Content uploaded by Andrew C. Fry
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Andrew C. Fry
Content may be subject to copyright.
Physiological Changes with Periodized
Resistance Training in Women
Tennis Players
WILLIAM J. KRAEMER
1
, KEIJO HA
¨
KKINEN
6
, N. TRAVIS TRIPLETT-MCBRIDE
3
, ANDREW C. FRY
3
,
L. PERRY KOZIRIS
3
, NICHOLAS A. RATAMESS
1
, JEFFREY E. BAUER
3
, JEFF S. VOLEK
1
, TIM MCCONNELL
4
,
ROBERT U. NEWTON
2
, SCOTT E. GORDON
3
, DON CUMMINGS
5
, JOHN HAUTH
5
, FRANK PULLO
5
,
J. MICHAEL LYNCH
3
, SCOTT A. MAZZETTI
2
, and HOWARD G. KNUTTGEN
3
1
Human Performance Laboratory, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT;
2
School of Biomedical and Sports Science, Edith
Cowan University, Joondalup, WA, Australia;
3
Laboratory for Sports Medicine, The Pennsylvania State University,
University Park, PA;
4
Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, PA;
5
East Stroudsburg University, East Stroudsburg, PA; and
6
Neuromuscular Research Center, Department of Biology of Physical Activity, University of Jyva¨skyla¨, Jyva¨skyla¨,
FINLAND
ABSTRACT
KRAEMER, W. J., K. HA
¨
KKINEN, N. T. TRIPLETT-MCBRIDE, A. C. FRY, L. P. KOZIRIS, N. A. RATAMESS, J. E. BAUER,
J. S. VOLEK, T. MCCONNELL, R. U. NEWTON, S. E. GORDON, D. CUMMINGS, J. HAUTH, F. PULLO, J. M. LYNCH, S. A.
MAZZETTI, and H. G. KNUTTGEN. Physiological Changes with Periodized Resistance Training in Women Tennis Players. Med. Sci.
Sports Exerc., Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 157–168, 2003. Purpose: To compare the physiological and performance adaptations between
periodized and nonperiodized resistance training in women collegiate tennis athletes. Methods: 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, V
˙
O
2max
, 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
Results: 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 V
˙
O
2max
decreased signifi
-
cantly 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 ⫾ 5vs11⫾ 8%), and shoulder press (24 ⫾ 7vs18⫾ 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 ⫾ 9vs37⫾ 7%) and serve (29
⫾ 5vs16⫾ 4%), forehand (22 ⫾ 3vs17⫾ 3%), and backhand ball velocities (36 ⫾ 4vs14⫾ 4%) as compared with nonperiodized
training after 9 months. Conclusions: These data demonstrated that periodization of resistance training over 9 months was superior for
enhancing strength and motor performance in collegiate women tennis players. Key Words: NONLINEAR VARIATION, WOMEN’S
HEALTH, MOTOR PERFORMANCE, TRADITIONAL STRENGTH TRAINING
T
he classical model of periodization of resistance
training manipulates the intensity and volume of
exercise over time with the intent to minimize bore-
dom, prevent overtraining, and reduce injuries (25). Typi-
cally, it was used by strength/power sports to peak physical
performance for major competitions. However, not all
sports are pure strength/power sports, and many sports have
multiple competitions and long seasons. Therefore, a non-
linear or undulating model has been proposed for use so that
different training sessions can be rotated over a 7- to 10-d
cycle (3,27). To date, although the theoretical basis of such
training theory is well established, few data exist regarding
its efficacy in comparison with the more traditional multi-
ple-set resistance-training programs (12). Thus, there is a
distinct need for research in this area of study, especially in
women athletes.
A recent review of the literature supported the hypothesis
that periodization of resistance training can result in greater
maximal strength gains and may even result in greater motor
performance adaptations when compared with traditional
resistance-training programs with limited variation in the
stimuli over long-term periods (11). Many resistance-train-
ing programs provide limited variation in the intensity and
volume used (11). Furthermore, limited data are available in
female athletes, especially over long-term training periods.
It has been shown that female athletes respond favorably to
long-term (i.e., 6 months) resistance training (4). Due to the
Address for correspondence: William J. Kraemer, Ph.D., FACSM, Human
Performance Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology Unit-1110, University of
Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269-1110; E-mail: kraemer@uconnvm.uconn.edu.
Submitted for publication January 2002.
Accepted for publication July 2002.
0195-9131/03/3501-0157/$3.00/0
MEDICINE & SCIENCE IN SPORTS & EXERCISE
®
Copyright © 2003 by the American College of Sports Medicine
DOI: 10.1249/01.MSS.0000043513.77296.3F
157
importance of muscular power in the game of tennis, resis-
tance training has become an important training tool to
optimize the neuromuscular performance factors related to
the primary strokes (20). Yet, no study has evaluated the
potential advantage of using a periodized resistance-training
program in women tennis players compared with a more
traditional multiple-set program consisting of constant re-
sistance and volume. Therefore, the purpose of this inves-
tigation was to examine whether nonlinear periodization of
resistance training resulted in additive performance or phys-
iological adaptations compared with a traditional resistance-
training program performed in the context of an academic
year in collegiate competitive women tennis players. As-
sessments of muscle strength, power, agility, speed, tennis
ability, aerobic capacity, jumping ability, body composition,
and resting hormonal concentrations were used to determine
the effectiveness of the programs and to present a compre-
hensive view of such training in women tennis players.
METHODS
Experimental design and approach to the prob-
lem. To investigate the primary hypothesis of this study, we
utilized a longitudinal research design, which allowed com-
parisons of two different resistance-training programs over
9 months (e.g., nonlinear periodized and nonperiodized).
The nonlinear periodization model involved rotation of the
training intensity and volume of exercise in a given week.
Such nonlinear variation of training intensity has been pro-
posed to be more conducive to sports with multiple com-
petitions and longer seasons (27). In addition, the variation
in the volume of exercise was greater in the nonlinear
periodized program; however, the total training volume (i.e.,
number of sets multiplied by the number of repetitions
performed) during each week was similar to the traditional
resistance-training program. This was critical to study de-
sign as differences in the overall training volume between
programs have been proposed to influence performance
adaptations (3,11,34). Thus, we were able to examine the
influence of nonlinear periodized resistance training on
physical performance and physiological adaptations while
avoiding the confounding effect of total training volume.
Participants. Thirty collegiate women tennis players
from three universities, who were not currently involved in
resistance training, were medically screened before the in-
vestigation and had no medical or orthopedic problems that
would compromise their participation in the study (Table 1).
Before testing, participants signed informed consent docu-
ments approved by the University’s Institutional Review
Board for the Use of Human Subjects consistent with pol-
icies of the American College of Sports Medicine. Partici-
pants were matched based on their ranking in the United
States Tennis Association (USTA) and were randomly
placed into one of three groups: 1) nonlinear periodized
resistance training (P, N ⫽ 9); 2) nonperiodized resistance
training (NV, N ⫽ 10); or a control group not involved in
any resistance exercise but who continued to perform reg-
ular activities associated with tennis practice (C, N ⫽ 8).
