Influence of Resistance Training Frequency on Muscular Adaptations in Well-Trained Men

Article (PDF Available)inThe Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research Publish Ahead of Print(7) · April 2015with 18,946 Reads 
How we measure 'reads'
A 'read' is counted each time someone views a publication summary (such as the title, abstract, and list of authors), clicks on a figure, or views or downloads the full-text. Learn more
DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000970 · Source: PubMed
Cite this publication
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of training muscle groups 1 day per week using a split-body routine versus 3 days per week using a total-body routine on muscular adaptations in well-trained men. Subjects were 20 male volunteers (height = 1.76 ± 0.05 m; body mass = 78.0 ± 10.7 kg; age = 23.5 ± 2.9 years) recruited from a university population. Participants were pair-matched according to baseline strength and then randomly assigned to 1 of 2 experimental groups: a split-body routine (SPLIT) where multiple exercises were performed for a specific muscle group in a session with 2-3 muscle groups trained per session (n = 10), or; a total-body routine (TOTAL), where 1 exercise was performed per muscle group in a session with all muscle groups trained in each session (n = 10). Subjects were tested pre- and post-study for 1 repetition maximum strength in the bench press and squat, and muscle thickness of forearm flexors, forearm extensors, and vastus lateralis. Results showed significantly greater increases in forearm flexor muscle thickness for TOTAL compared to SPLIT. No significant differences were noted in maximal strength measures. The findings suggest a potentially superior hypertrophic benefit to higher weekly resistance training frequencies.
Figures - uploaded by Brad J Schoenfeld
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Brad J Schoenfeld
Content may be subject to copyright.
Advertisement
A preview of the PDF is not available
  • ... However, the only reference they cited was the previously discussed metaanalysis by Krieger (54). Only two of the inclusive studies involved previously trained young adult males (140)(141). ...
    ... Dankel and colleagues hypothesized that greater frequencies may be more beneficial and used the words hypothetical, hypothetically, hypothesis or hypothesized well over a dozen times in their Current Opinion article; and to their credit, stated in our opinion more than once in their narrative. However, the only resistance training studies that Dankel and colleagues cited to support a greater frequency of training in advanced trainees were Schoenfeld and colleagues (141) and Hakkinen and Kallinen (174). As previously discussed in this Critical Commentary, Schoenfeld and colleagues (141) claimed that there was a superior hypertrophic benefit to higher frequency training; however, their own study reported only 1.1 mm difference in muscle thickness in just 1 of the 3 muscle groups assessed; that is, 2 out of 3 muscle groups showed no significant difference in muscle thickness. ...
    ... However, the only resistance training studies that Dankel and colleagues cited to support a greater frequency of training in advanced trainees were Schoenfeld and colleagues (141) and Hakkinen and Kallinen (174). As previously discussed in this Critical Commentary, Schoenfeld and colleagues (141) claimed that there was a superior hypertrophic benefit to higher frequency training; however, their own study reported only 1.1 mm difference in muscle thickness in just 1 of the 3 muscle groups assessed; that is, 2 out of 3 muscle groups showed no significant difference in muscle thickness. ...
    Presentation
    Full-text available
    Researchers have expressed concern recently for standardization of resistance training protocols so that valid comparisons of different training variables such as muscular fatigue, time under tension, pre-exhaust exercise and exercise order, pyramid and drop sets, amount of resistance (load), range of repetitions, frequency and volume of exercise, interset rest intervals, etc. can be more closely studied and compared. This Critical Commentary addresses some recent review articles and training studies specifically focused on the stimulus for muscle hypertrophy in participants with several years of resistance training experience. It reveals that many of the recommended resistance training protocols have their foundation in some long-held, self-described bias.
  • ... However, the only reference they cited was the previously discussed metaanalysis by Krieger (54). Only two of the inclusive studies involved previously trained young adult males (140)(141). ...
    ... Dankel and colleagues hypothesized that greater frequencies may be more beneficial and used the words hypothetical, hypothetically, hypothesis or hypothesized well over a dozen times in their Current Opinion article; and to their credit, stated in our opinion more than once in their narrative. However, the only resistance training studies that Dankel and colleagues cited to support a greater frequency of training in advanced trainees were Schoenfeld and colleagues (141) and Hakkinen and Kallinen (174). As previously discussed in this Critical Commentary, Schoenfeld and colleagues (141) claimed that there was a superior hypertrophic benefit to higher frequency training; however, their own study reported only 1.1 mm difference in muscle thickness in just 1 of the 3 muscle groups assessed; that is, 2 out of 3 muscle groups showed no significant difference in muscle thickness. ...
