ArticlePDF Available

Abstract and Figures

This study aimed to compare mechanical, metabolic, and perceptual responses between two traditional (TR) and four cluster (CL) set configurations. In a counterbalanced randomized order, 11 men were tested with the following protocols in separate sessions (sets × repetitions [inter-repetition rest]): TR1: 3×10 [0-s]; TR2: 6×5 [0-s]; CL1: 3×10 [10-s]; CL2: 3×10 [15-s]; CL3: 3×10 [30-s]); CL4: 1×30 [15-s]). The exercise (full-squat), number of repetitions (30), inter-set rest (5 min), and resistance applied (10RM) was the same for all set configurations. Mechanical fatigue was quantified by measuring the mean propulsive velocity during each repetition, and the change in countermovement jump height observed after each set and after the whole training session. Metabolic and perceptual fatigue were assessed via the blood lactate concentration and the OMNI perceived exertion scale measured after each training set, respectively. The mechanical, metabolic, and perceptual measures of fatigue were always significantly higher for the TR1 set configuration. The two set configurations that most minimized the mechanical measures of fatigue were CL2 and CL3. Perceived fatigue did not differ between the TR2, CL1, CL2 and CL3 set configurations. The lowest lactate concentration was observed in the CL3 set configuration. Therefore, both the CL2 and CL3 set configurations can be recommended because they maximize mechanical performance. However, the CL2 set configuration presents two main advantages with respect to CL3: (1) it reduces training session duration, and (2) it promotes higher metabolic stress, which to some extent may be beneficial for inducing muscle strength and hypertrophy gains.
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
... For example, when muscular strength and power development are prioritized and fatigue needs to be minimized, traditional Future research is warranted investigating the chronic effects of altering set configuration in clinical populations in which fatigue and high exertions during resistance training are contraindicated. recommended due to the large amount of fatigue that is developed [17], greater time-under-tension [16], metabolite accumulation [18] and greater muscle activation in later phases of the set compared to cluster set configurations [19]. However, while several studies show support for the superiority of traditional compared to cluster set configurations for the development of muscular strength [8,9,[20][21][22], others do not [23][24][25] or show no difference [26][27][28]. ...
... In addition, during specific phases of RT, movement velocity and power output are a primary focus. Greater movement velocity during repetitions and thus, a greater power output, have been demonstrated with cluster sets when fatigue is minimized [13,[16][17][18]29]. Greater velocity during training sessions is hypothesized to provide a specific training stimulus for the development of power output and movement velocity and thus, result in positive adaptations in these variables [13,17,18]. ...
... Greater movement velocity during repetitions and thus, a greater power output, have been demonstrated with cluster sets when fatigue is minimized [13,[16][17][18]29]. Greater velocity during training sessions is hypothesized to provide a specific training stimulus for the development of power output and movement velocity and thus, result in positive adaptations in these variables [13,17,18]. However, similar to muscular strength and hypertrophy, supporting longitudinal evidence for the development of movement velocity and power output across a training block utilizing cluster sets is, at this stage, unclear [20,24,[26][27][28]30]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background The acute responses to cluster set resistance training (RT) have been demonstrated. However, as compared to traditional sets, the effect of cluster sets on muscular and neuromuscular adaptations remains unclear.Objective To compare the effects of RT programs implementing cluster and traditional set configurations on muscular and neuromuscular adaptations.Methods Systematic searches of Embase, Scopus, Medline and SPORTDiscus were conducted. Inclusion criteria were: (1) randomized or non-randomized comparative studies; (2) publication in English; (3) participants of all age groups; (4) participants free of any medical condition or injury; (5) cluster set intervention; (6) comparison intervention utilizing a traditional set configuration; (7) intervention length ≥ three weeks and (8) at least one measure of changes in strength/force/torque, power, velocity, hypertrophy or muscular endurance. Raw data (mean ± SD or range) were extracted from included studies. Hedges’ g effect sizes (ES) ± standard error of the mean (SEM) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated.ResultsTwenty-nine studies were included in the meta-analysis. No differences between cluster and traditional set configurations were found for strength (ES = − 0.05 ± 0.10, 95% CI − 0.21 to 0.11, p = 0.56), power output (ES = 0.02 ± 0.10, 95% CI − 0.17 to 0.20, p = 0.86), velocity (ES = 0.15 ± 0.13, 95% CI − 0.10 to 0.41, p = 0.24), hypertrophy (ES = − 0.05 ± 0.14, 95% CI − 0.32 to 0.23, p = 0.73) or endurance (ES = − 0.07 ± 0.18, 95% CI − 0.43 to 0.29, p = 0.70) adaptations. Moreover, no differences were observed when training volume, cluster set model, training status, body parts trained or exercise type were considered.Conclusion Collectively, both cluster and traditional set configurations demonstrate equal effectiveness to positively induce muscular and neuromuscular adaptation(s). However, cluster set configurations may achieve such adaptations with less fatigue development during RT which may be an important consideration across various exercise settings and stages of periodized RT programs.