Three women did not complete the study due to schedule
demands, yielding complete data set from 27 women. Com-
petitive tennis experience was similar among groups (8.1 ⫾
3.5 yr). No differences were observed among women’s
groups in any experimental test variables before training.
Experimental testing. Participants were initially
tested for body composition; anaerobic power; aerobic ca-
pacity (V
˙
O
2max
); speed and agility; grip strength; jump
height; one-repetition maximum (1-RM) leg press, bench
press, and shoulder press; ball velocities for the serve,
forehand, and backhand tennis strokes; and serum insulin-
like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), testosterone, sex-hormone
binding globulin (SHBG), and cortisol concentrations. All
women then participated in a 9-month study including col-
legiate tennis practice/play and resistance training (P and
NV groups only) and were retested after 4, 6, and 9 months.
All women were carefully familiarized with all testing and
training protocols and procedures to eliminate acute learn-
ing effects (10). The tests utilized in this investigation dem-
onstrated exceptional test-retest reliability with intraclass
correlation coefficients ranging from 0.91 to 0.99. All tests
were performed at the same time of day to reduce the impact
of any diurnal variations. Participants were asked to main-
tain their same dietary and activity habits for 48 h before
testing.
Anthropometry and body composition. Height
(cm) and body mass (kg) were determined with a physi-
cian’s scale. Skinfold measurements were obtained from
three sites (triceps, suprailiac, and thigh) on the right side of
the body by the same investigator using a Lange skin-fold
caliper (Country Technology, Gays Mills, WI). The average
of two skinfold thicknesses within 2 mm was used as the
skinfold value. Body density was subsequently estimated
using the equation described by Jackson et al. (15), and
percent body fat was determined using the value obtained
for body density and the Siri equation (15,30). Fat-free mass
(kg) was then calculated by subtracting fat mass from body
mass.
Anaerobic power. After a 2-min warm-up using zero
resistance, a modified 30-s Wingate cycle ergometer
power test using a Monark Cycle Ergometer (Recreation
Equipment Unlimited, Inc., Pittsburgh, PA) was per-
formed to determine peak power output. Seat height was
determined by a 10° right-knee angle when the right foot
was in the pedal down position with the participant seated
on the bike. The ergometer load setting was calculated as
the participant’s body weight multiplied by a factor of
0.075. The participants were verbally encouraged to
pedal as fast as possible throughout the entire 30-s test.
Pedal revolutions were digitally counted throughout the
test and recorded after each 5-s time frame. Peak power
TABLE 1. Participant characteristics.
Group Age (yr) Height (cm) Body Mass (kg)
P(N ⫽ 9) 19.2 ⫾ 1.1 167.9 ⫾ 5.6 60.5 ⫾ 7.7
NV (N ⫽ 10) 18.6 ⫾ 1.3 167.0 ⫾ 4.1 60.8 ⫾ 7.8
C(N ⫽ 8) 19.3 ⫾ 1.6 167.3 ⫾ 6.1 60.1 ⫾ 7.6
Values are mean ⫾ SD.
158
Official Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine http://www.acsm-msse.org
output (W) was then calculated according to previously
established methods (16).
Aerobic capacity (V
˙
O
2max
). Maximal oxygen con
-
sumption (V
˙
O
2max
) was determined using a graded exercise
test to volitional fatigue and/or attain of maximal heart rate
with a modified Bruce protocol on a Quinton
®
(Seattle,
WA) motorized treadmill (7). Oxygen consumption and
carbon dioxide production was monitored via an online
breath-by-breath computerized indirect spirometry with ox-
ygen and carbon dioxide analyzers (Applied Electrochem-
istry S3A and CD3A Ametek Thermax Instrument Division,
Pittsburgh, PA), and heart rates and ratings of perceived
exertion were obtained for each minute of the test (36).
Expired gases were closely monitored during the last 6 min
of the test using an automated metabolic system using
classical end points for determination identical to our prior
work (21).
Sprinting speed and agility. Ten- and 20-m sprint
times were obtained from a standing start using two photo-
electric cells (Model ET3, Catalogic Optic Electronics,
Cary, NC) adjusted to the hip level and connected to an
automatic timing device (Automatic Performance Analyzer
Model 741, Dekan Timing Devices, Carol Stream, IL). The
photoelectric cells were positioned at the start and finish
lines. The fastest time observed over three trials was re-
corded for each displacement.
A lateral agility test using regulation-sized tennis racquets
modified from a USTA agility test protocol (33) was per-
formed by each woman. Two weighted poles were posi-
tioned 2.44 m from the net. A tennis ball was suspended
from each pole to hang at approximately waist level and to
allow for 360° rotation after contact with the racquet. The
distance between the tennis balls was 8.24 m on a horizontal
line, which was parallel to the net. Participants began the
test on the point halfway between the tennis balls and 12 m
from the net. Two directional lights were placed behind the
net and in full view at the baseline. The lights were attached
to a delayed timer, which was controlled by the same in-
vestigator to prevent false starts. Participants were in-
structed to start from the center mark (equal distance of
4.12 m from both suspended tennis balls) on a horizontal
line with the two balls. Upon illumination of either direc-
tional light, the participants were instructed to sprint first to
their forehand side, make racquet contact with the ball, then
sprint to their backhand side and make racquet contact with
the ball, then immediately repeat this sequence a second
time. Elapsed time was recorded from the time of illumina-
tion to the time of racquet contact of the second backhand.
Each participant completed three trials, the fastest trial being
used for analysis.
Muscle strength. Isometric handgrip strength was per-
formed using a Jaymar model 30 J4 (Country Technology)
handgrip dynamometer. The dynamometer was adjusted to
the participant’s hand and the best of three maximal trials
from each hand was used in data analysis.
1-RM strength was determined for a seated machine leg
press, and free-weight bench press and shoulder press ex-
ercises according to the following methods described by
Kraemer et al. (18). Two warm-up sets of 2–5 repetitions at
approximately 50 and 80% of perceived 1-RM were per-
formed separated by a 1-min rest interval. Three-to-four
attempts separated by 3- to 5-min rest intervals were then
performed untila1RMwasattained. The same investigator
during all tests judged successful 1-RM attempts, including
complete range of motion of the exercise, for each
individual.
Vertical jump height. Participants performed three
countermovement vertical jumps and started each jump with
both hands at eye level and the knees unlocked, and utilized
a two-foot take-off with no approach steps permitted. Jump
performance was assessed with a Vertec vertical jump tester
(Sports Imports, Inc., Columbus, OH). Standing reach was
determined while each participant stood flat-footed and
reached maximally with the dominant hand. Trials were
performed in triplicate and the highest vertical jump height
(total jump height ⫺ standing reach) was recorded.