    ... However, the only resistance training studies that Dankel and colleagues cited to support a greater frequency of training in advanced trainees were Schoenfeld and colleagues (141) and Hakkinen and Kallinen (174). As previously discussed in this Critical Commentary, Schoenfeld and colleagues (141) claimed that there was a superior hypertrophic benefit to higher frequency training; however, their own study reported only 1.1 mm difference in muscle thickness in just 1 of the 3 muscle groups assessed; that is, 2 out of 3 muscle groups showed no significant difference in muscle thickness. ...
    Presentation
    Full-text available
    Researchers have expressed concern recently for standardization of resistance training protocols so that valid comparisons of different training variables such as muscular fatigue, time under tension, pre-exhaust exercise and exercise order, pyramid and drop sets, amount of resistance (load), range of repetitions, frequency and volume of exercise, interset rest intervals, etc. can be more closely studied and compared. This Critical Commentary addresses some recent review articles and training studies specifically focused on the stimulus for muscle hypertrophy in participants with several years of resistance training experience. It reveals that many of the recommended resistance training protocols have their foundation in some long-held, self-described bias.
  • ... In experimental studies, a large number of studies compared one vs. two and three, three vs. four and six days per week RT on muscular adaptations and the results are controversial [4,6,7,12,15,16,20,22,25,26]; however, it seems that three days per week RT could be an optimum training modality for adaptations. Furthermore, almost all the studies examined training for three days per week or less; none of the included studies investigated high training days such as RT performed four days per week and did not compare split routine RT for three vs. four days per week on muscular adaptations, and data about this subject are unknown. ...
    ... Upper-body strength was assessed first, using the barbell bench press exercise; lower body strength was assessed second, using a 45° leg press machine (Nebula Fitness, Inc., Versailles, OH) [5,25]. To determine 1RM, participants performed 8 to 10 repetitions using ~50% of 1RM for warm up, 3 to 5 repetitions using ~75% of 1RM, and 1 to 3 repetitions using ~90% of 1RM. ...
    ... In fact, in absolute strength gains the RT3 group showed greater changes than the RT4 group and in body weight the RT3 group showed smaller changes than the trivial changes for the RT4, which explain the possibility of trivial to small strength in relation to body weight for both the training groups after the 8-week intervention. Other studies in men that compared training frequencies of (a) 1 vs. 2 per week, (b) 1 vs. 3 per week, and (c) 2 vs. 4 per week also showed similar gains in strength performance regardless of training frequency, which explains the greater role of training volume compared with training frequency [4,6,7,12,15,16,20,22,25,26]. On the other hand, Grgic et al. [14] reported that RT frequency plays a crucial role for increasing strength performance and higher RT frequencies induced greater strength gains. ...
    Article
    Full-text available
    Study aim : The aim of this study was to examine the effects of 8 weeks of resistance training (RT) with three vs. four sessions per week and equated training volume on muscular adaptations in men. Materials and methods : Thirty-three healthy young men volunteered to participate in the study and were randomly assigned to three times per week whole-body RT (RT3, n = 11), four times per week whole-body RT (RT4, n = 11) or a control group (CG, n = 11). Before and after training, participants were evaluated for one-repetition maximum (1RM) and muscular endurance (i.e., 60% of 1RM to failure) for the leg press and bench press. In addition, thigh, arm, chest, and calf circumferences, and percent body fat were assessed before and after training. Results : The findings revealed significant main effects of time for chest and thigh circumferences (p ≤ 0.05). There were no significant group × time interactions for chest and thigh circumferences (p > 0.05), but the RT4 showed greater changes (effect size [ES]: 0.48 vs. 0.15) in chest circumference, while the RT3 showed greater changes (ES: 0.77 vs. 0.35) in thigh circumference. Significant group × time interactions were observed for the 1RM of leg and bench presses (p < 0.05). Post-hoc analyses showed greater improvements for RT3 in comparison to RT4 in 1RM bench press (p = 0.01, ES: 0.77 vs. 0.6) and leg presses (p = 0.009, ES: 0.94 vs. 0.86). Conclusions : These results suggest that RT induces meaningful adaptive effects to improve strength and muscle size in men and RT3 appears to be more effective to induce muscular adaptations.
  • ... Manipulation of training frequency has been proposed as an effective stimuli to provide adaptations beyond the initial training. 2,4,6,24 Training volume has also been suggested as an appropriate means of increasing muscular adaptations, such as hypertrophy. 10,12 What is unclear is whether manipulation of the training frequency or manipulation of the volume of exercises provides the most effective protocol for well-trained subjects. ...
