performance from the results. The estimates of 1-RM strength were then compared to actual 1-RM performance to assess the level of conformity between these measures. Statistical procedures including Bland and Altman analyses, intraclass correlation coefficients, typical error and total error of measurement were used in the analyses of the results. In addition, paired t-tests were performed to determine whether actual 1-RM values were significantly different across the control and affected limbs and whether there were any significant differences in predictive accuracy for each equation across the control and affected limbs. Finally, the number of subjects with predicted 1-RM values within 5% or less of their actual 1-RM values was determined for each equation. Results: When the knee injury group performed the knee extension exercise, the Brown, Brzycki, Epley, Lander, Mayhew et al., Poliquin and Wathen prediction methods demonstrated the greatest levels of predictive accuracy. When two atypical subjects were identified and excluded from the analyses, the accuracy of these equations improved further. Following the removal of these two subjects, no significant differences in predictive accuracy were found for any of the equations across the affected and control limbs (p > 0.05). Typical errors and total errors were low for the more accurate prediction methods ranging from 2.4-2.8% and from 2.4-3.5%, respectively. Overall, the Poliquin table appeared to be the most accurate prediction method for this sample (affected limbs: bias 0.3 kg, 95% limits of agreement (LOA) -5.8 to 6.4 kg, typical error as a coefficient of variation (COV) 2.4%, total error of measurement (total error) 2.4%; control limbs: bias -1.3 kg, 95% LOA -9.0 to 6.3 kg, typical error as a COV 2.7%, total error 2.8%). When the knee OA group performed the knee extension exercise, the Brown, Brzycki, Epley, Lander, Mayhew et al., Poliquin and Wathen prediction methods demonstrated the greatest levels of predictive accuracy. No significant differences in predictive accuracy were found for any of the equations across the affected and control limbs (p > 0.05). When an atypical subject was identified and excluded from the analyses, the accuracy of the equations improved further. Typical errors as COVs and total errors for the more accurate prediction methods ranged from 2.5-2.7% and from 2.4-2.9%, respectively. Overall, the Poliquin table appeared to be the most accurate prediction method for this sample (affected limbs: bias 0.9 kg, 95% LOA -4.5 to 6.3 kg, typical error as a COV 2.5%, total error 2.5%; control limbs: bias -0.1 kg, 95% LOA -6.0 to 5.9 kg, typical error as a COV 2.5%, total error 2.4%). When the knee injury group performed the leg press, the Adams, Berger, Lombardi and O’Connor equations demonstrated the greatest levels of predictive accuracy. No significant differences in predictive accuracy were found for any of the equations across the affected and control limbs (p > 0.05). Typical errors as COVs and total errors for the more accurate equations ranged from 2.8-3.2% and from 2.9-3.3%, respectively. Overall, the Berger (affected limbs: bias -0.4 kg, 95% LOA -7.2 to 6.3 kg, typical error as a COV 3.2%, total error 3.2%; control limbs: bias 0.1 kg, 95% LOA -6.6 to 6.7 kg, typical error as a COV 3.1%, total error 3.0%) and O’Connor equations (affected limbs: bias -0.6 kg, 95% LOA-6.8 to 5.7 kg, typical error as a COV 2.9%, total error 3.0%; control limbs: bias -0.2 kg, 95% LOA -6.9 to 6.4 kg, typical error as a COV 2.9%, total error 2.9%) appeared to be the most accurate prediction methods for this sample. When the knee OA group performed the leg press, the Adams, Berger, KLW, Lombardi and O’Connor equations demonstrated the greatest levels of predictive accuracy. No significant differences in predictive accuracy were found for any of the equations across the affected and control limbs (p > 0.05). The typical errors as COVs and the total error values for the more accurate prediction methods were the highest observed in this study, ranging from 5.8-6.0% and from 5.7-6.2%, respectively. Overall, the Adams, Berger, KLW and O’Connor equations appeared to be the most accurate prediction methods for this sample. However, it is possible that the predicted leg press 1-RM values produced by the knee OA group might not have matched actual 1-RM values closely enough to be clinically acceptable for some purposes. Conclusion: The findings of the current study suggested that the Poliquin table produced the most accurate estimates of knee extension 1-RM performance for both the knee injury and knee OA groups. In contrast, the Berger and O’Connor equations produced the most accurate estimates of leg press 1-RM performance for the knee injury group, while the Adams, Berger, KLW and O’Connor equations produced the most accurate results for the knee OA group. However, the higher error values observed for the knee OA group suggested that predicted leg press 1-RM performance might not be accurate enough for some clinical purposes. Finally, it can be concluded that no single prediction equation was able to accurately estimate both knee extension and leg press 1-RM performance in subjects with knee injuries and knee OA.