Ball velocities. The methods used to analyze the ball
velocities during the serve, forehand, and backhand strokes
have been previously described in detail (20). Briefly, two
Panasonic 60-Hz model AG-450 video cameras were posi-
tioned facing each other along the baseline of the testing
court. A line perpendicular to the camera along the center
hash mark of the court was used as a reference plane, and a
meter stick was recorded in the plane to determine a scale
factor. After warming up, each participant performed the
serve, forehand, and backhand until 10 acceptable strokes of
each were filmed. An acceptable stroke was accomplished
by hitting a ball into the singles’ court for ground strokes,
and into the deuce court for right-handed players and the ad
court for left-handed players. Participants were instructed to
hit all of their shots as hard as possible and along the
reference plane.
Ballvelocity values were determined by digitizing trials
and analyzing frame-by-frame with the Peak 2D Motion
Analysis system (Peak Performance Technologies, Engle-
wood, CO). Three frames before impact, the impact frame,
and three frames after impact were digitized for each trial.
The data were expanded to represent collection at 240 Hz
using a cubic spline interpolation routine without smooth-
ing. During analysis, the researcher disqualified trials that
did not appear maximal. Other possible disqualifying factors
included balls hit at an acute angle relative to the reference
plain or if a portion of the stroke occurred outside the field
of view of the camera. The average ball velocity of the top
three trials for each stroke was used as the value.
Biochemical analyses. Resting venous blood samples
were obtained from a superficial arm vein using a needle,
syringe, and Vacutainer setup with the participant in a
slightly reclined, seated position. Women in the study had
normal menstruation with a similar percentage of women in
each group who were taking oral contraceptives. Resting
venous blood samples were obtained from the women dur-
ing the early follicular phase of the menstrual cycle, and
blood was obtained at the same time of the day for each
woman to reduce any possible effects of hormonal diurnal
RESISTANCE TRAINING IN WOMEN TENNIS PLAYERS Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
姞
159
variations. Whole blood was processed, and serum samples
were stored at ⫺85°C until analyses were performed.
Total IGF-1 was analyzed in duplicate using a
125
I liquid-
phase double-antibody radioimmunoassay (RIA) with an
octadecasylyl-silica preliminary column (acid-methanol)
extraction to separate IGF from its binding proteins (IncStar,
Stillwater, MN). Testosterone and cortisol were measured in
duplicate using
125
I solid-phase RIAs (Diagnostic Products,
Los Angeles, CA). SHBG concentrations were determined
in duplicate using a double antibody, liquid phase
125
I RIA
(Diagnostic Products). Intra- and inter-assay variances were
between 2.0 and 5.0%. Immunoreactivity was measured
with an LKB 1272 Clinigamma automatic gamma counter
and on-line data reduction system (Pharmacia LKB Nuclear,
Turku, Finland). Samples were thawed only once for
analyses.
Resistance-training programs. Resistance exercise
selection and order were identical between the two training
programs (Table 2) and each group performed two-to-three
sets of each separated by a 1.5- to 2-min rest intervals.
Heavier loads (4–6 RM) required 3-min rest periods for
optimal recovery. The C group participated in all tennis
training and conditioning drills but did not perform any
heavy resistance exercise. Subjects in the P and NV groups
were individually supervised by an experienced personal
trainer to ensure that all essential program characteristics
were strictly enforced. Most important, the trainers in the
study were responsible for the progression of training loads.
It has been recently demonstrated that direct supervision of
resistance training enhances strength performance adapta-
tions via greater and faster training load progression (26). In
either group, when a participant was capable of performing
the required number of repetitions for three consecutive sets
of a particular exercise, the training load was increased in
increments of about 2–13 kg, depending on the absolute
load being used. Both groups performed three workouts per
week with one rest-day between sessions unless match play
allowed only two per week. Complete (100%) attendance
for all workouts was observed as make-up sessions were
allowed.
Numbers of repetitions were preliminarily designed ac-
cording to each specific training program and are shown in
detail in Table 2. Because differences in training volume
between resistance-training program designs have been pro-
TABLE 2. Training programs.
PNV
4- to 6-RM Training Loads 8- to 10-RM Training Loads
Monday Set 1 Set 2 Set 3 Set 1 Set 2 Set 3
Leg press
Bench press
Unilateral leg curl
Shoulder press
Seated cable row
Calf raise NP NP
Latissimus pull down NP NP
Dumbbell lateral raise NP NP
Lumbar extension NP NP
Dumbbell internal rotation NP NP
Dumbbell external NP NP
Abdominal crunch NP NP
Wednesday 8-to10-RM Training Loads 8- to 10-RM Training Loads
Set 1 Set 2 Set 3 Set 1 Set 2 Set 3
Split squat NP NP
Close-grip bench press NP NP
Unilateral leg curl
Shoulder press
Seated cable row
Calf raise NP NP
Dumbbell flves NP NP
Lumbar extension NP NP
Dumbbell internal rotation NP NP
Dumbbell external NP NP
Abdominal crunch NP NP
Friday 12- to 15-RM Training Loads 8- to 10-RM Training Loads
Set 1 Set 2 Set 3 Set 1 Set 2 Set 3
Leg press
Bench press
Unilateral leg curl
Shoulder press
Seated cable row
Calf raise NP NP
Latissimus pull down NP NP
Dumbbell lateral raise NP NP
Lumbar extension NP NP
Dumbbell internal rotation NP NP
Dumbbell external NP NP
Abdominal crunch NP NP
NP, not performed, supplemental wrist curls, hammer curls, wrist rolls were performed twice a week.
160
Official Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine http://www.acsm-msse.org
posed to influence maximal strength performance adapta-
tions, the total number of sets multiplied by repetitions per
week was equated between the P and NV training program
designs (total sets ⫻ repetitions ⬇ 830) (3,11,34). Thus, the
major difference between the two programs was that the P
group rotated loading schemes (4- to 6-RM with longer rest
intervals, 8- to 10-RM, and 12- to 15-RM) over successive
workouts on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, respectively,
whereas the NV group utilized a traditional moderate-inten-
sity loading scheme (8- to 10-RM) where the relative inten-
sity remained constant. It is crucial to note that within our
study design, it was not conducive to include an additional
nonperiodized, high-intensity (4- to 6-RM) resistance-train-
ing group due to various concerns associated with such
uninterrupted, long-term heavy-resistance training in ac-
tively competitive women tennis athletes (e.g., injury, over-
training, etc.) (12). Another possible group, nonperiodized,
low-intensity (12- to 15-RM) resistance training, was not
used due to limitations in the number of competitive athletes
available. Thus, the comparison is essentially one of similar
volume with planned multiple loads to a program with only
a single load training zone over time.
Statistical analyses. Data are presented as the mean ⫾
SD. Statistical analyses for each dependent variable were
accomplished with a separate two-way ANOVA with re-
peated measures. When a significant F-ratio was achieved,
post hoc comparisons were accomplished via a Fisher’s
least significant difference test. Statistical power for the
various dependent variables examined ranged from 0.72 to
0.92 for the sample sizes used at the 0.05 alpha level
(nQuery Advisor
®
software, Statistical Solutions, Saugus,
MA). Significance in this study was defined as P ⱕ 0.05.
