Content uploaded by Belmiro Freitas de Salles
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Belmiro Freitas de Salles
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
Rest Interval between Sets in Strength Training
Abstract
Strength training has become one of the most popular physical activities for increasing characteristics such as absolute muscular strength, endurance, hypertrophy and muscular power. For efficient, safe and effective training, it is of utmost importance to understand the interaction among training variables, which might include the intensity, number of sets, rest interval between sets, exercise modality and velocity of muscle action. Research has indicated that the rest interval between sets is an important variable that affects both acute responses and chronic adaptations to resistance exercise programmes. The purpose of this review is to analyse and discuss the rest interval between sets for targeting specific training outcomes (e.g. absolute muscular strength, endurance, hypertrophy and muscular power). The Scielo, Science Citation Index, National Library of Medicine, MEDLINE, Scopus, Sport Discus and CINAHL databases were used to locate previous original scientific investigations. The 35 studies reviewed examined both acute responses and chronic adaptations, with rest interval length as the experimental variable. In terms of acute responses, a key finding was that when training with loads between 50% and 90% of one repetition maximum, 3-5 minutes' rest between sets allowed for greater repetitions over multiple sets. Furthermore, in terms of chronic adaptations, resting 3-5 minutes between sets produced greater increases in absolute strength, due to higher intensities and volumes of training. Similarly, higher levels of muscular power were demonstrated over multiple sets with 3 or 5 minutes versus 1 minute of rest between sets. Conversely, some experiments have demonstrated that when testing maximal strength, 1-minute rest intervals might be sufficient between repeated attempts; however, from a psychological and physiological standpoint, the inclusion of 3- to 5-minute rest intervals might be safer and more reliable. When the training goal is muscular hypertrophy, the combination of moderate-intensity sets with short rest intervals of 30-60 seconds might be most effective due to greater acute levels of growth hormone during such workouts. Finally, the research on rest interval length in relation to chronic muscular endurance adaptations is less clear. Training with short rest intervals (e.g. 20 seconds to 1 minute) resulted in higher repetition velocities during repeated submaximal muscle actions and also greater total torque during a high-intensity cycle test. Both of these findings indirectly demonstrated the benefits of utilizing short rest intervals for gains in muscular endurance. In summary, the rest interval between sets is an important variable that should receive more attention in resistance exercise prescription. When prescribed appropriately with other important prescriptive variables (i.e. volume and intensity), the amount of rest between sets can influence the efficiency, safety and ultimate effectiveness of a strength training programme.
... Se analizaron los registros de tres bases de datos electrónicas (Pubmed, Biblioteca Virtual en Salud de la BVS, Ebsco Sportdiscus), combinando las palabras "entrenamiento de resistencia", "ejercicio de resistencia", "ejercicio de fuerza", "intervalo de recuperación", "intervalo de descanso", "intervalo auto sugerido", "rango automático seleccionado" con la combinación "AND" y "OR". Resultados: Los datos agrupados de cinco estudios mostraron un gran efecto significativo a favor del grupo experimental (> 2 minutos) (DM: 1,24; IC del 95 % [0,78;1,71]; z: 5,25, Q: 1,08; p < 0,01), ya que, en los estudios en cuestión, este intervalo de recuperación permitió un mayor volumen de entrenamiento. Conclusión: Los intervalos más largos parecen ser mejores, en el volumen total de entrenamiento, aunque no hay consenso para diferentes objetivos de entrenamiento frente al RI autoseleccionado. ...
... Strength training (ST) has become one of the most popular physical activities in improving muscle strength, hypertrophy and power, 1,2 resulting in different health and performance benefits, such as improved body composition, improved performance in sports, strengthening of tendons 1 and can be used in cardiovascular and pulmonary rehabilitation programs or in the management of metabolic diseases, 3 as well as the effectiveness of ST in improving strength, hypertrophy. 4 Skeletal muscle consists of muscle fibers, classified as Type I and Type II. ...
Introduction
The recovery interval (RI) between sets and exercises has received attention from strength training (ST) researchers, to understand the relationship of rest on performance maintenance, especially the total load in a training session. It is known that each individual responds in a specific way to the training stimulus. So, what would be the effect of the different recovery interval strategies on the strength performance?
