Dissimilar effects of one- and three-set strength training on strength and muscle mass gains in upper and lower body in untrained subjects

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of single- and multiple-set strength training on hypertrophy and strength gains in untrained men. Twenty-one young men were randomly assigned to either the 3L-1UB group (trained 3 sets in leg exercises and 1 set in upper-body exercises; n = 11), or the 1L-3UB (trained 1 set in leg exercises and 3 sets in upper-body exercises; n = 10). Subjects trained 3 days per week for 11 weeks and each workout consisted of 3 leg exercises and 5 upper-body exercises. Training intensity varied between 10 repetition maximum (RM) and 7RM. Strength (1RM) was tested in all leg and upper-body exercises and in 2 isokinetic tests before training, and after 3, 6, 9, and 11 weeks of training. Cross sectional area (CSA) of thigh muscles and the trapezius muscle and body composition measures were performed before training, and after 5 and 11 weeks of training. The increase in 1RM from week 0 to 11 in the lower-body exercises was significantly higher in the 3L-1UB group than in the 1L-3UB group (41 vs. 21%; p < 0.001), while no difference existed between groups in upper-body exercises. Peak torque in maximal isokinetic knee-extension and thigh CSA increased more in the 3L-1UB group than in the 1L-3UB group (16 vs. 8%; p = 0.03 and 11 vs. 7%; p = 0.01, respectively), while there was no significant difference between groups in upper trapezius muscle CSA. The results demonstrate that 3-set strength training is superior to 1-set strength training with regard to strength and muscle mass gains in the leg muscles, while no difference exists between 1- and 3-set training in upper-body muscles in untrained men.     

1-Set vs. 3-set resistance training: a crossover study

This crossover study was conducted to investigate the effects of a 1-set and 3-set strength training program. The subjects were untrained men and women who were randomly signed into 1 of 3 groups: 10 subjects trained during the first 9 weeks (training period 1) with 1 set and 8-12 repetitions per set. After the break (9 weeks), they trained with 3 sets and 8-12 repetitions in training period 2. Twelve subjects started with the 3-set program and continued with the 1-set regime after the break. The control group (n = 7) did not train. The subjects were tested on 1 repetition maximum (1RM) for the biceps curl, leg press (unilateral: left and right), and bench press. Analysis of the data was done in a sampled manner for each strength training program (1-set and 3-set). The 1-set (n = 22) and 3-set (n = 22) programs led to significantly (p < 0.05) improved 1RM performances in every exercise. The relative improvements (%) for the 1RM were significantly higher during the 3-set program for the biceps curl and the bench press compared with the 1-set program. The control group exhibited no changes in any of the tested parameters over the course of this study. The design of this study allowed insight into the effects of different strength training volume without any genetical variations. The same subjects improved their 1RM during the 3-set program by 2.3 kg (biceps curl; corresponding effect size = 0.24), 8.9 kg (leg press right; 0.30), 10.9 kg (leg press left; 0.28), and 2.5 kg (bench press; 0.09) more than during the 1-set program. Depending on the goals of each trainee, these differences between the effects of different strength training volumes indicate that it may be worth spending more time on working out with a 3-set strength training regime.     

The effects of accentuated eccentric loading on strength, muscle hypertrophy, and neural adaptations in trained individuals

The purpose of this study was to compare the strength and neuromuscular adaptations for dynamic constant external resistance (DCER) training and dynamic accentuated external resistance (DAER) training (resistance training employing an accentuated load during eccentric actions). Male subjects active in resistance training were assigned to either a DCER training group (n = 10) or a DAER training group (n = 8) for 9 weeks. Subjects in the DCER group performed 4 sets of 10 repetitions with a load of 75% concentric 1 repetition maximum (RM). Subjects in the DAER group performed 3 sets of 10 repetitions with a concentric load of 75% of 1RM and an eccentric load of approximately 120% of concentric 1RM. Three measures reflecting adaptation of elbow flexors and extensors were recorded pretraining and posttraining: concentric 1RM, muscle cross-sectional area (CSA), and specific tension. Strength was assessed at midtraining periods. No significant changes in muscle CSA were observed in either group. Both training groups experienced significant increases in concentric 1RM and specific tension of both the elbow flexors and extensors, but compared with DCER training, DAER training produced significantly greater increases in concentric 1RM of the elbow extensors. These results suggest that, for some exercises, DAER training may be more effective than DCER training in developing strength within a 9-week training phase. However, for trained subjects, neither protocol is effective in eliciting muscle hypertrophy.     