RESULTS
Body composition. Fat-free mass increased and per-
cent body fat decreased significantly after P and NV train-
ing, but no differences were observed among groups in any
of the body composition variables at any time point (Table
3). Despite the lack of differences in body composition
between groups, there was a trend (P ⫽ 0.09) for an inter-
action in fat-free mass values over time. Also, the absolute
change (mean ⌬⫾SD) in fat-free mass over the 9 months
was significantly greater in P (3.3 ⫾ 1.7 kg) than NV (1.6
⫾ 2.4 kg).
Anaerobic power and V
˙
O
2max
. Peak anaerobic power
increased significantly after 9 months in P and NV (Table
4). Peak power was significantly greater in the P group than
the NV group after 4 and 6 months of training, but anaerobic
power values were similar between the two groups after 9
months. Surprisingly, V
˙
O
2max
decreased significantly after
9 months in P and NV. However, no differences were
observed among groups in V
˙
O
2max
at any time point.
Speed, agility, and vertical jump. Sprinting speed
and agility did not change after P and NV training and no
differences were observed among groups in 10-m or 20-m
sprinting speed or agility at any time point (Table 5). Max-
imal countermovement jump height increased significantly
during both P and NV training, but the percent increase in
jump height after 9 months was significantly greater after
periodized resistance training (⬇50% vs 37%; Fig. 1). As a
result, jump height was significantly greater in the P group
than the NV group after 9 months of training.
Muscle strength. Dominant and nondominant hand-
grip strength increased significantly during P and NV train-
ing (Table 6). No differences were observed between the P
and NV groups in grip strength at any time point. 1-RM
leg-press performance increased significantly during 9
months of P (19%) and NV (17%) training, but the percent
increase after 4 months was significantly greater during
periodized resistance training (9.3% vs 4.5%; Fig. 2). 1-RM
bench press performance increased significantly after 9
months of P (23%) and NV (17%) training, but the percent
increase after 6 months was significantly greater during P
training (⬇22% vs 11%; Fig. 3). In terms of absolute 1-RM
TABLE 5. Sprinting speed and agility.
Baseline
Months of Resistance Training
469
10-m sprint (s)
P 2.16 ⫾ 0.10 2.17 ⫾ 0.07 2.13 ⫾ 0.13 2.12 ⫾ 0.74
NV 2.15 ⫾ 0.09 2.17 ⫾ 0.09 2.17 ⫾ 0.10 2.13 ⫾ 0.10
C 2.22 ⫾ 0.10 2.13 ⫾ 0.11 2.24 ⫾ 0.10 2.17 ⫾ 0.10
20-m sprint (s)
P 3.73 ⫾ 0.21 3.71 ⫾ 0.10 3.69 ⫾ 0.11 3.65 ⫾ 0.14
NV 3.66 ⫾ 0.22 3.67 ⫾ 0.19 3.71 ⫾ 0.16 3.66 ⫾ 0.19
C 3.83 ⫾ 0.27 3.77 ⫾ 0.17 3.80 ⫾ 0.24 3.72 ⫾ 0.22
Agility (s)
P 7.07 ⫾ 0.95 7.89 ⫾ 0.35 7.58 ⫾ 0.39 7.43 ⫾ 0.22
NV 7.33 ⫾ 1.14 8.08 ⫾ 0.62 7.53 ⫾ 0.49 7.49 ⫾ 0.42
C 7.70 ⫾ 0.64 7.93 ⫾ 0.69 7.80 ⫾ 0.54 7.60 ⫾ 0.48
Values are mean ⫾ SD.
TABLE 3. Body composition.
Baseline
Months of Resistance Training
469
Body mass (kg)
P 60.5 ⫾ 7.7 62.4 ⫾ 7.4 61.8 ⫾ 7.0 61.6 ⫾ 6.8
NV 60.8 ⫾ 7.8 61.0 ⫾ 6.1 60.5 ⫾ 7.2 61.0 ⫾ 7.4
C 58.1 ⫾ 7.9 58.2 ⫾ 6.9 58.0 ⫾ 7.7 57.4 ⫾ 6.6
Fat-free mass (kg)
P 46.5 ⫾ 4.9 49.9 ⫾ 5.5* 49.3 ⫾ 5.1* 49.8 ⫾ 4.9*
NV 46.1 ⫾ 4.0 48.1 ⫾ 4.4* 47.4 ⫾ 4.0* 47.7 ⫾ 4.8*
C 44.6 ⫾ 3.3 45.3 ⫾ 3.9 45.0 ⫾ 4.1 45.0 ⫾ 3.7
Body fat (%)
P 22.9 ⫾ 3.9 20.0 ⫾ 3.4* 20.2 ⫾ 3.5* 19.1 ⫾ 3.6*
NV 23.7 ⫾ 4.9 21.1 ⫾ 2.4* 21.3 ⫾ 3.4* 21.6 ⫾ 2.9*
C 22.6 ⫾ 5.7 21.8 ⫾ 3.9 22.1 ⫾ 4.2 21.4 ⫾ 4.3
Values are mean ⫾ SD; *P ⱕ0.05 vs corresponding baseline value.
TABLE 4. Peak anaerobic power and maximal oxygen consumption (V
˙
O
2max
).
Baseline
Months of Resistance Training
46 9
Anaerobic power (W)
P 624 ⫾ 130 655 ⫾ 89¥ 665 ⫾ 106¥ 699 ⫾ 95*†
NV 563 ⫾ 116 582 ⫾ 98 605 ⫾ 121 664 ⫾ 124*†
C 570 ⫾ 78 551 ⫾ 87 546 ⫾ 70 577 ⫾ 62
V
˙
O
2max
(mL䡠kg
⫺1
䡠min
⫺1
)
P 49.4 ⫾ 4.4 47.0 ⫾ 2.2 48.9 ⫾ 4.2 45.7 ⫾ 5.2*
NV 51.0 ⫾ 3.2 51.5 ⫾ 5.3 51.3 ⫾ 6.4 45.1 ⫾ 4.9*
C 45.7 ⫾ 2.2 44.0 ⫾ 5.8 44.7 ⫾ 5.2 44.8 ⫾ 5.5
Values are mean ⫾ SD; ¥ P ⱕ0.05 vs corresponding NV and C values; * P ⱕ0.05 vs
corresponding baseline value; † P ⱕ0.05 vs corresponding C value
RESISTANCE TRAINING IN WOMEN TENNIS PLAYERS Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
姞
161
bench press performances, the P group was significantly
greater than the NV group after 4 and 6 months of training.
1-RM shoulder press performance increased significantly
after 9 months of P (24%) and NV (23%) training, but the
percent increase after 6 months was significantly greater
during P (⬇24% vs 18%; Fig. 4).