    ... 5,22,25 Although limited in scope, there is some evidence purporting the implementation of total-body (TB) training protocols in conjunction with reduced training frequency per week in trained individuals, particularly males. 6,26,27 Understanding the research into frequency and volume manipulation in comparison to SR and TB routines could have a profound effect on training recommendations for trained individuals, particularly those in male athletic sports, where the development of power through RT is at a premium. Therefore, the purpose of this critically appraised topic (CAT) was to review the recent evidence in training frequency (controlling for volume) on the development of performance indices, such as muscular strength and hypertrophy, in the welltrained male resistance-trained subjects. ...
    ... • Six randomized controlled trials met the inclusion and exclusion criteria and then were further screened for methodology. 4,6,10,26,29,30 One article was excluded, as it did not control for training volume, 30 and another, as it used a daily undulating periodization plan. 10 • Four articles were chosen to be included in the CAT. ...
    Article
    Full-text available
    Clinical Scenario : Manipulation of exercise variables in resistance training (RT) is an important component in the development of muscular strength, power, and hypertrophy. Currently, most research centers on untrained or recreationally trained subjects. This critically appraised topic focuses on studies that center on the well-trained subject with regard to frequency of training. Clinical Question : In well-trained male subjects, is there an association between RT frequency and the development of muscular strength and hypertrophy? Summary of Key Findings : Four studies met the inclusion criteria and were included for analysis. All studies showed that lower-frequency training could elicit muscular strength and hypertrophy increases. One study suggested that a higher frequency compared with a lower frequency may provide a slight benefit to hypertrophic development. One study reported a greater level of delayed onset muscle soreness with lower frequency training. The 4 studies demonstrate support for the clinical question. Clinical Bottom Line : Current evidence suggests that lower-frequency RT produces equal to greater improvements on muscular strength and hypertrophy in comparison to higher-frequency RT when volume is equated. The evidence is particularly convincing when lower-frequency RT is associated with a total-body training protocol in well-trained male subjects. Strength of Recommendation : There is moderate-to-strong evidence to suggest that lower-frequency RT, when volume is equated, will produce equal to greater improvements on muscular strength and hypertrophy in comparison to higher-frequency RT.
  • ... In both studies, the subjects had no previous experience in strength training and it was possible to verify that the two types of workout led to similar increases in strength. Schoenfeld et al. 23 , in a study conducted with university students with previous experience in strength workouts, also found that the two ways of structuring training sessions led to similar improvements in strength levels. They also noted that full-body workouts were more effective than split workouts in increasing muscle mass. ...
    ... Be that as it may, according to the results of the present study and the three studies which analysed the subject before it [21][22][23] , it can be argued that neither of the two ways of organising strength training sessions is clearly better than the other, irrespective of the subjects' age, sex or level of physical activity. We understand that this is because both types of workout have pros and cons. ...
    Article
    Full-text available
    Introduction: There are numerous scientific studies in which the components of resistance training load have been analyzed, as well as many variables that condition the development of muscular strength. However, only a few studies compared the effectiveness of full body workouts and split body routines. The purpose of the present investigation was to determine which of them is more effective in increasing both muscular strength levels and kinanthropometric parameters. Methods: 28 male university students without previous experience in strength training were finally included in the present study. They were randomly assigned to two different training groups: Full body workout group (GECC) and split body routine group (GERD). Intra-and inter-group differences in percentage changes (pre-post) were assessed using non-parametric tests. Results: After the completion of an 8-week intervention period, significant improvements in body fat percentage (p = 0.028), levels of muscular strength on the upper body (p=0.008) and on the lower body (p=0.043) were observed in the GECC. Similarly, significant improvements in body fat percentage (p=0.006), lean body mass (p=0.011) and upper body (p=0.031) and lower body levels of muscular strength (p=0.048) were reported in the GERD. However, no significant differences between groups were found neither in the strength tests performed, nor in the Kineanthropometric parameters evaluated. Conclusion: Both split and full body routines are useful to improve strength levels and kinanthropometric parameters in college students with no previous experience in strength training. However, neither of the two structures is significantly more effective than the other one when it comes to improving the above-mentioned parameters. Resumen Introducción: Existen numerosas investigaciones científicas en las que se han analizado los componentes de la carga del entrenamiento de fuerza, y las numerosas variables que condicionan el desarrollo de esta capacidad. En cambio, son pocos los estudios en los que se ha contrastado la eficacia de los entrenamientos de cuerpo completo frente a las rutinas divididas. El objetivo del presente estudio fue determinar cuál de los dos es más eficaz a la hora de mejorar los parámetros de fuerza y cineantropométricos. Material y métodos: 28 estudiantes universitarios de sexo masculino sin experiencia previa en el entrenamiento de fuerza fueron finalmente incluidos en este estudio y asignados aleatoriamente a dos grupos de entrenamiento de fuerza diferentes: Entrenamiento de cuerpo completo (GECC) y entrenamiento con rutina dividida (GERD). Se compararon los porcentajes de cambio (pre-post) intra e intergrupo mediante pruebas no paramétricas. Resultados: Finalizada la intervención de ocho semanas, el GECC mejoró de forma significativa el porcentaje de grasa (p=0,028), y la fuerza en el tren superior (p=0,008), e inferior (p=0,043). En el GERD se produjeron mejoras significativas en el porcentaje de grasa (p=0,006), en el tejido magro (p=0,011), y en la fuerza en el tren superior (p=0,031), e inferior (p=0,048). Sin embargo, no existieron diferencias significativas entre ambos grupos en ninguna de las mejoras alcanzadas en los parámetros de fuerza y cineantropométricos evaluados. Conclusión: Tanto las rutinas divididas como las de cuerpo completo permiten mejorar los niveles de fuerza y los parámetros cineantropométricos en estudiantes universitarios sin experiencia previa en el entrenamiento de fuerza. Sin embargo, ninguna de las dos estructuras de entrenamiento es significativamente más eficaz que la otra a la hora de mejorar los mencionados parámetros.