Objective
Compare the different recovery intervals in strength training volume, considering the number of repetitions in healthy adults.
Methods
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis based on methodological criteria, comparing fixed and self-selected RI on training volume, identified by the number of repetitions performed in a weight training program. Three electronic databases (Pubmed, VHL Virtual Health Library, Ebsco Sportdiscus) were analyzed, combining the expressions “resistance training”, “resistance exercise”, “strength exercise”, “recovery interval”, “rest interval”, “interval auto suggested”, “auto range selected” with “AND” and “OR” combination.
Results
Pooled data from five studies showed a large significant effect in favor of the experimental group (>2 minutes) (MD: 1.24; 95%-CI [0.78; 1.71]; z: 5.25, Q:1.08; p < 0.01), since in the studies, recovery interval allowed a greater training volume.
Conclusion
Longer RI seems be better, for maintaining total training volume, although there is no consensus for different training objectives against the self-selected RI. Thus, we imagine that this strategy may be important in the organizing a bodybuilding exercise program. Level of Evidence I; Systematic Review and Meta Analysis.
Keywords:
Resistance Training; Rest; Health Strategies
... General resistance exercise guidelines for healthy older adults and those with chronic conditions include 2-3 workouts weekly against moderate loads (70-85% of one repetition maximum: 1RM) and volumes (2-3 sets per exercise) [81,87]. Rest periods should last 1-2 min, though some encourage shorter rests to evoke endogenous anabolic hormone secretion [87,[96][97][98]. In terms of exercise selection for older adults, multi-joint exercises have more functional relevance [99]. ...
Sarcopenia is the loss of muscle mass and function from aging, inactivity, or disuse. It is a comorbidity to numerous conditions that exacerbates their severity and adversely impacts activities of daily living. While sarcopenia now receives more attention from the medical community, people with sarcopenia as a comorbidity nevertheless still sometimes receives less attention than other presenting diseases or conditions. Inevitable doctors’ visits or hospital stays for those with sarcopenia as a comorbidity have far higher healthcare costs than those without this condition, which imposes a greater financial burden on the medical insurance and healthcare industries. This review offers information and guidance on this topic. Treatments for sarcopenia include dietary, exercise, and pharmacological interventions. Yet, the latter treatment is only recommended in extreme cases as it may evoke numerous side effects and has little support in the scientific literature. Currently, a more holistic approach, with an emphasis on lifestyle modification, to reduce the likelihood of sarcopenia is examined. The current review discusses dietary and exercise interventions to limit the occurrence and severity of sarcopenia. References cited in this review conformed to the Declaration of Helsinki requirements for the use of human research subjects. Most of this review’s references (~97%) came from a PubMed search that spanned from 1997 to 2023. Search terms included “sarcopenia” OR “muscle wasting” OR “geriatrics”; OR “ageing”; and AND “diet” OR “exercise.” In addition, papers relevant or supportive of the topic as well as those considered seminal were included in the review. Over 96% of the references were peer-reviewed articles.
... Finally, the training frequency for eccentric exercise aligns with the guidelines proposed by traditional strength training models [85][86][87][88][89]. Eccentric training is prescribed as primary and complementary training one to three times a week with training periods of 4-24 weeks, depending on the selected training method [18,32,36,64]. ...
Eccentric resistance training that focuses on the lengthening phase of muscle actions has gained attention for its potential to enhance muscle strength, power, and performance (among others). This review presents a methodological proposal for classifying eccentric exercises based on complexity, objectives, methods, and intensity. We discuss the rationale and physiological implications of eccentric training, considering its benefits and risks. The proposed classification system considers exercise complexity and categorizing exercises by technical requirements and joint involvement, accommodating various skill levels. Additionally, training objectives are addressed, including (i) Sports Rehabilitation and Return To Sport, (ii) Muscle Development, (iii) Injury Prevention, (iv) Special Populations, and (v) Sporting Performance, proposing exercise selection with desired outcomes. The review also highlights various eccentric training methods, such as tempo, isoinertial, plyometrics, and moderate eccentric load, each with different benefits. The classification system also integrates intensity levels, allowing for progressive overload and individualized adjustments. This methodological proposal provides a framework for organizing eccentric resistance training programs, facilitating exercise selection, program design, and progression. Furthermore, it assists trainers, coaches, and professionals in optimizing eccentric training’s benefits, promoting advancements in research and practical application. In conclusion, this methodological proposal offers a systematic approach for classifying eccentric exercises based on complexity, objectives, methods, and intensity. It enhances exercise selection, program design, and progression in eccentric resistance training according to training objectives and desired outcomes.