... If we analyze scientific studies in which the responses of different set configurations on the strength exercise velocities were observed [25][26][27], we will often see the adoption of a variable pace. In cyclical modalities, the variable pace strategy is one in which we observe fluctuations in velocity throughout the exercise [1] (gradual velocity loss, followed by an increase in a constant cycle). ...
... In other words, trying to program rests leads to a greater chance of error in achieving a better performance than not programming rests, in which the athlete tries to complete the task in less time by self-regulating efforts. However, González-Hernádez et al. [27] found a set configuration that allowed a shorter total time to perform a strength training session. They compared the performance of three traditional sets of 10 maximum repetitions with 5 min inter-sets in the full squat with other set configurations that included intra-set rests, with the same task volume (30 total repetitions) and intensity. ...
... However, it may be that this phenomenon does not occur in the movements of acyclical modalities, especially if traditional sets are adopted, as it can lead to a high applied force loss, not providing the proper recovery to increase velocity, as can be seen in the studies cited previously [25][26][27]. Furthermore, the deliberate decrease in velocity in the early stages of the WOD during the negative pacing strategy assumes a more extended time under tension. ...
Article
Full-text available
Empirically, it is widely discussed in "Cross" modalities that the pacing strategy developed by an athlete or trainee has a significant impact on the endurance performance in a WOD in the AMRAP, EMOM, or FOR TIME model. We can observe at least six pacing strategies adopted during the cyclical modalities in the endurance performance in the scientific literature. However, besides these modalities, exercises of acyclical modalities of weightlifting and gymnastics are performed in the "Cross" modalities. These exercises may not allow the same pacing strategies adopted during cyclic modalities' movements due to their motor characteristics and different intensity and level of effort imposed to perform the motor gesture. In addition to the intensity and level of effort that are generally unknown to the coach and athlete of the "Cross" modalities, another factor that can influence the adoption of a pacing strategy during a WOD in the AMRAP, EMOM, or FOR TIME model is the task endpoint knowledge, which varies according to the training model used. Thus, our objective was to evaluate situations in which these factors can influence the pacing strategies adopted in a self-regulated task with cyclic and acyclic modalities movements during an endurance workout in the AMRAP, EMOM, and FOR TIME model. Given the scarcity of studies in the scientific literature and the increasing discussion of this topic within the "Cross" modalities, this manuscript can help scientists and coaches better orient their research problems or training programs and analyze and interpret new findings more accurately.
... Previously, researchers have shown that a CS acutely attenuates fatigue development and allows the maintenance of mechanical performance (24,39) along with creating lower metabolic and hormonal stress (7,11,26,29,30,41,43) compared with TRD configurations. However, most studies comparing mechanical performance between CS and TRD structures have used only one type of instrumentation or used solely kinetic or kinematic data (6,7,11,15,26,28,41,43), which may result in bias in the calculation of variables, especially power output (4). ...
... Previously, researchers have shown that a CS acutely attenuates fatigue development and allows the maintenance of mechanical performance (24,39) along with creating lower metabolic and hormonal stress (7,11,26,29,30,41,43) compared with TRD configurations. However, most studies comparing mechanical performance between CS and TRD structures have used only one type of instrumentation or used solely kinetic or kinematic data (6,7,11,15,26,28,41,43), which may result in bias in the calculation of variables, especially power output (4). To date, only a few studies examining the effects of CS configuration have combined both kinetic and kinematic data (16,29,30,40), which seems to be superior when measuring force, velocity, and power (4). ...