  • ... Y en los dos casos se pudo verificar que los dos tipos de rutinas generan incrementos de fuerza similares. Schoenfeld et al. 23 , en un estudio realizado con estudiantes universitarios que poseían experiencia previa en trabajos de fuerza, constataron igualmente que las dos formas de estructurar la sesión de entrenamiento generaron mejoras similares en los niveles de fuerza. También observaron que el entrenamiento de cuerpo completo fue más eficaz que la rutina dividida a la hora de aumentar la masa muscular. ...
    ... En cualquier caso, a tenor de los resultados del presente estudio y de los tres estudios previos en los que se ha analizado esta cuestión [21][22][23] , cabe pensar que ninguna de las dos formas de estructurar la sesión de fuerza es superior a la otra de forma clara, con independencia de la edad, el sexo o del nivel de práctica de actividad física de los sujetos. Entendemos que esto se debe a que tanto las rutinas divididas como las de cuerpo completo presentan pros y contras. ...
    Article
    Full-text available
    Pablo Prieto González, et al. 78 Arch Med Deporte 2020;37(2):78-83 Artículo original Resumen Introducción: Existen numerosas investigaciones científicas en las que se han analizado los componentes de la carga del entrenamiento de fuerza, y las numerosas variables que condicionan el desarrollo de esta capacidad. En cambio, son pocos los estudios en los que se ha contrastado la eficacia de los entrenamientos de cuerpo completo frente a las rutinas divididas. El objetivo del presente estudio fue determinar cuál de los dos es más eficaz a la hora de mejorar los parámetros de fuerza y cineantropométricos. Material y métodos: 28 estudiantes universitarios de sexo masculino sin experiencia previa en el entrenamiento de fuerza fueron finalmente incluidos en este estudio y asignados aleatoriamente a dos grupos de entrenamiento de fuerza diferentes: Entrenamiento de cuerpo completo (GECC) y entrenamiento con rutina dividida (GERD). Se compararon los porcentajes de cambio (pre-post) intra e intergrupo mediante pruebas no paramétricas. Resultados: Finalizada la intervención de ocho semanas, el GECC mejoró de forma significativa el porcentaje de grasa (p=0,028), y la fuerza en el tren superior (p=0,008), e inferior (p=0,043). En el GERD se produjeron mejoras significativas en el porcentaje de grasa (p=0,006), en el tejido magro (p=0,011), y en la fuerza en el tren superior (p=0,031), e inferior (p=0,048). Sin embargo, no existieron diferencias significativas entre ambos grupos en ninguna de las mejoras alcanzadas en los parámetros de fuerza y cineantropométricos evaluados. Conclusión: Tanto las rutinas divididas como las de cuerpo completo permiten mejorar los niveles de fuerza y los parámetros cineantropométricos en estudiantes universitarios sin experiencia previa en el entrenamiento de fuerza. Sin embargo, ninguna de las dos estructuras de entrenamiento es significativamente más eficaz que la otra a la hora de mejorar los mencionados parámetros. Palabras clave: Entrenamiento. Fuerza. Rutina dividida. Rutina de cuerpo completo.
  • ... In both studies, the subjects had no previous experience in strength training and it was possible to verify that the two types of workout led to similar increases in strength. Schoenfeld et al. 23 , in a study conducted with university students with previous experience in strength workouts, also found that the two ways of structuring training sessions led to similar improvements in strength levels. They also noted that full-body workouts were more effective than split workouts in increasing muscle mass. ...