Effects of linear vs. daily undulatory periodized resistance training on maximal and submaximal strength gains

The objective of this study was to verify the effect of 2 periodized resistance training (RT) methods on the evolution of 1-repetition maximum (1RM) and 8RM loads. Twenty resistance trained men were randomly assigned to 2 training groups: linear periodization (LP) group and daily undulating periodization (DUP) group. The subjects were tested at baseline and after 12 weeks for 1RM and 8RM loads in leg press (LEG) and bench press (BP) exercises. The training program was performed in alternated sessions for upper (session A: chest, shoulder and triceps) and lower body (session B: leg, back and biceps). The 12-week periodized training was applied only in the tested exercises, and in the other exercises, 3 sets of 6-8RM were performed. Both groups exhibited significant increases in 1RM loads on LEG and BP, but no statistically significant difference between groups was observed. The same occurred in 8RM loads on LEG and BP. However, DUP group presented superior effect size (ES) in 1RM and 8RM loads for LEG and BP exercises when compared to the LP group. In conclusion, periodized RT can be an efficient method for increasing the strength and muscular endurance in trained individuals. Although there was no statistically significant difference between periodization models, DUP promoted superior ES gains in muscular maximal and submaximal strength.     

A comparison of periodization models during nine weeks with equated volume and intensity for strength

The purpose of the present investigation was to determine if significant differences exist among 3 different periodization programs in eliciting changes in strength. Twenty-eight recreationally trained college-aged volunteers (mean +/- SD; 22.29 +/- 3.98) of both genders were tested for bench press, leg press, body fat percentage, chest circumference, and thigh circumference during initial testing. After initial testing, subjects were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 training groups: (a) linear periodization (n = 9), (b) daily undulating periodization (n = 10), or (c) weekly undulating periodization (n = 9). The training regimen for each group consisted of a 9-week, 3-day-per-week program. Training loads were assigned as heavy (90%, 4 repetition maximum [4RM]), medium (85%, 6RM), or light (80%, 8RM) for bench press and leg press exercises. Subjects were familiarized with the CR-10 rated perceived exertion scale and instructed to achieve an 8 or 9 on the final repetition of each set for all other exercises. Subjects were then retested after 4 weeks of training. Training loads were then adjusted according to the new 1RM. Subjects were then retested after 5 more weeks of exercise. For all subjects, significant (p < 0.05) increases in bench press and leg press strength were demonstrated at all time points (T1-T3). No significant differences (p > 0.05) were observed between groups for bench press, leg press, body fat percentage, chest circumference, or thigh circumference at all time points. These results indicate that no separation based on periodization model is seen in early-phase training.     

Three sets of weight training superior to 1 set with equal intensity for eliciting strength

The purpose of this study was to compare single and multiple sets of weight training for strength gains in recreationally trained individuals. Sixteen men (age = 21 +/- 2.0) were randomly assigned to 1 set (S-1; n = 8) or 3 set (S-3; n = 8) groups and trained 3 days per week for 12 weeks. One repetition maximum (1RM) was recorded for bench press and leg press at pre-, mid-, and posttest. Subjects trained according to daily undulating periodization (DUP), involving the bench press and leg press exercises between 4RM and 8RM. Training intensity was equated for both groups. Analysis of variance with repeated measures revealed statistically significant differences favoring S-3 in the leg press (p < 0.05, effect size [ES] = 6.5) and differences approaching significance in the bench press (p = 0.07, ES = 2.3). The results demonstrate that for recreationally trained individuals using DUP training, 3 sets of training are superior to 1 set for eliciting maximal strength gains.     