Ball velocities. Ball velocities for all three tennis
strokes increased significantly during both P and NV train-
ing, but the percent increases in the tennis serve (⬇29% vs
16%), forehand stroke (⬇22% vs 17%), and backhand
stroke (⬇36% vs 14%) after 9 months were each signifi-
cantly greater after P (Figs. 5–7).
Hormonal concentrations. Resting serum concentra-
tions of IGF-1, testosterone, and cortisol increased signifi-
cantly during both P and NV training (Table 7). Resting
serum concentrations of IGF-1 and cortisol were also sig-
nificantly increased in the C group, suggesting an influence
of collegiate tennis practice and competition on adaptations
in the endocrine system (Table 7). Resting serum cortisol
concentrations were significantly greater in the P group than
both the NV and C groups after 4 and 9 months of training
but not after 6 months (only greater than the C group).
DISCUSSION
The primary findings of this investigation were that pe-
riodization of resistance training did produce greater mag-
nitudes of improvements in strength and sport-specific mo-
tor performances than a traditional resistance-training
program in collegiate women tennis players. Such differen-
tial adaptations in strength and power between the two
training programs most likely contributed to greater im-
provements in jump height and ball velocities for the serve,
forehand, and backhand tennis strokes. Furthermore, these
differential adaptations between periodized and traditional
progressive resistance-training groups occurred despite sim-
ilar weekly training volumes, indicating the inclusion of
variation as an important factor in a training program. In the
past, it has been argued that the greater strength gains
typically observed after periodized resistance-training pro-
grams were mediated by reductions in the training volume
(i.e., tapering the number of sets and repetitions) (3,11,34).
Thus, to our knowledge, these data are the first to demon-
strate greater strength and motor performance gains in
women athletes using similar volumes of exercise.
Because the variation of intensity during each week of
periodized training was the major difference between the
two training program designs, this appears to be the medi-
ating factor in the additive effects observed in strength and
power using this nonlinear periodized training strategy. This
was most likely due to the ability to recruit more fast-twitch
motor units with the inclusion of the heavier loading (i.e.,
4–6 RM) (13,28,29). Training studies in men have shown
that individuals exposed to heavier loads during training
experienced greater improvements in maximal strength per-
formance (2,9,10). The use of heavy resistance training was
also shown to be effective for increasing strength in women
athletes over 6 months (4). Therefore, variation in training
FIGURE 1—Comparison of women’s vertical jump height (A) and
corresponding percent changes (B) before □ and after 4 1,6;, and
9 months 䡵 of training in P, NV, and C. Values are mean ⴞ SD; * P
< 0.05 versus corresponding before value; # P < 0.05 versus corre-
sponding 4-month value; † P < 0.05 versus corresponding 6-month
value; ⴙ P < 0.05 versus corresponding C value; ¥ P < 0.05 versus
corresponding NV and C values. For data panel A at 9 months, jump
height in P > NV (P < 0.05).
TABLE 6. Grip strength for dominant and nondominant limbs.
Baseline
Months of Resistance Training
469
Dominant (N)
P 335.7 ⫾ 40.8 343.4 ⫾ 44.4† 341.2 ⫾ 42.2 361.9 ⫾ 34.5*†
NV 321.3 ⫾ 46.8 352.2 ⫾ 44.2*† 330.6 ⫾ 57.6 356.1 ⫾ 44.5*†
C 330.6 ⫾ 40.3 311.0 ⫾ 41.2 324.7 ⫾ 41.1 316.9 ⫾ 46.1
Nondominant (N)
P 251.1 ⫾ 25.5 246.2 ⫾ 20.6 247.2 ⫾ 31.4 338.4 ⫾ 25.5*†
NV 261.9 ⫾ 20.6 265.9 ⫾ 30.4 266.8 ⫾ 31.4 314.9 ⫾ 21.6*†
C 261.9 ⫾ 20.6 251.1 ⫾ 30.4 242.3 ⫾ 30.4 266.8 ⫾ 30.0
Values are mean ⫾ SD; *P ⱕ0.05 vs. corresponding baseline value; †P ⱕ0.05 vs
corresponding C value
162
Official Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine http://www.acsm-msse.org
intensity in the periodized resistance-training program to
accommodate the rigors and schedule demands of tennis
practice and competition was an effective method to facil-
itate the underlying neuromuscular and performance
adaptations.
Although our data can only indicate the potential for other
factors to be involved with the differential training effects
among groups, both muscle hypertrophy and endocrine fac-
tors could produce such integrated effects. In the present
study, the change in fat-free mass over 9 months tended to
be greater in the P group (P ⫽ 0.08) than the NV group,
reflecting enhanced body composition and muscle hyper-
trophy with periodized resistance training (3,35). Other
training studies in women have demonstrated significant
body composition changes in fat-free mass while reporting
increases in strength performance similar to those reported
in the present study (5,6,8). It appears the differential
strength adaptations between periodized and traditional
multiple-set resistance training may be due to a combination
of neurological and muscular adaptations (28,29,31,32).
It is well documented that women’s upper-body strength
differs from their lower-body strength in terms of initial
strength levels and training adaptations (24,35). Wilmore
(35) had demonstrated that women’s relative upper-body
FIGURE 2—Comparison of women’s 1-RM leg press (A) and corre-
sponding percent changes (B) before □ and after 4 1,6;, and 9
months 䡵 of training in P, NV, and C. Values are mean ⴞ SD; * P <
0.05 versus corresponding before value; # P < 0.05 versus correspond-
ing 4-month value; † P < 0.05 versus corresponding 6-month value;
ⴙ P < 0.05 versus corresponding C value; ¥ P < 0.05 versus corre-
sponding NV and C values. For data panel A at 4, 6, and 9 months,
1-RM leg press in P > NV (P < 0.05).
FIGURE 3—Comparison of women’s 1-RM bench press (A) and cor-
responding percent changes (B) before □ and after 4 1,6;, and 9
months 䡵 of training in P, NV, and C. Values are mean ⴞ SD; * P <
0.05 versus corresponding before value, # P < 0.05 versus correspond-
ing 4-month value; ⴙ P < 0.05 versus corresponding C value; ¥ P <
0.05 versus corresponding NV and C values. For data panel A at 4 and
6 months, 1-RM bench press in P > NV (P < 0.05).
RESISTANCE TRAINING IN WOMEN TENNIS PLAYERS Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
姞
163
strength (i.e., in relation to fat-free mass) remains much less
than men’s after 10 wk of training, whereas their lower-
body strength relative to fat-free mass may equal or even
surpass that of men’s. Classically, this has been indica-
tive of the difficulty of making the same magnitude of
gains in women’s upper body as observed in their lower
body or in comparison with men. The majority of the
strength gains in 1-RM bench-press performance oc-
curred during the first 4 months in the P group in the
present study. A similar plateau trend was also observed
in the 1-RM shoulder press after six months in the P
group. The inability to continually improve over the
entire training program may have been limited by the
upper limits of physiological adaptation possible during
this time period in these competitive women tennis play-
ers. Of significance to the adaptational time course was
the fact that the last 3.5 months of training were per-
formed within the context of a competitive tennis season.