... 7,8,23,26 Other authors tried to explore whether F 0 more closely resembles maximal dynamic strength capacity, which is commonly assessed as the 1-repetition maximum (1RM). 1,4,9,10,25 However, although F 0 was also highly associated with the 1RM, 1,4,30 F 0 is systematically higher than the force achieved during the 1RM trial. 9,10,24 These differences are likely explained because F 0 represents the maximal isometric force but is obtained from dynamic contractions, while the 1RM is obtained at a mean velocity from 0.17 to 0.50 m/s. ...
Background: Force-velocity (F-V) relationship models gained popularity as a tool for muscle mechanical assessment. However, it is not clear whether the validity of the F-V relationship parameters (maximal theoretical force [F0], velocity [V0] and power [Pmax]) is affected using different load types: gravitational (W, rubber bands pulling the barbell downward), inertial (I, rubber bands pulling the barbell, which is equalized to the weight of the added plates upward), and combined (W + I, weight of the plates).
Hypothesis: Load type would affect both the magnitude and validity of F-V relationship parameters. The highest magnitude and validity was expected for F0 using a W, for V0 using an I, and for Pmax using a W + I load.
Study Design: Cross-sectional.
Level of Evidence: Level 3.
Methods: A total of 13 resistance-trained men (body mass, 87.7 ± 11.2 kg and body height, 183.9 ± 6.4 cm) performed bench press (BP) throws (BPTs) using 3 types of loads against 30 to 80 kg. The validity of F-V relationship parameters was explored with respect to the tests used traditionally for force (maximal voluntary contraction and 1-repetition maximum [1RM]), velocity (maximal velocity achieved during almost unloaded tasks), and power (BPT against the 50%1RM and medicine ball throws) assessment.
Results: The W + I loading promoted the highest values of F0 and Pmax, while the highest magnitude of V0 was promoted by the I loading. The validity was acceptable for F0 obtained using the 3 loading conditions with respect to the BP 1RM (r range, 0.30-0.83), and V0 obtained using the I loading with respect to the stick throw (r = 0.54).
Conclusion: The magnitude of the F-V relationship parameters is affected by load type, but their validity with respect to standardized tests is comparable, with the exception of the higher validity of V0 when obtained using the I loading.
Clinical relevance: Any load type can be used for assessing F0, while I load should be selected when assessing V0.
Increasing disability-free life expectancy is a crucial issue to optimize active ageing and to reduce the burden of evitable medical costs. One of the main challenges is to develop pragmatic and personalized prevention strategies in order to prevent frailty, counteract adverse outcomes such as falls and mobility disability, and to improve quality of life. Strong evidence reports the effectiveness of exercise interventions to improve various physical parameters and muscle function that are cornerstones of frailty. Other findings also suggest that the interactions between nutrition and physical exercise with or without health behavior promotion prevent the development of frailty. Multimodal programs, including structured exercise, adequate dietary intervention and health behavior promotion, appear increasingly consensual. However, in order for implementation in real-life settings, some pitfalls need to be addressed. In this perspective, structuring and tailoring feasible, acceptable and sustainable interventions to optimize exercise training responses are essential conditions to warrant short, medium and long-term individual benefits. The different components of exercise programs appear to be fairly consensual and effective. However, specific composition of the programs proposed (frequency, intensity, type, time, volume and progressiveness) have to be tailored to individual characteristics and objectives in order to improve exercise responses. The intervention approaches, behavioral strategies and indications for these programs also need to be refined and framed. The main objective of this work is to guide the actions of healthcare professionals and enable them to widely and effectively implement multimodal programs including exercise, nutrition and behavioral strategies in real-life settings
The purpose of this study was a pilot study to determine the performance level and physiologic responses (heart rate and heart rate recovery (%)) of six different rest interval conditions during the performance of seven sets of a 65% 1RM bench press exercise. Eight healthy male university students who were 20 years of age and enrolled at University C were tested. The subjects’ bench press 1RM was measured before the experiment, and they performed bench press exercises with six different rest intervals (30 s, 1 min, 2 min, 3 min, 4 min, and 5 min), which were randomized and crossed over. The experimental measurements were performed once a week and repeated six times per rest interval condition (six intervals) to minimize the learning effect for the subjects. A two-way repeated measures ANOVA was used to verify