... The CS2 protocol kept the force, velocity, and power values constant during the 3 sets. These findings are consistent across a variety of resistance exercises, including back squat (11,26,40,41), power clean (14,16), unloaded (28) and loaded jumps (1,15), and BP (1,7,8,25). By contrast, another study reported no differences in mean force during the BP exercise with 6RM load, comparing TRD and CS structures (6). ...
Article
The aim of this study was to compare the effects of different cluster set (CS) configurations on mechanical performance and electromyography (EMG) activity during the bench press (BP) exercise. Fourteen strength-trained men (age 23.062.4 years; height 1.7660.08 m; body mass 78.3612.2 kg) performed 3 different protocols in the BP exercise consisting of 3 sets of 12 repetitions at 60% of 1 repetition maximum with interset rests of 2 minutes, differing in the set configuration: (a) traditional sets (TRDs), (b) cluster sets of 4 repetitions (CS4), and (c) cluster sets of 2 repetitions (CS2). Intraset rests of 30 seconds were interposed for CS protocols. The mean propulsive values of force, velocity, and power output were measured for every repetition by synchronizing a linear velocity transducer with a force platform. The root mean square (RMS) and median frequency (MDF) for pectoralis major (PM) and triceps brachii (TB) muscles were also recorded for every repetition. Force, velocity, and power values progressively increased as the number of intraset rests increased (TRD,CS4,CS2). The CS2 protocol exhibited lower RMS-PM than CS4 and TRD for almost all sets. In addition, TRDs showed significantly lower MDF-TB than CS2 for all sets and lower MDF-TB than CS4 during the third set. In conclusion, more frequent intraset rests were beneficial for maintaining mechanical performance, which may be mediated, from a neuromuscular perspective, by lesser increases in EMG amplitude and attenuated reductions in EMG frequency.
... However, the incorporation of a CS protocol may be the key to overcoming this issue without the need to reach muscular failure and significantly increasing training volume. Furthermore, the effects of different traditional sets and CS protocols on lactate concentration and velocity loss have been reported in the set as markers of metabolic stress and performance, respectively [16]. These results have shown that 5RM produced a similar velocity loss compared with CS but with an increased blood lactate concentration. ...
... Our results indicated an increase in fat-free mass evaluated by DXA in all protocols, although the group that worked 3 RM with 20 s of rest obtained better results. In the same line, Gonzalez-Hernández et al. [16] showed that intra-set resting periods in between 15-30 s might be better from a hypertrophy point of view, given that a similar mechanical output could be obtained compared with more extended resting periods but with more emphasis on metabolic stress that could enhance the muscle growth stimuli. Additionally, we report that the application of creatine monohydrate in 3 RM protocols with 20 pauses would notably increase the fat-free mass and strength levels evaluated by MR [21]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Cluster-set resistance training is focused on performance improvements of sports by increasing the repetition maximum, jump height, and efficiency in the sprint. In this commentary, we present relevant aspects to optimize the use of cluster training under the context of muscle hypertrophy. Therefore, we address intra-sets pauses, the number of repetitions per block, and strategies that benefit this methodology. During a cluster set resistance training program, not only the total number of repetitions could be higher, which means a superior total volume, but also a higher mechanical output might lead to potential benefits to muscle hypertrophy.
... Shorter set configurations that include rest periods between clusters of repetitions are an effective strategy to attenuate fatigue and maintain mechanical performance (i.e., force production, movement velocity, and, as a consequence, power output) during RT sessions (36). In addition, higher blood lactate (7,8,24) and ammonia (26) concentrations, hormonal response (growth hormone and cortisol) (26,27,37), and muscle damage indicators (i.e., creatine kinase) (26) have been observed after longer set configurations. ...
... In line with the fatigue levels observed during the training session, greater reductions in CMJ height were observed after the longer set configuration. Previous studies have also shown smaller CMJ height losses after training sessions with intraset rest periods compared with traditional structures (8,24). However, the exercise-induced fatigue on isometric strength (i.e., MIF and RFDmax) and several TMG-derived parameters (i.e., Dm, Tc, and Td) was similar for both set configurations. ...
... Additionally, if cluster sets are implemented with higher training loads, a moderate to high repetition training set (i.e., eight to twelve repetitions), shorter rest intervals between individual repetitions (e.g., 5-10 seconds), or clusters (e.g., 15-30 seconds) may be a viable option to be chosen. When this is done, the provided recovery will facilitate the maintenance of performance, allow for the use of higher training loads (47,118), and still provide some degree of fatigue that may provide a stimulus that facilitates hypertrophy (25,28,118) (Figure. 2). ...