This may have also influenced the magnitude of gains
made in the upper body of these women. Conversely, in
contrast with the upper-body adaptations was the ability
of the lower body to continue to significantly increase
strength and power over the entire training program in the
P group. Such data demonstrate that there may be a need
for further study of periodized training strategies specif-
ically for the upper body in women.
FIGURE 4—Comparison of women’s 1-RM shoulder press (A) and
corresponding percent changes (B) before □ and after 4 1,6;, and
9 months 䡵 of training in P, NV, and C. Values are mean ⴞ SD; * P
< 0.05 versus corresponding before value; # P < 0.05 versus corre-
sponding 4-month value; ⴙ P < 0.05 versus corresponding C value;
¥ P < 0.05 versus corresponding NV and C values. For data in panel
A at 6 and 9 months, 1-RM shoulder press in P > NV (P < 0.05).
FIGURE 5—Comparison of women’s peak ball velocities during the
tennis serve (A) and corresponding percent changes (B) before □ and
after 4 1,6;, and 9 months 䡵 of training in P, NV, and C. Values are
mean ⴞ SD; * P < 0.05 versus corresponding before value; # P < 0.05
versus corresponding4-month value; ⴙ P < 0.05 versus corresponding
C value; ¥ P < 0.05 versus corresponding NV and C values. For data
in panel A at 4, 6, and 9 months, serve velocity in P > NV (P < 0.05).
164
Official Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine http://www.acsm-msse.org
From a sports-specific conditioning perspective, the ob-
served findings of significantly improved ball velocities for
the serve, forehand, and backhand tennis strokes in the P and
NV groups demonstrated the importance of resistance train-
ing for sport. The greater magnitude of improvement ob-
served after periodized resistance training supports the use
of such a training strategy. In the present study, both training
groups significantly increased 1-RM shoulder press and ball
velocities. In addition, periodized resistance training in-
duced small but significant continued improvements in ball
velocities over the 9-month period, whereas nonperiodized
training did not. It is possible that resistance training in-
creased upper-body force production capabilities suffi-
ciently to enable a better transfer into power and high-
velocity force production necessary during the different
tennis strokes (23,37). The increases in maximal strength in
the shoulder musculature were important. Kraemer et al.
(20) have previously reported that strength and joint laxity
were the only significant contributors to ball velocities of
different tennis strokes with the 1-RM shoulder press being
more highly correlated (R ⫽ 0.69) to three ball velocities
than the bench press (R ⫽ 0.30) (20). This indicates that the
strength of the deltoids appears more important to the de-
velopment of higher ball velocities than the pectoralis mus-
cles of the chest. Nevertheless, a total sports-specific tennis-
FIGURE 6—Comparison of women’s peak ball velocities during the
tennis forehand stroke (A) and corresponding percent changes (B)
before □ and after 4 1,6;, and 9 months 䡵 of training in P, NV, and
C. Values are mean ⴞ SD; * P < 0.05 versus corresponding before
value; # P < 0.05 versus corresponding 4-month value; ⴙ P < 0.05
versus corresponding C value; ¥ P < 0.05 versus corresponding NV
and C values. For data in panel A at 4, 6, and 9 months, forehand
velocity in P > NV (P < 0.05).
FIGURE 7—Comparison of women’s peak ball velocities during the
tennis backhand stroke (A) and corresponding percent changes (B)
before □ and after 4 1,6;, and 9 months 䡵 of training in P, NV, and
C. Values are mean ⴞ SD; * P < 0.05 versus corresponding before
value; # P < 0.05 versus corresponding 4-month value; ⴙ P < 0.05
versus corresponding C value; ¥ P < 0.05 versus corresponding NV
and C values. For data in panel A at 4, 6, and 9 months, backhand
velocity in P > NV (P < 0.05).
RESISTANCE TRAINING IN WOMEN TENNIS PLAYERS Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
姞
165
training program was used which ultimately contributes to
the over all development of the neuromuscular capabilities
needed in the sport.
It is interesting to note that lower-body strength perfor-
mance increased over the entire 9-month experimental pe-
riod. Because tennis strokes are dependent upon the entire
closed kinetic chain of muscle, greater enhancements in hip
and lower-body force/power production capabilities (i.e.,
1-RM leg press, vertical jump) may also have contributed to
the larger improvements in ball velocities during tennis
strokes in the P group. It may be speculated that potential
mediating mechanisms may be related to greater activation
and synchronization of high force/power motor units, which
have a higher recruitment threshold and/or enhanced inhi-
bition of antagonist muscle activity (23,28,29). The inclu-
sion of heavy training (4–6 RM) may have played an
important role in the program design.
The interaction of different physical performance capa-
bilities with training and competitive tennis remains com-
plex. Tennis-induced upper-body strength imbalances have
been documented in non-resistance-trained, collegiate
women tennis players (20). Although no differences were
observed between the P and NV groups, isometric grip
strength did increase significantly in both groups, resulting
in a diminishment of the imbalance between dominant and
nondominant handgrip strength. The speed and agility re-
sults demonstrate that, despite the evident influence of re-
sistance training on sport-specific motor performance, there
is a much greater need for specific “speed training” beyond
what would be inherent to typical tennis conditioning drills
and strength training programs. Thus, more specialized
training is necessary beyond resistance training if speed
improvements are a training goal in competitive athletes.
Interestingly, adaptations in peak anaerobic Wingate power
output resulted in greater performances in the P group than
the NV group after 4 and 6 months of training, but these
differences were diminished after 9 months of training
within the context of a competitive season. These data
indicate the difficulty in continually improving during the
rigors of a competitive season and may demonstrate the
importance of maintenance training during this time. Sur-
prisingly, aerobic power (V
˙
O
2max
) decreased in the two
resistance training groups over the last 3 months of training
during the major competitive season. The interplay between
anaerobic and aerobic development and competitive tennis
remains complex, but with the game focused on power and
very short points, anaerobic power may be more important.
Thus, our data appear to indicate that when peak anaerobic
power is improved, aerobic capacity may be somewhat
reduced due to a change in the priority of the body’s adap-
tations to higher force generation and toleration of glyco-
lytic exercise metabolism (21). This may be especially true
in tennis where “burst-like” power capabilities represent the
new trend in the game of tennis. These data demonstrate the
dramatic need for training programs, which are designed
using the concepts of “specificity of training” relative to the
desired sports-specific fitness goals of athletes (12).
The endocrine system underlies many of the physiologi-
cal mechanisms of adaptation with resistance training (19).