the data, post-comparison (contrast: repeat) was used to establish statistical significance, and the following results were obtained. First, the level of exercise performance (reps) between sets across the six rest interval conditions showed significant differences (p < 0.000) and high effect sizes (ES ≥ 0.70) across the rest interval conditions. In addition, more reps (in terms of volume) were performed in the relatively longer rest interval conditions. The number of reps over the progression of the sets also showed a significant difference (p < 0.000) for the shorter rest interval condition, with a high effect size (ES ≥ 0.64). There was also an interaction effect (p < 0.000) between the rest interval condition and the set, with the number of repetitions at the beginning of the set decreasing significantly as the set progressed for the relatively short rest interval condition, with a high effect size (ES ≥ 0.60). Second, there was no statistically significant difference in after-exercise heart rate among the rest interval conditions between sets, but the longer rest interval conditions of 4 and 5 min showed a significant difference (p < 0.005) as the set progressed, with a high effect size (ES ≥ 0.41). In each of the six rest interval conditions, heart rate levels were similar in sets 1 and 2 but increased from set 3 to set 7. Immediately after each bout of exercise, the resting heart rate according to rest interval condition was statistically highest in the shorter rest intervals (30 s, 1 min), with a high effect size (p < 0.020) and a high ES ≥ 0.39. Heart rate was also higher in the 2, 3, 4, and 5-min rest intervals, and increased significantly (p < 0.000) as the sets progressed, with a high effect size. Third, heart rate recovery (%) according to the rest interval condition between sets was significantly higher in the longer rest interval conditions (1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 min) than in the 30 s rest interval condition (p < 0.039), with a high effect size (ES ≥ 0.37). In addition, heart rate recovery in all rest interval conditions significantly decreased as the sets progressed (p < 0.05), with a high effect size (ES ≥ 0.37). Taken together, there were significant differences in performance levels (reps), physiological responses, and recovery between rest interval conditions during the equal-intensity resistance exercises in this study. Furthermore, the performance levels between rest interval conditions during the 65% 1RM bench press exercise in this study suggest that rest intervals of 2–3 min may be effective for improving muscular endurance, while rest intervals of 4–5 min may be effective for improving muscle hypertrophy. This suggests that manipulating the rest intervals between sets during resistance training at the same intensity may lead to better training outcomes.
(1)Background:The purpose of the study was conducted to investigate the recovery of heart rate according to the performance level and rest interval conditions during 65%1RM bench press exercise;(2)Methods:The subjects of this study were eight healthy male college studentsin their 20 (years) attending University C. 1RM was measured before theexperiment, and the exercise sequence of six rest intervals (30sec, 1, 2, 3, 4,5min) was randomly selected and cross-distribution experiment. The experimental measurement was conducted a total of six times according to the rest interval condition (six conditions) once every 3 days to minimize the learning effect. The data was verified with repeated measures Two-way ANOVA and Contrast's repeated method was applied for post-comparison;(3)Results: First, the amount of exercise and the number of repetitions statistically substantially dropped (p<.001) as the number of sets rose, and a greater decline was shown when the rest periods got shorter. Second, the heart rate after exercise was increased significantly (p<.01) as the set progressed in the long rest interval conditions (4, 5min), and the heart rate after rest was increased statistically significantly (p<,05) as the set progressed in the short rest interval conditions (30sec, 1min). Third, the heart rate recovery rate (%) was able to perform more repetitions than in the short rest interval condition due to the relatively high physiological recovery of the neuromuscular and circulatory system under the long rest interval condition;(4)Conclusions: Therefore, according to the rest conditionduring the 65%1RM bench press exercise conducted in this study, the restinterval condition of 2~3min may be effective in improving muscular endurance,and the rest interval condition of 4~5min may be effective in improving muscular hypertrophy. As a result of this study, there was a significant difference in exercise performance (repetition) and physiological recovery depending on the rest interval condition according to the set progress during the same intensity resistance exercise. Through this, it is judged that it is possible to adjust the amount of exercise appropriate for the purpose of training by adjusting not only the intensity during resistance exercise but also the rest interval between sets.