Article
Altering set configurations during a resistance training program can provide a novel training variation that can be used to modify the external and internal training loads that induce specific training outcomes. To design training programs that better target the defined goal(s) of a specific training phase, strength and conditioning professionals need to better understand how different set configurations impact the training adaptations that result from resistance training. Traditional and cluster set structures are commonly implemented by strength and conditioning. The purpose of this review is to offer examples of the practical implementation of traditional and cluster sets that can be integrated into a periodized resistance training program.
... Resistance training (RT) has been practiced by millions of people such as athletes and individuals interested in fitness, who seek increased health statuses, such as improving body composition, lipid profiles, and athletic performance via improvements in strength and muscle power (Nunez et al., 2019;Gonzalez-Hernandez et al., 2020). ...
Article
Full-text available
Purpose: This study aimed to compare the oxygen consumption, lactate concentrations, and energy expenditure using three different intensities during the resistance training sessions. Methods: A total of 15 men (22.9 ± 2.61 years) experienced in resistance training underwent 3 sessions composed of 8 exercises (chest press, pec deck, squat, lat pull-down, biceps curl, triceps extension, hamstring curl, and crunch machine), which were applied in the same order. The weight lifted differed among the sessions [high session: 6 sets of 5 repetitions at 90% of 1-repetition maximum (1-RM); intermediary session: 3 sets of 10 repetitions at 75% of 1-RM; and low session: 2 sets of 15 repetitions at 60% of 1-RM]. The oxygen consumption (VO 2 )—during and after (excess post-exercise oxygen consumption (EPOC)) the session, blood lactate concentration, and energy expenditure (i.e., the sum of aerobic and anaerobic contributions, respectively) were assessed. Results: The VO2 significantly decreased in the function of the weight lifting ( F (2.28) = 17.02; p < 0.01; η G 2 = 0.32). However, the aerobic contributions significantly increase in the function of the weight lifting ( F (2.28) = 79.18; p < 0.01; η G 2 = 0.75). The anaerobic contributions were not different among the sessions ( p > 0.05; η G 2 < 0.01). Thus, the total energy expenditure during the session (kcal) significantly increased in the function of the weight lifting ( F (2.28) = 86.68; p < 0.01; η G 2 = 0.75). The energy expenditure expressed in time unit (kcal·min ⁻¹ ) was higher in low session than in high session ( F (2.28) = 6.20; p < 0.01; η G 2 = 0.15). Conclusion: The weight lifted during resistance training-induced different physiological responses, which induced higher energy expenditure per unit of time during the low session.
... In contrast to traditional-set structures, cluster-set structures reduce the fatigue experienced during sets by including intraset rest periods in addition to traditional interset rest periods (14,53,54). More specifically, cluster-set structures facilitate greater maintenance of velocity and power output (54) while reducing metabolic stress (39) and consequently, reduced neuromuscular fatigue for a given training volume (46). ...
Article
Davies, TB, Halaki, M, Orr, R, Mitchell, L, Helms, ER, Clarke, J, and Hackett, DA. Effect of set structure on upper-body muscular hypertrophy and performance in recreationally trained men and women. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2021-This study explored the effect of volume-equated traditional-set and cluster-set structures on muscular hypertrophy and performance after high-load resistance training manipulating the bench press exercise. Twenty-one recreationally trained subjects (12 men and 9 women) performed a 3-week familiarization phase and were then randomized into one of two 8-week upper-body and lower-body split programs occurring over 3 and then progressing to 4 sessions per week. Subjects performed 4 sets of 5 repetitions at 85% one repetition maximum (1RM) using a traditional-set structure (TRAD, n = 10), which involved 5 minutes of interset rest only, or a cluster-set structure, which included 30-second inter-repetition rest and 3 minutes of interset rest (CLUS, n = 11). A 1RM bench press, repetitions to failure at 70% 1RM, regional muscle thickness, and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry were used to estimate changes in muscular strength, local muscular endurance, regional muscular hypertrophy, and body composition, respectively. Velocity loss was assessed using a linear position transducer at the intervention midpoint. TRAD demonstrated a significantly greater velocity loss magnitude (g = 1.50) and muscle thickness of the proximal pectoralis major (g = -0.34) compared with CLUS. There were no significant differences between groups for the remaining outcomes, although a small effect size favoring TRAD was observed for the middle region of the pectoralis major (g = -0.25). It seems that the greater velocity losses during sets observed in traditional-set compared with cluster-set structures may promote superior muscular hypertrophy within specific regions of the pectoralis major in recreationally trained subjects.