The changes in the resting concentrations of IGF-1, testos-
terone, and cortisol over the 9-month period reflected a
variety of external stimuli including the influences of resis-
tance training, tennis practice, and tennis competition that
influenced the body’s environment. Some of these hormonal
changes, in particular the increases in IGF-1 and small
increases in testosterone concentrations during resistance
training, may have helped to mediate observed adaptations
in muscular performances and fat-free mass during both the
P and NV training programs. In view of the proposed role(s)
of these hormones in the hypertrophy of skeletal muscle
(1,18), our data support an influence of resistance training
and concomitant tennis conditioning on women’s resting
hormonal concentrations over 9 months. The changes in
resting IGF-1 concentrations also increased over the final 3
months in all groups (including the C group) showing that
the stresses of training and/or a competitive season can
influence hormonal mechanisms at the level of the circula-
tion. These findings for IGF-1 are similar to the results
recently reported by Koziris et al. (17), who also demon-
strated that total and free resting IGF-1 concentrations, as
well as IGF binding protein-3, were significantly enhanced
with strenuous swim training over 6 months in women and
men. Thus, strenuous training associated with collegiate
tennis conditioning, especially the competitive season, ap-
pears to influence the neuroendocrine system sufficiently to
require adaptive changes. Such changes in IGF-1 physiol-
ogy may also occur locally to help mediate the changing
needs of the muscle fibers and bone during strenuous train-
ing and sport competition (1,17,18).
The influence of the stress of tennis play and practice on
the endocrine system was also evident in the cortisol results
because increases occurred in all groups over the 9 months.
Resting serum concentrations of cortisol in women have
shown no difference after 16 wk of power training (14) and
have shown decreases after 8 wk of high-volume resistance
training (22). We had hypothesized a reduction in cortisol
following resistance training in both groups, but it appears
that tennis practice and competition have a greater influence
TABLE 7. Serum hormonal concentrations.
Baseline
Months of Resistance Training
469
IGF-1 (nmol䡠L
⫺1
)
P16⫾ 1.9 21 ⫾ 4.0 24 ⫾ 3.0*⫹ 27 ⫾ 5.0*⫹
NV 18 ⫾ 1.9 19 ⫾ 6.0 22 ⫾ 4.0* 25 ⫾ 4.0*
C17⫾ 2.0 18 ⫾ 3.0 19 ⫾ 4.0 23 ⫾ 5.0*
Test (nmol䡠L
⫺1
)
P 1.1 ⫾ 0.7 1.3 ⫾ 0.4 1.0 ⫾ 0.7 1.9 ⫾ 0.3*⫹
NV 0.9 ⫾ 0.7 1.0 ⫾ 0.6 0.9 ⫾ 0.7 1.7 ⫾ 0.3*⫹
C 0.9 ⫾ 0.3 1.0 ⫾ 0.3 1.0 ⫾ 0.9 1.2 ⫾ 0.8
SHBG (nmol䡠L
⫺1
)
P 75.8 ⫾ 47.3 81.5 ⫾ 47.8 80.5 ⫾ 39.4 76.0 ⫾ 36.5
NV 60.0 ⫾ 39.0 61.0 ⫾ 39.0 62.0 ⫾ 39.0 65.0 ⫾ 34.0
C 62.0 ⫾ 32.4 62.8 ⫾ 37.2 74.5 ⫾ 58.7 70.5 ⫾ 38.7
Cortisol (nmol䡠L
⫺1
)
P 320 ⫾ 95 559 ⫾ 151*¥ 516 ⫾ 290*⫹ 621 ⫾ 247*¥
NV 322 ⫾ 112 446 ⫾ 154* 524 ⫾ 173*⫹ 521 ⫾ 93*⫹
C 234 ⫾ 48 434 ⫾ 223* 358 ⫾ 126* 405 ⫾ 121*
Values are mean ⫾ SD; *P ⱕ0.05 vs corresponding baseline value; †P ⱕ0.05 vs
corresponding C value; ¥P ⱕ0.05 vs corresponding NV and C values.
166
Official Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine http://www.acsm-msse.org
on cortisol production than what can be off-set by a resis-
tance-training program alone. The P group had a greater
cortisol response that may have reflected a higher overall
stress with the greater exposure to heavier lifting. The tro-
phic influence of SHBG remained relatively stable yet the
adrenal cortex appeared more sensitive in the P group after
the first 3 months. Nevertheless, it remains unclear how the
interaction of cortisol at the level of the receptor is affected
by training. It may be that a reduction in the binding sites
might be observed in the resistance training groups, which
would mitigate any negative effects (e.g., protein degrada-
tion, immune suppression) of the higher cortisol concentra-
tions being produced after the first 3 months of training,
practice, and initial competitions. Thus, future study at the
receptor level of cells remains important to improve our
understanding of circulatory endocrine changes. These data
do show that over a long-term resistance-training program
and/or rigorous collegiate tennis training/competition pro-
gram, hormonal adaptations become observable at the level
of the circulation.
In summary, this investigation examined the additive
effects of periodized resistance training on performance and
hormonal adaptations in women tennis players. The results
demonstrated that there are distinct differences between
periodized and nonperiodized training programs. These dif-
ferences are evident in both the rate of the observed adap-
tations as well as in the magnitude of changes. It appears
that the use of a heavier resistance-training session rotated
into a training sequence of different intensities may be
essential for optimizing muscular force, endocrine, and per-
formance adaptations. Although further work is obviously
needed in this area of study (11), this is the first long-term
study that has demonstrated that one style of periodization
of resistance training can elicit significantly greater in-
creases in lower- and upper-body 1-RM strength and motor
performances in women tennis players. This gives important
support to the hypothesis that periodization (variation in
training) may be essential for optimization of resistance-
training programs in women.
We would like to thank our dedicated subjects and a large group
of research assistants. This study was supported in part by a grant
from the United States Tennis Association, Key Biscayne, FL (USTA
Grant to WJK). In addition, we would like to thank all of the labora-
tory staff and trainers who helped with the testing and training of
these subjects, Jeff Connors for his help in the strength training
programs and the various tennis coaches and athletes, including
Coach Sue Whiteside, for their support.
Current addresses: Jeffrey A. Bauer, State University of New York
College at Cortland, Cortland, NY, L. Perry Koziris, Department of
Kinesiology, University of North Texas, Denton, TX. Andrew C. Fry,
Ph.D., University of Memphis, Travis Triplett-McBride, Ph.D., De-
partment of Exercise Science, University of Wisconsin-LaCrosse,
LaCrosse, WI, J. Michael Lynch, Quincy University, Quincy, IL, and
Howard G. Knuttgen, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
REFERENCES
1. ADAMS, G. R., and F. HADDAD. The relationships among IGF-1,
DNA content, and protein accumulation during skeletal muscle
hypertrophy. J. Appl. Physiol. 81:2509–2516, 1996.
2. A
NDERSON, T., and J. T. KEARNEY. Effects of three resistance
training programs on muscular strength and absolute and relative
endurance. Res. Q. Exerc. Sport 53:1–7, 1992.
3. B
AKER, D., G. W. WILSON, and R. CARLYON. Periodization: the
effect on strength of manipulating volume and intensity.
J. Strength Cond. Res. 8:235–242, 1994.
4. B
ROWN, C. H., and J. H. WILMORE. The effects of maximal resis-
tance training on the strength and body composition of women
athletes. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 6:174–177, 1974.