Introduction
The recovery interval (RI) between sets and exercises has received attention from strength training (ST) researchers, to understand the relationship of rest on performance maintenance, especially the total load in a training session. It is known that each individual responds in a specific way to the training stimulus. So, what would be the effect of the different recovery interval strategies on the strength performance?
Objective
Compare the different recovery intervals in strength training volume, considering the number of repetitions in healthy adults.
Methods
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis based on methodological criteria, comparing fixed and self-selected RI on training volume, identified by the number of repetitions performed in a weight training program. Three electronic databases (Pubmed, VHL Virtual Health Library, Ebsco Sportdiscus) were analyzed, combining the expressions “resistance training”, “resistance exercise”, “strength exercise”, “recovery interval”, “rest interval”, “interval auto suggested”, “auto range selected” with “AND” and “OR” combination.
Results
Pooled data from five studies showed a large significant effect in favor of the experimental group (>2 minutes) (MD: 1.24; 95%-CI [0.78; 1.71]; z: 5.25, Q:1.08; p < 0.01), since in the studies, recovery interval allowed a greater training volume.
Conclusion
Longer RI seems be better, for maintaining total training volume, although there is no consensus for different training objectives against the self-selected RI. Thus, we imagine that this strategy may be important in the organizing a bodybuilding exercise program. Level of Evidence I; Systematic Review and Meta Analysis.
Keywords:
Resistance Training; Rest; Health Strategies
Overweight and obesity affects more than 66% of the adult population and is associated with a variety of chronic diseases. Weight reduction reduces health risks associated with chronic diseases and is therefore encouraged by major health agencies. Guidelines of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) encourage a 10% reduction in weight, although considerable literature indicates reduction in health risk with 3% to 5% reduction in weight. Physical activity (PA) is recommended as a component of weight management for prevention of weight gain, for weight loss, and for prevention of weight regain after weight loss. In 2001, the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) published a Position Stand that recommended a minimum of 150 min wk(-1) of moderate-intensity PA for overweight and obese adults to improve health; however, 200-300 min wk(-1) was recommended for long-term weight loss. More recent evidence has supported this recommendation and has indicated more PA may be necessary to prevent weight regain after weight loss. To this end, we have reexamined the evidence from 1999 to determine whether there is a level at which PA is effective for prevention of weight gain, for weight loss, and prevention of weight regain. Evidence supports moderate-intensity PA between 150 and 250 min wk(-1) to be effective to prevent weight gain. Moderate-intensity PA between 150 and 250 min wk(-1) will provide only modest weight loss. Greater amounts of PA (>250 min wk(-1)) have been associated with clinically significant weight loss. Moderate-intensity PA between 150 and 250 min wk(-1) will improve weight loss in studies that use moderate diet restriction but not severe diet restriction. Cross-sectional and prospective studies indicate that after weight loss, weight maintenance is improved with PA >250 min wk(-1). However, no evidence from well-designed randomized controlled trials exists to judge the effectiveness of PA for prevention of weight regain after weight loss. Resistance training does not enhance weight loss but may increase fat-free mass and increase loss of fat mass and is associated with reductions in health risk. Existing evidence indicates that endurance PA or resistance training without weight loss improves health risk. There is inadequate evidence to determine whether PA prevents or attenuates detrimental changes in chronic disease risk during weight gain.
This study investigated the effects of a high volume 5-wk weight training program and different exercise/rest intervals on measures of power, high intensity exercise endurance (HIEE), and maximum strength. Subjects, 33 weight trained men (M age 20.4+/-3.5 yrs), were divided into 3 equal groups. The groups used the same exercises and set-and-repetition scheme. Rest intervals were 3 min for Gp 1, 1.5 min for Gp 2, and 0.5 min for Gp 3. Pre/post changes were analyzed using G x T ANOVA. Peak power, average peak power, and average total work, as measured during 15 five-sec cycle max-efforts rides and the 1-RM squat, increased significantly (N = 33, p < 0.05). The vertical jump and vertical jump power index did not show a statistically significant change. The 1-RM squat increased significantly more in Gp 1 (7%) than in Gp 3 (2%). Data suggest that, except for maximum strength, adaptations, to short-term, high-volume training may not be dependent on the length of rest intervals.