Article
The purpose of the study is to compare the effect in healthy young adults of two resistance training protocols, six-repetition maximum (RM) versus 12RM on maximum strength (1RM). A single-blind, randomized controlled trial was used in the study. Sixty-two healthy physical therapy students, with age (mean [+standard deviation]) 23 (+2.6) years, weight 67.4 (+11.7) kg and height 171.7 (+8.4) cm, of both genders who were recreationally active, but not training systematically, volunteered to participate in the study. They were randomized into two groups (group 1: 24 women and 8 men; group 2: 23 women and 7 men) by a block randomization procedure that ensured equal gender distribution. Sealed envelopes were used to conceal allocation to groups. Group 1 did three sets of 6RM of each exercise, and group 2 did three sets of 12RM. Both groups performed the exercises twice per week for 8 weeks with 3 minutes rest between sets and exercises. Primary outcomes were maximum strength defined as one-repetition maximum squat (1RMSq) for lower-body strength and bench press (1RMBp) for upper-body strength. Secondary outcomes were body weight and Uro Kaleva Kekkonen (UKK) Fitness Index. Both groups increased strength significantly (p < 0.001) in 1RMSq (6RM 13.6%, 12RM 13.5%) and 1RMBp (6RM 9.2%, 12RM 8.4%). There was no significant difference in the change between the two groups, no change in body weight and only a small increase in UKK Fitness Index. Both 6RM and 12RM training protocols improve maximum strength in recreationally active healthy young adults, with no significant difference between the protocols. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Article
The purpose of this study was to compare early muscular fitness adaptations in children in response to low repetition maximum (LRM) and high repetition maximum (HRM) resistance training. Twenty-three girls and 20 boys between the ages of 8.0 and 12.3 years (mean age 10.6 ± 1.3 years) volunteered to participate in this study. Children performed one set of 6 to 10 RM (n = 12) or one set of 15 to 20 RM (n = 19) on child-size exercise machines twice weekly over 8 weeks. Children in the control group (n = 12) did not resistance train. Maximum strength (1 RM) on the chest press, local muscular endurance (15 RM) on the leg press, long jump, vertical jump, and v-sit flexibility were assessed at baseline and posttraining. The LRM and HRM groups made significantly greater gains in 1 RM strength (21% and 23%, respectively) as compared with the control group (1%). Only the HRM group made significantly greater gains in 15 RM local muscular endurance (42%) and flexibility (15%) than that recorded in the control group (4% and -5%, respectively). If children perform one set per exercise as part of an introductory resistance training program, these findings favor the prescription of a higher RM training range.
Article
To investigate the effects of heavy strength training on the mean power output in a 5-min all-out trial following 185 min of submaximal cycling at 44% of maximal aerobic power output in well-trained cyclists. Twenty well-trained cyclists were assigned to either usual endurance training combined with heavy strength training [E+S; n=11 (♂=11)] or to usual endurance training only [E; n=9 (♂=7, ♀=2)]. The strength training performed by E+S consisted of four lower body exercises [3 × 4-10 repetition maximum (RM)], which were performed twice a week for 12 weeks. E+S increased 1 RM in half-squat (P≤0.001), while no change occurred in E. E+S led to greater reductions than E in oxygen consumption, heart rate, blood lactate concentration, and rate of perceived exertion (P<0.05) during the last hour of the prolonged cycling. Further, E+S increased the mean power output during the 5-min all-out trial (from 371 ± 9 to 400 ± 13 W, P<0.05), while no change occurred in E. In conclusion, adding strength training to usual endurance training improves leg strength and 5-min all-out performance following 185 min of cycling in well-trained cyclists.
Article
Full-text available
Full-text of this article is available at http://www.asep.org/files/Smith.pdf This paper reviews research evidence relating to the strength training advice offered by Arthur Jones, founder and retired Chairman of Nautilus Sports/Medical Industries and MedX Corporation. Jones advocated that those interested in improving their muscular size, strength, power and/or endurance should perform one set of each exercise to muscular failure (volitional fatigue), train each muscle group no more than once (or, in some cases, twice) per week, perform each exercise in a slow, controlled manner and perform a moderate number of repetitions (for most people, ~8-12). This advice is very different to the strength training guidelines offered by the National Strength and Conditioning Association, the American College of Sports Medicine and most exercise physiology textbooks. However, in contrast to the lack of scientific support for most of the recommendations made by such bodies and in such books, Jones’ training advice is strongly supported by the peer-reviewed scientific literature, a statement that has recently been supported by a review of American College of Sports Medicine resistance training guidelines. Therefore, we strongly recommend Jones’ methods to athletes and coaches, as they are time-efficient and optimally efficacious, and note that, given his considerable contribution to the field of strength training, academic recognition of this contribution is long overdue.