    ... Be that as it may, according to the results of the present study and the three studies which analysed the subject before it [21][22][23] , it can be argued that neither of the two ways of organising strength training sessions is clearly better than the other, irrespective of the subjects' age, sex or level of physical activity. We understand that this is because both types of workout have pros and cons. ...
    Article
    Full-text available
    Summary Introduction: There are numerous scientific studies in which the components of resistance training load have been analyzed, as well as many variables that condition the development of muscular strength. However, only a few studies compared the effectiveness of full body workouts and split body routines. The purpose of the present investigation was to determine which of them is more effective in increasing both muscular strength levels and kinanthropometric parameters. Methods: 28 male university students without previous experience in strength training were finally included in the present study. They were randomly assigned to two different training groups: Full body workout group (GECC) and split body routine group (GERD). Intra-and inter-group differences in percentage changes (pre-post) were assessed using non-parametric tests. Results: After the completion of an 8-week intervention period, significant improvements in body fat percentage (p = 0.028), levels of muscular strength on the upper body (p=0.008) and on the lower body (p=0.043) were observed in the GECC. Similarly, significant improvements in body fat percentage (p=0.006), lean body mass (p=0.011) and upper body (p=0.031) and lower body levels of muscular strength (p=0.048) were reported in the GERD. However, no significant differences between groups were found neither in the strength tests performed, nor in the Kineanthropometric parameters evaluated. Conclusion: Both split and full body routines are useful to improve strength levels and kinanthropometric parameters in college students with no previous experience in strength training. However, neither of the two structures is significantly more effective than the other one when it comes to improving the above-mentioned parameters.
  • ... Frequency Frequency is the last variable discussed in this review and concludes the composition of resistance training. The effect of weekly training frequency stimulating the same muscle group multiple times weekly on skeletal muscle hypertrophy has been described in untrained subjects (Candow & Burke, 2007;Gentil, Fischer, Martorelli, Lima, & Bottaro, 2015), trained subjects (McLester, Bishop, & Guilliams, 2000;Schoenfeld, Ratamess, Peterson, Contreras, & Tiryaki-Sonmez, 2015b), and bodybuilders (Ribeiro et al., 2015). Gentil et al. (2015) compared the hypertrophic effect of equal-volume resistance training performed once or twice a week in untrained men. ...
    ... In the same comparison in well-trained men, McLester et al. (2000) reported 8% and 1% lean body mass accretion after resistance training at high-(3 ·wk -1 ) and low frequency (1d·wk -1 ), respectively, recording no significant difference between conditions. Schoenfeld et al. (2015b) demonstrated that a total-body routine (one exercise performed per muscle group in a session with all muscle groups trained in each session) tends to produce greater hypertrophy than a split-body routine (multiple exercises performed for a specific muscle group in a session with two or three muscle groups trained per session) in well-trained men when the volume is equalized. Since the total workout volume was matched, this result was unexpected; however, the authors claimed that it is consistent with the time course of muscle protein synthesis (MPS), which appears to last approximately 48 h post resistance training. ...
    Article
    Studies from the 20th century had proposed that exercise-derived anabolism is the result of acute release of anabolic hormones. Recent advances in molecular biology have validated the hormonal theory, but have raised the question of whether exercise-induced anabolic hormones are related to chronic hypertrophy. Intrinsic factors of muscle contraction, on the other hand, seem to play an important role in exercise-induced protein synthesis and hypertrophy. This review seeks to highlight the role of anabolic pathways related to resistance exercise and express its applicability in resistance training considering the following variables: (a) intensity; (b) volume; (c) rest interval; (d) types of contraction; (e) velocity of contraction; (f) exercise order; and (g) frequency. We conclude that resistance training-induced hypertrophy is likely explained by intrinsic factors rather than by the hormonal theory. Regarding the following training recommendations, multiple sets, long rest intervals, dynamic and high-velocity contractions and prioritizing the exercise order are most likely to produce the greatest enhancement in skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Training intensity may vary, as low (30% one-repetition maximum [1RM]) or high (80% 1RM) intensities induce similar improvements in hypertrophy when performed to a maximal level of effort. Likewise, training frequency may vary according to individual needs, as the total volume performed within a training week appears to be more strongly related to hypertrophy than the number of weekly training sessions. This review contributes to the development of sports performance, aesthetics, and quality of life, and to the prevention or treatment of muscle loss caused by aging or illness.
  • ... In addition, although no significant changes were observed in VrD90 throughout the season, an increment of this variable for AL and GL between 2 and 3 time points (16.8% and 11.9%, respectively) was observed. Conversely, a RT program (one session per week) for one muscle group during 8 weeks has been shown to increase the 1RM from the baseline and the muscle thickness in well-trained men, although the effect is greater when the participants trained more than once per week (39). Very similar results were obtained by Zaroni et al. (40) also in a training period of 8 weeks. ...