Article
Full-text available
Strength and conditioning specialists commonly deal with the quantification and selection the setting of protocols regarding resistance training intensities. Although the one repetition maximum (1RM) method has been widely used to prescribe exercise intensity, the velocity-based training (VBT) method may enable a more optimal tool for better monitoring and planning of resistance training (RT) programs. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of two RT programs only differing in the training load prescription strategy (adjusting or not daily via VBT) with loads from 50 to 80% 1RM on 1RM, countermovement (CMJ) and sprint. Twenty-four male students with previous experience in RT were randomly assigned to two groups: adjusted loads (AL) ( n = 13) and non-adjusted loads (NAL) ( n = 11) and carried out an 8-week (16 sessions) RT program. The performance assessment pre- and post-training program included estimated 1RM and full load-velocity profile in the squat exercise; countermovement jump (CMJ); and 20-m sprint (T20). Relative intensity (RI) and mean propulsive velocity attained during each training session (V session ) was monitored. Subjects in the NAL group trained at a significantly faster V session than those in AL ( p < 0.001) (0.88–0.91 vs. 0.67–0.68 m/s, with a ∼15% RM gap between groups for the last sessions), and did not achieve the maximum programmed intensity (80% RM). Significant differences were detected in sessions 3–4, showing differences between programmed and performed V session and lower RI and velocity loss (VL) for the NAL compared to the AL group ( p < 0.05). Although both groups improved 1RM, CMJ and T20, NAL experienced greater and significant changes than AL (28.90 vs.12.70%, 16.10 vs. 7.90% and −1.99 vs. −0.95%, respectively). Load adjustment based on movement velocity is a useful way to control for highly individualised responses to training and improve the implementation of RT programs.
Article
Full-text available
Background Resistance training has been used to enhance a range of athletic abilities through correct manipulation of several variables such as training load, training volume, set configuration, and rest period. Objective The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the acute and chronic responses of lower body cluster, contrast, complex, and traditional training across a range of athletic performance outcomes (1-repetition maximum squat strength, jump height, peak power, peak force, peak velocity, and sprint time). Methods A database search was completed (SPORTDiscus, Medline and CINAHL) followed by a quality scoring system, which concluded with 41 studies being used in the meta-analysis. Effect sizes were calculated for acute and training intervention changes compared to baseline. For acute cluster training, effect sizes were used to represent differences between equated traditional and cluster sets. Results Acutely, contrast and cluster training can be implemented to enhance and maintain velocity. Complex training does not acutely show a performance-enhancing effect on jump performance. Conclusion When looking to develop exercise-specific force, the exercise should be completed closer to set failure with fewer repetitions still able to be completed, which can be achieved using complex or high-volume contrast training to pre-fatigue the lighter exercise. When the objective is to improve velocity for the target exercise, it can be combined with a heavier contrast pair to create a postactivation performance enhancing effect. Alternatively, cluster set designs can be used to maintain high velocities and reduce drop-off. Finally, traditional training is most effective for increasing squat 1-repetition maximum.
Article
Full-text available
BACKGROUND: Cluster training is being increasingly used to develop muscular power. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of short inter-repetition rest (IRR) periods on the capacity to maintain maximal levels of power output. METHODS: In a first session, 16 active-duty soldiers performed a progressive loading test to establish the load linked to maximal power (optimal load, OL), and the half squat 1-repetition maximum. In Session 2, six individual sets of repetitions performed to failure (or a maximum of 20 repetitions) were conducted using the loads OL, low (LL, 15% below OL), and high (HL, 15% above OL) as quickly as possible. For each load, participants performed one set without rest between repetitions (CR, continuous repetition protocol), and another set with 6 s of rest between repetitions (IRR protocol). RESULTS: The number of repetitions participants performed before exceeding a power loss threshold of 15% were higher in the IRR versus the CR protocol by 218% (11 vs. 35), 86% (7 vs. 13), and 175% (4 vs. 11) for LL, OL, and HL, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A 6 s interval between repetitions is sufficient to induce partial recovery in participants, and could therefore improve muscle power output.