Article
Full-text available
Loading recommendations for resistance training are typically prescribed along what has come to be known as the “repetition continuum”, which proposes that the number of repetitions performed at a given magnitude of load will result in specific adaptations. Specifically, the theory postulates that heavy load training optimizes increases maximal strength, moderate load training optimizes increases muscle hypertrophy, and low-load training optimizes increases local muscular endurance. However, despite the widespread acceptance of this theory, current research fails to support some of its underlying presumptions. Based on the emerging evidence, we propose a new paradigm whereby muscular adaptations can be obtained, and in some cases optimized, across a wide spectrum of loading zones. The nuances and implications of this paradigm are discussed herein.
Article
Full-text available
The starting point of this review is the assumption that single-set training (SST) can be regarded as an equal alternative to multiple-set strength training. On the basis of 72 primary studies, the meta-analysis dealt with the problem of single-set vs. multiple-set training (MST). The effectiveness of these training methods was examined depending on various interventions. Apart from qualitative decision aspects, the effectiveness was checked on the basis of effect size. Generally speaking, it can be stated that MST, depending on factors like age, training experience, duration of the study, etc., offers several advantages over single-set regimes (F = 3.71; df = 1; p = 0.06; eta(2) = 0.02), especially when combined with periodization strategies, and it can be applied very successfully for increasing maximal strength in long-time effects. Therefore, the outcome effects of both methods are the same in short-time interventions. For longer-time interventions (F = 15.74; df = 1; p < 0.05; eta(2) = 0.12) and for advanced subjects with the goal of optimizing their strength gain, however, multiple-set strategies are superior (F = 7.32; df = 1; p < 0.05; eta(2) = 0.06).
Article
In this study, we assessed the influence of training intensity on strength retention and loss incurred during detraining in older adults. In a previous study, untrained seniors (age = 71.0 +/- 5.0; n = 61) were randomly divided into 3 exercise groups and 1 control group. Exercise groups trained 2 days per week for 18 weeks with equivalent volumes and acute program variables but intensities of 2 x 15 repetitions maximum (RM), 3 x 9RM, or 4 x 6RM. Thirty of the original training subjects (age 71.5 +/- 5.2 years) participated in a 20-week detraining period. A 1RM for 8 exercises was obtained pre- and posttraining and at 6 and 20 weeks of detraining. The total of 1RM for the 8 exercises served as the dependent variable. Analysis of variance procedures demonstrated significant increases in strength with training (44-51%; p < 0.05), but no group effect. All training groups demonstrated significant strength decreases at both 6 and 20 weeks of detraining independent of prior training intensity (all group average 4.5% at 6 weeks and 13.5% at 20 weeks; p < 0.04). However, total-body strength was significantly greater than pretraining values after the detraining period (all group average 82% at 6 weeks and 49% at 20 weeks; p < 0.001). The results suggest that when older adults participate in progressive resistance exercise for 18 weeks, then stop resistance training (i.e., detrain), strength losses occur at both 6 and 20 weeks of detraining independent of prior resistance training intensity. However, despite the strength losses, significant levels of strength are retained even after 20 weeks of detraining. The results have important implications for resistance-trained older adults who could undergo planned or unplanned training interruptions of up to 5 months.
Article
According to physics, the equation F = 2 md/t2 determines the force F required to move a mass m through a distance d in t seconds. Two experiments were performed on college men (n = 35 and 30) in which a lateral arm movement of approximately 90 deg. involving about 4 ft. of hand travel, was made at maximum speed. The movement time t, the effective arm mass m, and the static dynamometer strength s of the muscles were measured for each subject. The reliability of individual differences in all measures was above .96. There was no significant correlation between static strength and “strength in action” computed from arm mass and speed of movement. The results agree with the concept that strength as ordinarily measured is determined by a neuromotor coordination pattern rather than the ultimate physiological capacity of the muscle. The neuromotor pattern energizing the muscle is different during movement. Absence of correlation is another example of the high specificity of neuromotor coordination skills. Reaction times were also measured and found to be uncorrelated with speed of movement.
Article
The purpose of the study was to determine the optimum number of repetitions with which to train for quickest strength improvement. Nine groups, consisting of a total of 199 male college students, were tested before and after 12 weeks of progressive resistance exercise. Each group trained differently in repetitions per set. Resistances employed were 2 RM, 4 RM, 6 RM, 8 RM, 10 RM, and 12 RM for one set. The optimum number of repetitions was found to be between 3 and 9.