Muscular adaptations to combinations of high- and low-intensity resistance exercises

Acute and long-term effects of resistance-training regimens with varied combinations of high- and low-intensity exercises were studied. Acute changes in the serum growth hormone (GH) concentration were initially measured after 3 types of regimens for knee extension exercise: a medium intensity (approximately 10 repetition maximum [RM]) short interset rest period (30 s) with progressively decreasing load ("hypertrophy type"); 5 sets of a high-intensity (90% of 1RM) and low-repetition exercise ("strength type"); and a single set of low-intensity and high-repetition exercise added immediately after the strength-type regimen ("combi-type"). Postexercise increases in serum GH concentration showed a significant regimen dependence: hypertrophy-type > combi-type > strength-type (p < 0.05, n = 8). Next, the long-term effects of periodized training protocols with the above regimens on muscular function were investigated. Male subjects (n = 16) were assigned to either hypertrophy/combi (HC) or hypertrophy/ strength (HS) groups and performed leg press and extension exercises twice a week for 10 weeks. During the first 6 weeks, both groups used the hypertrophy-type regimen to gain muscular size. During the subsequent 4 weeks, HC and HS groups performed combi-type and strength-type regimens, respectively. Muscular strength, endurance, and cross sectional area (CSA) were examined after 2, 6, and 10 weeks. After the initial 6 weeks, no significant difference was seen in the percentage changes of all variables between the groups. After the subsequent 4 weeks, however, 1RM of leg press, maximal isokinetic strength, and muscular endurance of leg extension showed significantly (p < 0.05) larger increases in the HC group than in the HS group. In addition, increases in CSA after this period also tended to be larger in the HC group than in the HS group (p = 0.08). The results suggest that a combination of high- and low-intensity regimens is effective for optimizing the strength adaptation of muscle in a periodized training program.     

The acute effects of a caffeine-containing supplement on strength, muscular endurance, and anaerobic capabilities

The purpose of this study was to examine the acute effects of a caffeine-containing supplement on upper- and lower-body strength and muscular endurance as well as anaerobic capabilities. Thirty-seven resistance-trained men (mean +/- SD, age: 21 +/- 2 years) volunteered to participate in this study. On the first laboratory visit, the subjects performed 2 Wingate Anaerobic Tests (WAnTs) to determine peak power (PP) and mean power (MP), as well as tests for 1 repetition maximum (1RM), dynamic constant external resistance strength, and muscular endurance (TOTV; total volume of weight lifted during an endurance test with 80% of the 1RM) on the bilateral leg extension (LE) and free-weight bench press (BP) exercises. Following a minimum of 48 hours of rest, the subjects returned to the laboratory for the second testing session and were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups: a supplement group (SUPP; n = 17), which ingested a caffeine-containing supplement, or a placebo group (PLAC; n = 20), which ingested a cellulose placebo. One hour after ingesting either the caffeine-containing supplement or the placebo, the subjects performed 2 WAnTs and were tested for 1RM strength and muscular endurance on the LE and BP exercises. The results indicated that there was a significant (p < 0.05) increase in BP 1RM for the SUPP group, but not for the PLAC group. The caffeine-containing supplement had no effect, however, on LE 1RM, LE TOTV, BP TOTV, PP, and MP. Thus, the caffeine-containing supplement may be an effective supplement for increasing upper-body strength and, therefore, could be useful for competitive and recreational athletes who perform resistance training.     

Effect of a learning trial on self-selected resistance training load

Previous research has shown that individuals self-select loads for resistance training that falls below the accepted threshold for overload and do not lift to volitional fatigue. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of a resistance training learning trial on self-selected resistance training load. A control group (5 women, 3 men) and a learning group of (4 women, 4 men) novice lifters were recruited. The control group (CG) received an orientation to selected strength machines (seated bench, leg extension, back row, biceps curl, triceps extension, shoulder press). On a subsequent training day, CG self-selected a training load, while blinded to the actual loads. The learning group (LG) received an initial orientation and also was tested for estimated 1 repetition maximum (1RM) for the seated bench press. On a subsequent day, the LG completed 2 sets of the seated bench press at 75% of estimated 1RM and were encouraged to lift until failure. On a third day, LG subjects completed a self-selected trial identical to that of the CG. Both groups were assessed for estimated 1RM for each exercise on a separate day following all trials. Comparisons between CG and LG were made using independent-means t tests and adjusted using Bonferroni's equation (p < 0.01). While subjects selected a bench press load that was 21% greater for LG (63.4 +/- 6.4% 1RM) compared to the CG (50.3 +/- 12.0%), there was no statistical significance. There were no significant differences in self-selected load for any of the other exercises. There were also no significant differences for number of repetitions or rate of perceived exertion between groups. We conclude that a learning trial of the bench press exercise to increase self-selected workload is not enough to change load self-selection.     