5. C
ALDER, A. W., P. D. CHILIBECK,C.E.WEBBER, and D. G. SALE.
Comparison of whole and split weight training routines in young
women. Can. J. Appl. Physiol. 19:185–199, 1994.
6. C
HILIBECK, P. D., A. W. CALDER,D.G.SALE, and C. E. WEBBER.A
comparison of strength and muscle mass increases during resis-
tance training in young women. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 77:170–
175, 1997.
7. C
OSTILL, D. L., and E. L. FOX. Energetics of marathon running.
Med. Sci. Sports 1:81–86, 1969.
8. C
ULLINEN, K., and M. CALDWELL. Weight training increases fat-free
mass and strength in untrained young women. J. Am. Diet. Assoc.
98:414–418, 1998.
9. D
ELORME, T. L. Restoration of muscle power by heavy resistance
exercise. J. Bone Joint Surg. 27:645–667, 1945.
10. D
UDLEY, G. A., P. A. TESCH,B.J.MILLER, and P. BUCHANAN.
Importance of eccentric actions in performance adaptations to
resistance training. Aviat. Space Environ. Med. 62:543–550, 1991.
11. F
LECK, S. J. Periodized strength training: a critical review.
J. Strength Cond. Res. 13:82–89, 1999.
12. F
LECK, S. J., and W. J. KRAEMER. Designing Resistance Training
Programs, 2nd Ed. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1997, pp.
1–275.
13. Ha¨
KKINEN, K., M. ALEN, and P. V. KOMI. Changes in isometric
force and relaxation-time, electromyographic and muscle fibre
characteristics of human skeletal muscle during strength training
and detraining. Acta Physiol. Scand. 125:573–585, 1985.
14. HAKKINEN,K,A.PAKARINEN H. KYROLAINEN S. CHENG D. H. KIM,
and P. V. K
OMI. Neuromuscular adaptations and serum hormones
in females during prolonged power training. Int. J. Sports Med.
11:91–98, 1990.
15. J
ACKSON, A. S., M. L. POLLOCK, and A. WARD. Generalized equa-
tions for predicting body density in women. Med. Sci. Sports
Exerc. 12:175–182, 1980.
16. K
OZIRIS, L. P., and D. L. MONTGOMERY. Power output and peak
blood lactate concentration following intermittent and continuous
cycling tests of anaerobic capacity. Sports Med. Training Rehabil.
3:289–296, 1992.
17. KOZIRIS,L.P,R.C.HICKSON,R.T.CHATTERTON JR., et al. Serum
levels of total and free IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 are increased and
maintained in long-term training. J. Appl. Physiol. 86:1436–1442,
1999.
18. K
RAEMER, W. J., S. E. GORDON,S.J.FLECK, et al. Endogenous
anabolic hormonal and growth factor responses to heavy resis-
tance exercise in males and females. Int. J. Sports Med. 12:228–
235, 1991.
19. KRAEMER, W. J., S. J. FLECK,J.E.DZIADOS, et al. Changes in
hormonal concentrations after different heavy-resistance exercise
protocols in women. J. Appl. Physiol. 75:594–604, 1993.
20. K
RAEMER, W. J., N. T. TRIPLETT,A.C.FRY, et al. An in-depth
sports medicine profile of women college tennis players. J. Sport
Rehabil. 4:79–98, 1995.
21. K
RAEMER, W. J., J. F. PATTON,S.E.GORDON, et al. Compatibility
of high-intensity strength and endurance training on hormonal and
skeletal muscle adaptations. J. Appl. Physiol. 78:976–989, 1995.
22. K
RAEMER, W. J., R. S. STARON,D.KARAPONDO, et al. The effects of
short-term resistance training on endocrine function in men and
women. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 78:69–76, 1998.
23. K
YR
¨
OL
¨
AINEN, H., P. V. KOMI,K.Ha¨KKINEN, and D. H. KIM. Effects
of power-training with stretch-shortening cycle (SSC) exercises of
upper limbs in females. J. Strength Cond. Res. 12:248–252, 1998.
RESISTANCE TRAINING IN WOMEN TENNIS PLAYERS Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
姞
167
24. LAUBACH, L. L. Comparative muscular strength of men and wom-
en: a review of the literature. Aviat. Space Environ. Med. 47:534–
42, 1976.
25. M
ATVEYEV,L.Fundamentals of Sports Training. Moscow:
Progress Publishers, 1981, pp. 1–200.
26. M
AZZETTI, S. A., W. J. KRAEMER,J.S.VOLEK, et al. The influence
of direct supervision of resistance training on strength perfor-
mance. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 32:1175–1184, 2000.
27. P
OLIQUIN, C. Five ways to increase the effectiveness of your
strength training program. NSCA J. 10:34–39, 1988.
28. S
ALE, D. G. Neural adaptation to resistance training. Med. Sci.
Sports Exerc. 20(Suppl. 5):S135–S145, 1988.
29. S
CHMIDTBLEICHER, D. Muscular mechanics and neuromuscular con-
trol. In: Swimming Science, V International Series Sport Science,
B. E. Ungerechts, K. Wilke, and K. Reischle (Eds.). Champaign,
IL: Human Kinetics, 1988, pp. 131–148.
30. S
IRI, W. E. Body composition from fluid spaces and density:
analysis of methods. In: Techniques for Measuring Body Compo-
sition, J. Brozek and A. Henschel, (Eds.). Washington, DC: Na-
tional Academy of Sciences, 1961, pp. 223–244.
31. S
TARON, R. S., M. J. LEONARDI,D.L.KARAPONDO, et al. Strength and
skeletal muscle adaptations in heavy-resistance-trained women after
detraining and retraining. J. Appl. Physiol. 70:631–640, 1991.
32. S
TARON, R. S., D. L. KARAPONDO,W.J.KRAEMER, et al. Skeletal
muscle adaptations during early phase of heavy-resistance training
in men and women. J. Appl. Physiol. 76:1247–1255, 1994.
33. U
NITED STATES TENNIS ASSOCIATION. Complete Conditioning for
Tennis. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics 1998, pp. 1–216.
34. W
ILLOUGHBY, D. S. The effects of mesocycle-length weight train-
ing programs involving periodization and partially equated vol-
umes on upper and lower body strength. J. Strength Cond. Res.
7:2–8, 1993.
35. W
ILMORE, J. H. Alterations in strength, body composition and
anthropometric measurements consequent to a 10-week weight
training program. Med. Sci. Sports 6:133–138, 1974.
36. W
ILMORE, J. H., and D. L. COSTILL. Semiautomated systems ap-
proach to the assessment of oxygen uptake during exercise.
J. Appl. Physiol. 36:618–620, 1974.
37. W
ILSON, G. J., R. U. NEWTON,A.J.MURPHY, and B. J. HUMPHRIES.
The optimal training load for the development of dynamic athletic
performance. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 25:1279–1286, 1993.
168
Official Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine http://www.acsm-msse.org