Article
The dynamometer strength of 30 males age 21 years was measured for each hand. There were two trials under the condition of single-hand contraction and two trials with simultaneous contraction of both hands. Facilitation as predicted by the hypothesis failed to occur. The dominant hand showed 3 percent loss of strength when there was simultaneous contraction of the contralateral hand, but there was no influence on the strength of the nondominant hand. Individual differences in strength were found to be 54 percent specific to the hand tested; there was only 46 percent general hand strength ability.
Article
Fifty college women were randomly assigned to one of three resistance training protocols that employed progressive resistance with high resistance/low repetitions (HRLR), medium resistance/medium repetitions (MRMR), and low resistance/high repetitions (LRHR). The three groups trained on the same resistance exercises for 9 weeks at 3 sets of 6 to 8 RM, 2 sets of 15 to 20 RM, and 1 set of 30 to 40 RM, respectively. Training included free weights and multistation equipment. The 1-RM technique was used for strength testing, and muscular endurance tests consisted of maximum repetitions either at a designated resistance or at a percentage of 1-RM. There were significant pre/post strength increases in both upper and lower body tests, but no significant post-treatment difference in muscular strength among the three protocols. Absolute muscular endurance increased significantly on 4 of 6 pre/post comparisons, while relative endurance increased significantly on only 4 of 12 comparisons. HRLR training yielded greater strength gains. LRHR training generally produced greater muscular endurance gains, and the percentage increase in absolute endurance was approximately twice the increase in strength for all groups. Lower body gains in both strength and endurance were greater than upper body gains. (C) 1994 National Strength and Conditioning Association
Article
Vertical jump ability is a requirement for success in a number of sports. This paper reviews three broad categories of strength training methods by which vertical jump ability is commonly improved. It examines a theoretical rationale for a strength training program by identifying the neuromechanical factors that affect jumping performance. The results of studies using general, special, and specific strength training exercises are also examined. The role and application of these different exercises for athletes of different abilities is discussed. Practical methods for analyzing jumping performance and their relevance to strength training are also discussed. (C) 1996 National Strength and Conditioning Association
Article
Nine different weight training programs were compared to determine which were more effective in improving strength. The experiment was conducted with the bench press lift for a period of 12 weeks with approximately 20 subjects in each weight training program. Subjects were tested for the 1 RM on the bench press lift at the beginning of training and at three-week intervals. Training took place three times weekly with the variations in programs involving one, two, and three sets, and two, six, and ten repetitions per set. The results showed that three sets and six repetitions per set were best for improving strength.
Article
The effects of strength training of the quadriceps on peak power output during isokinetic cycling has been investigated in group of 17 young healthy volunteers. Subjects trained by lifting near-maximal loads on a leg extension machine for 12 weeks. Measurements of maximal voluntary isometric force were made at 2-3 week intervals and a continual record was kept of the weights lifted in training. Peak power output was measured at 110 rev min-1 and at either 70 or 80 rev min-1 before and after the 12 week training period. Measurements of maximum oxygen uptake (VO2max) were made on 12 subjects before and after training. The greatest change was in the weights lifted in training which increased by 160-200%. This was accompanied by a much smaller increase in maximum isometric force (3-20%). There was no significant change in peak power output at either speed. The VO2max remained unchanged with training. The role of task specificity in training is discussed in relation to training regimes for power athletes and for rehabilitation of patients with muscle weakness.
Article
This experiment was undertaken to determine the effects of a six-week progressive weight training program on the development of strength and muscle hypertrophy, using one exercise, the deep-knee bend, with varying repetitions. Thirty students were chosen by random from beginning weight lifting classes at Michigan State University. Following a two-week conditioning period the subjects were divided into three groups of ten each for the controlled training period. The programs were as follows: Group A—3 sets of 9-10 repetitions, Group B—3 sets of 5-6 repetitions, and Group C—3 sets of 2-3 repetitions. Individuals in each group handled maximum weight loads for the number of repetitions each was required to perform. The effectiveness of the program was determined by three measurements: (a) thigh girth, (b) dynamic strength as measured by one RM on the deep-knee bend, and (c) static strength as measured on the dynamometer. The results were graphically analyzed and percentages calculated. The data were also statistically-treated using analysis of covariance. No significant differences were found between the three systems of training. All training procedures resulted in the improvement of static and dynamic strength.