Article
Full-text available
This study investigated the effect of introducing different interrepetition rest (IRR) periods on the ability to sustain maximum bench press throw velocity with a range of loads commonly used to develop upper-body power. Thirty-four physically active collegiate men (age: 21.5 ± 2.8 years; body mass: 75.2 ± 7.2 kg; height: 176.9 ± 4.9 cm) were tested during 2 consecutive weeks. During the first week, the maximum dynamic strength (repetition maximum [RM]) in bench press exercise was determined (RM = 76.7 ± 13.2 kg). The following week, 3 testing sessions were conducted with 48 hours apart in random order. In each day of evaluation, only 1 load (30%RM, 40%RM, or 50%RM) was assessed in the bench press throw exercise. With each load, subjects performed 3 single sets of 15 repetitions (15-minute interset rest) with 3 different sets configurations: continuous repetitions (CR), 6 seconds of IRR (IRR6), and 12 seconds of IRR (IRR12). The decrease of peak velocity (PV) was significantly lower for IRR12 compared with CR and IRR6 at least since the repetition 4. No differences between CR and IRR6 protocols were found until the repetition 7 at 30%RM and 40%RM and until the repetition 5 at 50%RM. The decrease of PV during the CR protocol was virtually linear for the 3 loads analyzed (r2 > 0.99); however, this linear relationship became weaker for IRR6 (r2 = 0.79–0.95) and IRR12 (r2 = 0.35–0.87). These results demonstrate that IRR periods allow increasing the number of repetitions before the onset of significant velocity losses.
Article
Full-text available
Abstract The purpose of this study was to compare the effect on strength gains of two isoinertial resistance training (RT) programmes that only differed in actual concentric velocity: maximal (MaxV) vs. half-maximal (HalfV) velocity. Twenty participants were assigned to a MaxV (n = 9) or HalfV (n = 11) group and trained 3 times per week during 6 weeks using the bench press (BP). Repetition velocity was controlled using a linear velocity transducer. A complementary study (n = 10) aimed to analyse whether the acute metabolic (blood lactate and ammonia) and mechanical response (velocity loss) was different between the MaxV and HalfV protocols used. Both groups improved strength performance from pre- to post-training, but MaxV resulted in significantly greater gains than HalfV in all variables analysed: one-repetition maximum (1RM) strength (18.2 vs. 9.7%), velocity developed against all (20.8 vs. 10.0%), light (11.5 vs. 4.5%) and heavy (36.2 vs. 17.3%) loads common to pre- and post-tests. Light and heavy loads were identified with those moved faster or slower than 0.80 m·s(-1) (∼60% 1RM in BP). Lactate tended to be significantly higher for MaxV vs. HalfV, with no differences observed for ammonia which was within resting values. Both groups obtained the greatest improvements at the training velocities (≤0.80 m·s(-1)). Movement velocity can be considered a fundamental component of RT intensity, since, for a given %1RM, the velocity at which loads are lifted largely determines the resulting training effect. BP strength gains can be maximised when repetitions are performed at maximal intended velocity.
Article
Full-text available
Abstract Limited research exists on rest-pause or cluster-set (CS) protocols. Acute effects of a traditional set (TS) and CS protocols of resistance exercise on serum growth hormone (GH), cortisol (C), blood lactate (BL), countermovement vertical jump (CMVJ) and standing long jump (SLJ) were compared. Eleven resistance-trained males (22.9±2.6 year; 176.9±10.6 cm; 78.5±1.6 kg; 12.9±3.1% BF) completed one repetition maximum tests for clean pull (CP), back squat (BS) and bench press (BP). Subjects were then randomly assigned to TS or CS protocols for sessions 2 and 3, and performed CP and BS lifts followed by two circuits of three sets of three exercises. GH, C, BL, CMVJ and SLJ were measured pre-exercise (Pre), mid-exercise following completion of CS or TS protocol (Mid), immediately (IP), 15 (15P) and 30 (30P) minutes post-exercise. Repeated measures ANOVAs examined differences in GH, C, BL, CMVJ and SLJ. No differences (p>0.05) existed between protocols for GH and C. GH levels 15P were elevated (p<0.05) above 30P (15.78 + 4.66 vs. 12.10 + 4.66 µg(.)L(-1)). C levels 30P were elevated (p<0.05) above Pre (716.85 + 102.56 vs. 524.79 + 75.79 nmol(.)L(-1)). Interaction (p <0.05) existed between protocol and time for BL; mid-BL was lower for CS than TS (7.69±3.73 vs. 12.78±1.90 mmol(.)L(-1)). Pooled data for CMVJ and SLJ were greater (p <0.05) across the CS protocol. The less metabolically taxing CS protocol resulted in better sustainability of jump measures.