    Article
    Abstract Background: Futsal is a team sport involving intermittent technical actions of high intensity, and high physical (strength) and muscular demands. In this regard, the Tensiomyography (TMG) is a useful and non-invasive tool for the monitoring and assessment of the muscle's contractile capacity. This study aimed to analyze the changes in the contractile properties produced during the season, as well as to determine the potential cumulative effect of a resistance training (RT) program in futsal players. Methods: Fourteen elite futsal players (2 goalkeepers, 4 defenders, 4 wingers and 3 pivots) were assessed by TMG at 11th, 18th, and 28th week of the season. The maximal radial displacement of the muscle belly (Dm); contraction time (Tc); delay time (Td) and radial displacement velocity (90%) Dm (VrD90) were assessed. After the second measurement, a RT program was included in the regular training sessions and focused on the lower body musculature. It was performed during 9 weeks (1-weekly). Finally, a third measurement was performed between 28th-29th weeks. Repeated measures analysis of variance was used to detect in-season changes. Two factors were included: Time (changes detected after resistance training program) was used as the within-subject factor and the specific position was used as the between-subject factor. Results: An increment in Tc for several muscles: biceps femoris (BF;p=0.02), semitendinosus (ST;p=0.04), adductor longus (AL;p=0.008) and gastrocnemius medialis (GM;p=0.009) was observed throughout the season. Similarly, significant increments in Dm for GM (p=0.02) and AL (p=0.05), as well as increments in Td for BF (p=0.002) were found. Moreover, no significant changes in VrD90 between time points 2-3 (analysis of RT effect) were observed. Additionally, the player ́s positions reported no significant changes for any of the variables analyzed. Conclusions: An increase respect to baseline levels was observed for Tc, Td and Dm during the season. However, the adaptations to contractile properties were muscle specific. In addition, an in-season 9-week RT program (1-weekly), had no significant effects (time points 2-3) on the contractile properties of futsal players. In addition, there were no differences when comparing different positions.
  • Article
    Full-text available
    RESUMEN El presente estudio es cuantitativo de tipo correlacional el cual tuvo un diseño experimental puro y como objetivo el desarrollo de la hipertrofia en la masa muscular de miembros inferiores (MMMI) a través de un programa de musculación de 20 semanas, para el logro de este objetivo se realizó una intervención a 10 hombres sanos que se conformaron 2 grupos de 5 integrantes de manera aleatoria y se estimó la MMMI, posterior se empleó un test de laboratorio para conocer la potencia de miembros inferiores (PMI), el Grupo F1 (edad 17±1,52 años, talla(m) 1,73±0,05, MMMI (Kg) 11,19±1,39) aplicó un programa de entrenamiento con sobrecargas de frecuencia 1 mientras que el Grupo F2 (edad 18 ±2,86 años, talla(m) 1,71±0,07, MMMI (Kg) 10,7±1,04) efectuó un programa de entrenamiento de frecuencia 2, luego de finalizar las 20 semanas de entrenamiento se evaluó nuevamente la PMI y se estimó la MMMI. Después de analizar los resultados obtenidos se evidenciaron mejoras más significativas en el incremento de la MMMI en el Grupo F2 con respecto al Grupo F1, también se manifestó un mayor beneficio en el Grupo F2 en la mejora de la fuerza en los ejercicios efectuados, sin embargo ninguno de los grupos mejoró significativamente la PMI, por consiguiente se concluye que el entrenamiento con sobrecargas de frecuencia 2 permite obtener un incremento más significativo de la fuerza y MMMI comparado con el entrenamiento de frecuencia 1, no obstante no se encontraron mejoras significativas en la PMI con ninguno de los programas.