Article
The experiment was designed to compare the effects of isometric-isotonic (A), dynamic-overload (B), and free swing (C) exercise programs on the speed and strength of a lateral arm movement The 26 college men in each group—three experimental and one control—were given pre- and post-training speed and strength trials. Each experimental group performed its assigned exercise twice a week during the 10-week training period. Reliability coefficients for both strength and speed of movement measurements were found to be high. Following training there were significant speed increases in both the isometric-isotonic and dynamic-overload groups (t=10.06 and 8.10; however, the difference in speed gain between conditions was nonsignificant (F=.10). Also, strength increases in both of these groups were significant (t=8.81 and 3.08), with that of the isometric-isotonic group significantly greater than the dynamic-overload group (F=5.11). No significant speed or strength gains were registered by either the free swing or control group.
Article
This study investigated the effect of the following weight-training loads on the acquisition of strength: three groups of seven maximum repetitions, four groups of five maximum repetitions, and five groups of three maximum repetitions. Fifty-five randomly selected subjects were further randomly assigned to one of the three training programs. All subjects performed two work-outs per week over a 9-week period on the curl, bench press, and squat. Strength was evaluated at the beginning and end of the experiment by ascertaining the maximum poundage which the lifter could handle for the performance of one repetition. The best lifts on each of the curl, bench press, and squat were summed and divided by body weight to give a strength/weight ratio. Within-group t ratios indicated that all groups registered strength gains that were highly significant. An analysis of covariance showed that no one group attained improvements that were significantly different from those of other groups.
Article
The effects of three resistance training programs on muscular strength and on absolute and relative muscular endurance were investigated. Forty-three male college students were randomly assigned to the training protocols. The high resistance-low repetition group (n = 15) performed three sets of 6–8 RM (repetition maximum) per session. The medium resistance-medium repetition subjects (n = 16) trained by doing two sets of 30–40 RM per session, while the low resistance-high repetition group (n = 12) used a single set of 100–150 RM. All subjects trained with the bench press exercise three times per week for nine weeks. Tests of strength (1-RM), absolute and relative endurance were administered before and after training. Statistical analyses revealed that the 20% improvement in maximum strength by the high resistance-low repetition group was greater than the 8 and 5% gains reported for the medium resistance-medium repetition and low resistance-high repetition groups, respectively. Relative to absolute endurance, however, the 41 percent and 39 percent improvements registered by the low resistance-high repetition and medium resistance-medium repetition groups, respectively, were not significantly greater than the 28% gain reported for the high resistance-low repetition group. Results for the relative endurance test revealed that the high resistance-low repetition group's performance actually decreased by 7% after training, and was significantly poorer than the 22% and 28% improvements made by the other two groups. It was concluded that human skeletal muscle makes both general and specific adaptations to a training stimulus, and that the balance of these adaptations is to some extent dependent upon the intensity and duration of the training protocol used.
Article
Seventeen male and female subjects (ages 20-38 yr) were tested pre- and posttraining for maximal knee extension torque at seven specific velocities (0, 0.84, 1.68, 2.51, 3.35, 4.19, and 5.03 rad . s-1) with an isokinetic dynamometer. Maximal knee extension torques were recorded at a specific joint angle (0.52 rad below the horizontal plane) for all test speeds. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of three experimental groups: group A, control, n = 7; group B, training at 1.68 rad . s-1, n = 5; or group C, training at 4.19 rad . s-1, n = 5. Subjects trained the knee extensors by performing two sets of 10 single maximal voluntary efforts three times a week for 4 wk. Before training, each training group exhibited a leveling-off of muscular tension in the slow velocity-high force region of the in vivo force-velocity relationship. Training at 1.68 rad . s-1 resulted in significant (P less than 0.05) improvements at all velocities except for 5.03 rad . s-1 and markedly affected the leveling-off in the slow velocity-high force region. Training at 4.19 rad . s-1 did not affect the leveling-off phenomenon but brought about significant improvements (P less than 0.05) at velocities of 2.51, 3.35, and 4.19 rad . s-1. The changes seen in the leveling-off phenomenon suggest that training at 1.68 rad . s-1 might have brought about an enhancement of motoneuron activation.
Clinical aspects of strength and power training In: Strength and Power in Sport
  • G Grimby
GRIMBY, G. Clinical aspects of strength and power training. In: Strength and Power in Sport. P. Komi, ed. Boston: Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1992. pp. 340–343.
Strength Fitness: Physiological Principles and Train-ing Techniques
  • W Westcott
WESTCOTT, W. Strength Fitness: Physiological Principles and Train-ing Techniques. Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown Publishers, 1991, p. 1
Practical Measurements for Evaluation in Physical Education
  • And J Nelson
JOHNSON, B., AND J. NELSON. Practical Measurements for Evaluation in Physical Education. New York: MacMillan, 1986, pp. 210–212.