Article
Full-text available
The purpose of this study was to analyze the performance during the execution of a maximum number (MNR) of repetitions in a cluster set configuration. Nine judokas performed two sessions of parallel squats with a load corresponding to a 4RM with a Traditional Training (TT) and Cluster Training (CT) set configuration. The TT consisted of three sets of repetitions leading to failure and three minutes of rest between sets. In the CT the maximum number of repetitions was performed with a rest interval between each repetition (45.44 ± 11.89 s). The work-to-rest ratio was similar for CT and TT. MNR in CT was 45.5 ± 32 repetitions and was 9.33 ± 1.87 times the volume in TT. There was a tendency for the average mean propulsive velocity (MPV) to be higher in CT (0.39 ± 0.04 m.s-1 vs. 0.36 ± 0.04 m.s-1 for CT and TT respectively; p= 0.054; standardized mean difference (d)= 0.57). The average MPV was higher in CT for a similar number of repetitions (0.44 ± 0.08 m.s-1 vs. 0.36 ± 0.04 m.s-1 for CT and TT respectively; p= 0.006; d= 1.33). The number of repetitions in TT was correlated with absolute 4RM load (r= -0.719; p= 0.031) but not in CT (r= -0.273; p= 0.477). A cluster set configuration allows for a higher number of repetitions and an improved sustainability of mechanical performance. CT, unlike TT, was not affected by absolute load, suggesting an improvement of training volume with high absolute loads.
Article
Full-text available
The Importance of Movement Velocity as a Measure to Control Resistance Training Intensity Configuration of the exercise stimulus in resitance training has been traditionally associated with a combination of the so-called ‘acute resistance exercise variables’ (exercise type and order, loading, number of repetitions and sets, rests duration and movement velocity). During typical resistance exercise in isoinertial conditions, and assuming every repetition is performed with maximal voluntary effort, velocity unintentionally declines as fatigue develops. However, few studies analyzing the response to different resitance training schemes have described changes in repetition velocity or power. It thus seems necessary to conduct more research using models of fatigue that analyze the reduction in mechanical variables such as force, velocity and power output over repeated dynamic contractions in actual training or competition settings. Thus, the aim of this paper was to discuss the importance of movement velocity concerning control training intensity.
Article
Full-text available
The aim of this study was to evaluate the acute effect of a half squat exercise performed with different set configurations on jump potentiation. Twelve resistance-trained men were evaluated on three occasions separated by 48-96 hrs. First, they performed a 5 repetitions maximum test (5RM). Subsequently, they performed in a randomized order two sessions: one session with 5RM until failure, and another session with the same workload but with 30 s rest intervals between repetitions (i.e. cluster set; CS). Countermovement jump performance was examined during the second and third sessions for jump height and force-time parameters using a force platform at the following time intervals: before and at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 min. Separate comparisons for each variable at the different time intervals were analyzed using ANOVA, effect size, and qualitative inferences. The majority of the parameters improved independently of the time they occur, except peak force and vertical stiffness after a set until failure. For peak power, it appears the cluster treatment resulted in superior potentiation at 1 min whereas the 5RM treatment resulted in greater potentiation at 9 min. Effect size analysis and qualitative outcomes revealed an improvement in vertical stiffness and a lowering in the depth of the countermovement in CS. There were significant correlations between participants' 5RM relative performance and various force-time parameters only in CS. It appears that a CS induces greater peak power than a 5RM set at 1 min, although the reverse occurs at 9 min. Delayed potentiation associated with the 5RM may be attributed to greater fatigue versus the CS approach. Therefore, it follows that the optimal method for inducing peak power potentiation is dependent on the available time between heavy half-squat exercise and subsequent jump performance.