  • Article
    Full-text available
    To compare the physiological and performance adaptations between periodized and nonperiodized resistance training in women collegiate tennis athletes. Thirty women (19 +/- 1 yr) were assigned to either a periodized resistance training group (P), nonperiodized training group (NV), or a control group (C). Assessments for body composition, anaerobic power, VO2(max), speed, agility, maximal strength, jump height, tennis-service velocity, and resting serum hormonal concentrations were performed before and after 4, 6, and 9 months of resistance training performed 2-3 d.wk (-1). Nine months of resistance training resulted in significant increases in fat-free mass; anaerobic power; grip strength; jump height; one-repetition maximum (1-RM) leg press, bench press, and shoulder press; serve, forehand, and backhand ball velocities; and resting serum insulin-like growth factor-1, testosterone, and cortisol concentrations. Percent body fat and VO2(max) decreased significantly in the P and NV groups after training. During the first 6 months, periodized resistance training elicited significantly greater increases in 1-RM leg press (9 +/- 2 vs 4.5 +/- 2%), bench press (22 +/- 5 vs 11 +/- 8%), and shoulder press (24 +/- 7 vs 18 +/- 6%) than the NV group. The absolute 1-RM leg press and shoulder press values in the P group were greater than the NV group after 9 months. Periodized resistance training also resulted in significantly greater improvements in jump height (50 +/- 9 vs 37 +/- 7%) and serve (29 +/- 5 vs 16 +/- 4%), forehand (22 +/- 3 vs 17 +/- 3%), and backhand ball velocities (36 +/- 4 vs 14 +/- 4%) as compared with nonperiodized training after 9 months. These data demonstrated that periodization of resistance training over 9 months was superior for enhancing strength and motor performance in collegiate women tennis players.
  • Article
    Full-text available
    Regimented resistance training has been shown to promote marked increases in skeletal muscle mass. Although muscle hypertrophy can be attained through a wide range of resistance training programs, the principle of specificity, which states that adaptations are specific to the nature of the applied stimulus, dictates that some programs will promote greater hypertrophy than others. Research is lacking, however, as to the best combination of variables required to maximize hypertophic gains. The purpose of this study was to investigate muscular adaptations to a volume-equated bodybuilding-type training program versus a powerlifting-type routine in well-trained subjects. 17 young men were randomly assigned to either an HT group that performed 3 sets of 10RM with 90 seconds rest or an ST group that performed 7 sets of 3RM with 3 minutes rest. After 8 weeks, no significant differences were noted in muscle thickness of the biceps brachii. Significant strength differences were found in favor of ST for the 1RM bench press and a trend was found for greater increases in the 1RM squat. In conclusion, this study showed both bodybuilding- and powerlifting-type training promote similar increases in muscular size, but powerlifting-type training is superior for enhancing maximal strength.
  • Article
    Full-text available
    The purpose of this study was to investigate the time course of hypertrophic adaptations in both the upper arm and trunk muscles following high-intensity bench press training. Seven previously untrained young men (aged 25 ± 3 years) performed free-weight bench press training 3 days (Monday, Wednesday and Friday) per week for 24 weeks. Training intensity and volume were set at 75% of one repetition maximum (1-RM) and 30 repetitions (3 sets of 10 repetitions, with 2-3 min of rest between sets), respectively. Muscle thickness (MTH) was measured using B-mode ultrasound at three sites: the biceps and triceps brachii and the pectoralis major. Measurements were taken a week prior to the start of training, before the training session on every Monday and 3 days after the final training session. Pairwise comparisons from baseline revealed that pectoralis major MTH significantly increased after week-1 (p = 0.002), triceps MTH increased after week-5 (p = 0.001) and 1-RM strength increased after week-3 (p = 0.001) while no changes were observed in the biceps MTH from baseline. Significant muscle hypertrophy was observed earlier in the chest compared to that of the triceps. Our results indicate that the time course of the muscle hypertrophic response differs between the upper arm and chest.
  • Previous studies have reported for the vastus lateralis (VL) that the extent of muscle hypertrophy in response to resistance training is greater in the distal than in the middle region, despite uniform muscle fibre composition within VL along its length. In the present study, to investigate mechanism(s) for such non-uniform muscle hypertrophy, we simultaneously measured neuromuscular activity and muscle oxygenation state at the middle and distal regions of VL during fatiguing heavy resistance exercise. Twelve males performed unilateral knee extension exercise which consisted of 4 sets of 8 repetitions at intensity of 80% of the individual one repetition maximum. During the resistance exercise, neuromuscular activities and muscle oxygenation status at the middle and distal regions (50% and 70% of the thigh length, respectively) of VL were measured by using electromyography and near-infrared spectroscopy, respectively. Neuromuscular activities were similar between the distal and middle regions of VL, whereas muscle tissue oxygenation saturation was significantly lower at the distal than at the middle region of VL. These results suggest a possibility that the regional difference in muscle oxygenation but not in neuromuscular activity during fatiguing heavy resistance exercise is responsible for the regional difference in hypertrophy within a muscle.