(C) 1995 National Strength and Conditioning Association
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 posttreatment 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.
Acute and long-term hormonal and neuromuscular adaptations to hypertrophic strength training were studied in 13 recreationally strength-trained men. The experimental design comprised a 6-month hypertrophic strength-training period including 2 separate 3-month training periods with the crossover design, a training protocol of short rest (SR, 2 minutes) as compared with long rest (LR, 5 minutes) between the sets. Basal hormonal concentrations of serum total testosterone (T), free testosterone (FT), and cortisol (C), maximal isometric strength of the leg extensors, right leg 1 repetition maximum (1RM), dietary analysis, and muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) of the quadriceps femoris by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were measured at months 0, 3, and 6. The 2 hypertrophic training protocols used in training for the leg extensors (leg presses and squats with 10RM sets) were also examined in the laboratory conditions at months 0, 3, and 6. The exercise protocols were similar with regard to the total volume of work (loads 3 sets 3 reps), but differed with regard to the intensity and the length of rest between the sets (higher intensity and longer rest of 5 minutes vs. somewhat lower intensity but shorter rest of 2 minutes). Before and immediately after the protocols, maximal isometric force and electro-myographic (EMG) activity of the leg extensors were measured and blood samples were drawn for determination of serum T, FT, C, and growth hormone (GH) concentrations and blood lactate. Both protocols before the experimental training period (month 0) led to large acute increases (p < 0.05-0.001) in serum T, FT, C < and GH concentrations, as well as to large acute decreases (p < 0.05-0.001) in maximal isometric force and EMG activity. However, no significant differences were observed between the protocols. Significant increases of 7% in maximal isometric force, 16% in the right leg 1RM, and 4% in the muscle CSA of the quadriceps femoris were observed during the 6-month strength-training period. However, both 3-month training periods performed with either the longer or the shorter rest periods between the sets resulted in similar gains in muscle mass and strength. No statistically significant changes were observed in basal hormone concentrations or in the profiles of acute hormonal responses during the entire 6-month experimental training period. The present study indicated that, within typical hypertrophic strength-training protocols used in the present study, the length of the recovery times between the sets (2 vs. 5 minutes) did not have an influence on the magnitude of acute hormonal and neuromuscular responses or long-term training adaptations in muscle strength and mass in previously strength-trained men.
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
The purpose of this series of investigations was to gain insight on resistance training in American football and address some of the myths. Many theories about resistance training have been proposed, yet there has been little if any research on some of these training philosophies. This series of studies represents an accumulation of data that helped to formulate a training approach. Rather than having a training philosophy, it might be more productive to have a training approach based on facts and critical monitoring of test variables representative of the physical development possible through strength and conditioning programs. It was demonstrated that football players are capable of multiple maximal efforts in resistance training and that the length of the rest period was a determining factor. In general, multiple sets and various periodized training programs were superior to single-set programs in the rate and magnitude of improvements in body composition, strength, local muscular endurance, and power. Such data indicate that for building programs in previously trained football players, multiple-set programs that provide variation are more appropriate.
(C) 1997 National Strength and Conditioning Association
This study examined the effect of rest interval length on repeated one-repetition maximum (1-RM) bench press performance. Sixteen male college students (age = 22+/-2 yrs) who were experienced in the bench press exercise volunteered for this investigation. On the first laboratory visit the subjects' 1-RM was determined. The next four test sessions involved performing the 1-RM attempt two times, with the intertrial interval being 1, 3, 5, or 10 min. The results of a Cochran Q test found on significant (p > 0.05) difference in the ability to repeat a successful maximal bench press based on the rest interval lengths tested. These findings are consistent with previous research indicating a rapid return in maximal force production capabilities following a fatiguing task. These results indicate that 1-min rest intervals are sufficient for recovery between maximal strength tests.
(C) 1994 National Strength and Conditioning Association