Predicting maximal strength in trained postmenopausal woman

The purpose of this study was to present an equation that accurately predicts 1 repetition maximum (RM) over a wide range of repetitions to fatigue (RTF) for 4 different machine resistance exercises in postmenopausal women. Seventy trained women (age = 57.4 +/- 3.1 years) performed maximal and submaximal repetitions on leg press, bench press, rowing, and leg adduction machines at the conclusion of a 2-year training program. Maximal repetitions were performed on each exercise in the following ranges: 3-5RM, 6-10RM, 11-15RM, and 16-20RM. Special regard was taken to maintain the identical execution of each test (i.e., range of motion, starting angle, speed of movement). One cubic polynomial (w(i) [0.988-0.0000584 r(i)(3) + 0.00190 r(i)(2) + 0.0104 r(i),] where w(i) is the load of measurement I, and r(i) is the number of repetitions) accurately predicted 1RM from RTF with mean absolute differences between actual 1RM and predicted 1RM for the 4 exercises of 1.5-3.1% and with coefficients of variation of <3.3%. Equation accuracy was independent of the exercise type or the number of RTF. Thus, this study supported the validity of RTF to adequately estimate 1RM over a wide range of repetitions and within different exercises in trained, older female subjects.     

Acute effect of two aerobic exercise modes on maximum strength and strength endurance

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of 2 modes of aerobic exercise (continuous or intermittent) on maximum strength (1 repetition maximum, 1RM) and strength endurance (maximum repetitions at 80% of 1RM) for lower- and upper-body exercises to test the acute hypothesis in concurrent training (CT) interference. Eight physically active men (age: 26.9 +/- 4.2 years; body mass: 82.1 +/- 7.5 kg; height: 178.9 +/- 6.0 cm) were submitted to: (a) a graded exercise test to determine V(.-)O2max (39.26 +/- 6.95 ml x kg(-1) x min(-1)) and anaerobic threshold velocity (3.5 mmol x L(-1)) (9.3 +/- 1.27 km x h(-1)); (b) strength tests in a rested state (control); and (c) 4 experimental sessions, at least 7 days apart. The experimental sessions consisted of a 5-kilometer run on a treadmill continuously (90% of the anaerobic threshold velocity) or intermittently (1:1 minute at V(.-)O2max). Ten minutes after the aerobic exercise, either a maximum strength or a strength endurance test was performed (leg press and bench press exercises). The order of aerobic and strength exercises followed a William's square distribution to avoid carryover effects. Results showed that only the intermittent aerobic exercise produced an acute interference effect on leg strength endurance, decreasing significantly (p < 0.05) the number of repetitions from 10.8 +/- 2.5 to 8.1 +/- 2.2. Maximum strength was not affected by the aerobic exercise mode. In conclusion, the acute interference hypothesis in concurrent training seems to occur when both aerobic and strength exercises produce significant peripheral fatigue in the same muscle group.     

Impact of testing strategy on expression of upper-body work capacity and one-repetition maximum prediction after resistance training in college-aged men and women

The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of resistance training on upper-body muscular strength and the expression of work capacity and muscular endurance. In addition, a training-induced change in the relationship between muscular strength and endurance was assessed by testing changes in the accuracy of using endurance repetitions to predict 1 repetition maximum (1RM) bench press before and after training. College-aged men (n = 85) and women (n = 62) completed a 12-week linear periodization resistance training program. Before and after training, the subjects were assessed for 1RM and repetitions to fatigue (RTFs) with a submaximal load. After pretraining 1RM determination, the subjects were randomly assigned to perform RTFs at 65% 1RM (n = 74) or 90% 1RM (n = 73). Pretraining and posttraining RTFs were conducted at the same respective % 1RM. Work capacity was determined from repetition weight × RTF. After training, there was a significant increase in 1RM in both men (～14%) and women (～23%). Posttraining RTF was not different from pretraining RTF at 65 %1RM (18.2 ± 5.1 and 19.0 ± 6.0, respectively) but was significantly reduced in the 90% 1RM group (6.1 ± 3.6 vs. 4.5 ± 2.7, respectively). Likewise, there was a differential effect of training on the expression of work capacity, which increased in the 65 % 1RM group (123 ± 155 kg-reps) but decreased in the 90% 1RM group (-62 ± 208 kg-reps); the effect was independent of gender within each testing group. In conclusion, the changes in muscular strength associated with resistance training produced an increase in work capacity when tested with a 65 % 1RM load without a change in endurance. In contrast, both work capacity and endurance decreased when tested with 90% 1RM. Thus, the impact of strength training on work capacity and muscle endurance is specific to the load at which endurance testing is performed.     