  • Article
    Purpose: Muscle hypertrophy in response to resistance training has been reported to occur nonuniformly along the length of the muscle. The purpose of the present study was to examine whether the regional difference in muscle hypertrophy induced by a training intervention corresponds to the regional difference in muscle activation in the training session. Methods: Twelve young men participated in a training intervention program for the elbow extensors with a multijoint resistance exercise for 12 wk (3 d · wk(-1)). Before and after the intervention, cross-sectional areas of the triceps brachii along its length were measured with magnetic resonance images. A series of transverse relaxation time (T2)-weighted magnetic resonance images was recorded before and immediately after the first session of training intervention. The T2 was calculated for each pixel within the triceps brachii. In the images recorded after the session, the number of pixels with a T2 greater than the threshold (mean + 1 SD of T2 before the session) was expressed as the ratio to the whole number of pixels within the muscle and used as an index of muscle activation (percent activated area). Results: The percent activated area of the triceps brachii in the first session was significantly higher in the middle regions than that in the most proximal region. Similarly, the relative change in cross-sectional area induced by the training intervention was also significantly greater in the middle regions than the most proximal region. Conclusion: The results suggest that nonuniform muscle hypertrophy after training intervention is due to the region-specific muscle activation during the training session.
  • Article
    Full-text available
    Nutrient timing is a popular nutritional strategy involves the consumption of combinations of nutrients--primarily protein and carbohydrate--in and around an exercise session. Some have claimed that this approach can produce dramatic improvements in body composition. It has even been postulated that the timing of nutritional consumption may be more important than the absolute daily intake of nutrients. The post-exercise period is widely considered the most critical part of nutrient timing. Theoretically, consuming the proper ratio of nutrients during this time not only initiates the rebuilding of damaged muscle tissue and restoration of energy reserves, but it does so in a supercompensated fashion that enhances both body composition and exercise performance. Several researchers have made reference to an anabolic "window of opportunity" whereby a limited time exists after training to optimize training-related muscular adaptations. However, the importance - and even the existence - of a post-exercise 'window' can vary according to a number of factors. Not only is nutrient timing research open to question in terms of applicability, but recent evidence has directly challenged the classical view of the relevance of post-exercise nutritional intake with respect to anabolism. Therefore, the purpose of this paper will be twofold: 1) to review the existing literature on the effects of nutrient timing with respect to post-exercise muscular adaptations, and; 2) to draw relevant conclusions that allow practical, evidence-based nutritional recommendations to be made for maximizing the anabolic response to exercise.
  • Article
    There is not a strong research basis for current views of the importance of individual training variables in strength training protocol design. This study compared 1 day versus 3 days of resistance training per week in recreational weight trainers with the training volume held constant between the treatments. Subjects were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups: 1 day per week of 3 sets to failure (1DAY) or 3 days per week of 1 set to failure (3DAY). Relative intensity (percent of initial 1 repetition maximum [1RM]) was varied throughout the study in both groups by using a periodized repetition range of 3-10. Volume (repetitions x mass) did not differ (p <= 0.05) between the groups over the 12 weeks. The 1RMs of various upper-and lower-body exercises were assessed at baseline and at weeks 6 and 12. The 1RMs increased (p <= 0.05) significantly for the combined groups over time. The 1DAY group achieved ~62% of the 1RM increases observed in the 3DAY group in both upper-body and lower-body lifts. Larger increases in lean body mass were apparent in the 3DAY group. The findings suggest that a higher frequency of resistance training, even when volume is held constant, produces superior gains in 1RM. However, training only 1 day per week was an effective means of increasing strength, even in experienced recreational weight trainers. From a dose-response perspective, with the total volume of exercise held constant, spreading the training frequency to 3 doses per week produced superior results. (C) 2000 National Strength and Conditioning Association
  • Article
    This study aimed to investigate the accuracy of estimating the volume of limb muscles (MV) using ultrasonographic muscle thickness (MT) measurements. The MT and MV of each of elbow flexors and extensors, knee extensors and ankle plantar flexors were determined from a single ultrasonographic image and multiple magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans, respectively, in 27 healthy men (23–40 years of age) who were allocated to validation (n=14) and cross-validation groups (n=13). In the validation group, simple and multiple regression equations using MT and a set of MT and limb length, respectively, as independent variables were derived to estimate the MV measured by MRI. However, only the multiple regression equations were cross-validated, and so the prediction equations with r 2 of 0.787–0.884 and the standard error of estimate of 22.1 cm3 (7.3%) for the elbow flexors to 198.5 cm3 (11.1%) for the knee extensors were developed using the pooled data. This approach did not induce significant systematic error in any muscle group, with no significant difference in the accuracy of estimating MV between muscle groups. In the multiple regression equations, the relative contribution of MT for predicting MV varied from 41.9% for the knee extensors to 70.4% for the elbow flexors. Thus, ultrasonographic MT measurement was a good predictor of MV when combined with limb length. For predicting MV, however, the unsuitability of a simple equation using MT only and the difference between muscle groups in the relative contribution of MT in multiple regression equations indicated a need for further research on the limb site selected and muscle analyzed for MT measurement.