Article
Full-text available
The effect of interrepetition rest (IRR) periods on power output during performance of multiple sets of power cleans is unknown. It is possible that IRR periods may attenuate the decrease in power output commonly observed within multiple sets. This may be of benefit for maximizing improvements in power with training. This investigation involved 10 college-aged men with proficiency in weightlifting. The subjects performed 3 sets of 6 repetitions of power cleans at 80% of their 1 repetition maximum with 0 (P0), 20 (P20), or 40 seconds (P40) of IRR. Each protocol (P0, P20, P40) was performed in a randomized order on different days each separated by at least 72 hours. The subjects performed the power cleans while standing on a force plate with 2 linear position transducers attached to the bar. Peak power, force, and velocity were obtained for each repetition and set. Peak power significantly decreased by 15.7% during P0 in comparison with a decrease of 5.5% (R1: 4,303 ± 567 W, R6: 4,055 ± 582 W) during P20 and a decrease of 3.3% (R1: 4,549 ± 659 W, R6: 4,363 ± 476 W) during P40. Peak force significantly decreased by 7.3% (R1: 2,861 ± 247 N, R6: 2,657 ± 225 N) during P0 in comparison with a decrease of 2.7% (R1: 2,811 ± 327 N, R6: 2,730 ± 285 N) during P20 and an increase of 0.4% (R1: 2,861 ± 323 N, R6: 2,862 ± 280 N) during P40. Peak velocity significantly decreased by 10.2% (R1: 1.97 ± 0.15 m·s(-1), R6: 1.79 ± 0.11 m·s(-1)) during P0 in comparison with a decrease of 3.8% (R1: 1.89 ± 0.13 m·s(-1), R6: 1.82 ± 0.12 m·s(-1)) during P20 and a decrease of 1.7% (R1: 1.93 ± 0.17 m·s(-1), R6: 1.89 ± 0.14 m·s(-1)) during P40. The results demonstrate that IRR periods allow for the maintenance of power in the power clean during a multiple set exercise protocol and that this may have implications for improved training adaptations.
Article
This study aimed to analyze: 1) the pattern of repetition velocity decline during a single set to failure against different submaximal loads (50-85% 1RM) in the bench press exercise; and 2) the reliability of the percentage of performed repetitions, with respect to the maximum possible number that can be completed, when different magnitudes of velocity loss have been reached within each set. Twenty-two men performed 8 tests of maximum number of repetitions (MNR) against loads of 50-55-60-65-70-75-80-85% 1RM, in random order, every 6-7 days. Another 28 men performed 2 separate MNR tests against 60% 1RM. A very close relationship was found between the relative loss of velocity in a set and the percentage of performed repetitions. This relationship was very similar for all loads, but particularly for 50-70% 1RM, even though the number of repetitions completed at each load was significantly different. Moreover, the percentage of performed repetitions for a given velocity loss showed a high absolute reliability. Equations to predict the percentage of performed repetitions from relative velocity loss are provided. By monitoring repetition velocity and using these equations, one can estimate, with considerable precision, how many repetitions are left in reserve in a bench press exercise set.
Article
To examine whether blood lactate and ammonia concentrations can be used to estimate the functional state of the muscle contractile machinery with regard to muscle lactate and ATP levels during leg press exercise. Thirteen men (age 34 ± 5 yr, 1RM leg press strength 199 ± 33 kg) performed either 5 sets of 10 repetitions to failure (5x10RF), or 10 sets of 5 repetitions not to failure (10x5RNF) with the same initial load (10 RM) and inter-set rests (2 min) on two separate sessions in random order. Capillary blood samples were obtained before, and during exercise and recovery. Six subjects underwent vastus lateralis muscle biopsies at rest, before the first set and after the final exercise set. 5x10RF resulted in a significant and marked decrease in power output (37%), muscle ATP content (24%) and high levels of muscle (25.0 ± 8.1 mmol·kg wet wt) and blood lactate (10.3 ± 2.6 mmol·L) and blood ammonia (91.6 ± 40.5 µmol·L). During 10x5RNF no or minimal changes were observed. Significant correlations were found between: 1) blood ammonia and muscle ATP (r=-0.75), 2) changes in peak power output and blood ammonia (r=-0.87) and blood lactate (r=-0.84), and 3) blood and muscle lactate (r=0.90). Blood lactate and ammonia concentrations can be used as extracellular markers for muscle lactate and ATP contents, respectively. The decline in mechanical power output can be used to indirectly estimate blood ammonia and lactate during leg press exercise.