Moderate resistance training volume produces more favorable strength gains than high or low volumes during a short-term training cycle

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of 3 resistance training volumes on maximal strength in the snatch (Sn), clean & jerk (C&J), and squat (Sq) exercises during a 10-week training period. Fifty-one experienced (>3 years), trained junior lifters were randomly assigned to one of 3 groups: a low-volume group (LVG, n = 16), a moderate-volume group (MVG, n = 17), and a high-volume group (HVG, n = 18). All subjects trained 4-5 days a week with a periodized routine using the same exercises and relative intensities but a different total number of sets and repetitions at each relative load: LVG (1,923 repetitions), MVG (2,481 repetitions), and HVG (3,030 repetitions). The training was periodized from moderate intensity (60- 80% of 1 repetition maximum [1RM]) and high number of repetitions per set (2-6) to high intensity (90-100% of 1RM) and low number of repetitions per set (1-3). During the training period, the MVG showed a significant increase for the Sn, C&J, and Sq exercises (6.1, 3.7, and 4.2%, respectively, p < 0.01), whereas in the LVG and HVG, the increase took place only with the C&J exercise (3.7 and 3%, respectively, p < 0.05) and the Sq exercise (4.6%, p < 0.05, and 4.8%, p < 0.01, respectively). The increase in the Sn exercise for the MVG was significantly higher than in the LVG (p = 0.015). Calculation of effect sizes showed higher strength gains in the MVG than in the HVG or LVG. There were no significant differences between the LVG and HVG training volume-induced strength gains. The present results indicate that junior experienced lifters can optimize performance by exercising with only 85% or less of the maximal volume that they can tolerate. These observations may have important practical relevance for the optimal design of strength training programs for resistance-trained athletes, since we have shown that performing at a moderate volume is more effective and efficient than performing at a higher volume.     

Effect of range of motion on muscle strength and thickness

The purpose of this investigation was to compare partial range-of-motion vs. full range-of-motion upper-body resistance training on strength and muscle thickness (MT) in young men. Volunteers were randomly assigned to 3 groups: (a) full range of motion (FULL; n = 15), (b) partial range of motion (PART; n = 15), or (c) control (CON; n = 10). The subjects trained 2 d · wk(-1) for 10 weeks in a periodized program. Primary outcome measures included elbow flexion maximal strength measured by 1 repetition maximum (1RM) and elbow flexors MT measured by ultrasound. The results indicated that elbow flexion 1RM significantly increased (p < 0.05) for the FULL (25.7 ± 9.6%) and PART groups (16.0 ± 6.7%) but not for the CON group (1.7 ± 5.5%). Also, FULL 1RM strength was significantly greater than the PART 1RM after the training period. Average elbow flexor MT significantly increased for both training groups (9.65 ± 4.4% for FULL and 7.83 ± 4.9 for PART). These data suggest that muscle strength and MT can be improved with both FULL and PART resistance training, but FULL may lead to greater strength gains.     

Maximal strength testing in healthy children

Strength training has become an accepted method of conditioning in children. However, there is concern among some observers that maximal strength testing may be inappropriate or potentially injurious to children. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of 1 repetition maximum (1RM) strength testing in healthy children. Thirty-two girls and 64 boys between 6.2 and 12.3 years of age (mean age 9.3 +/- 1.6 years) volunteered to participate in this study. All subjects were screened for medical conditions that could worsen during maximal strength testing. Under close supervision by qualified professionals, each subject performed a 1RM test on 1 upper-body (standing chest press or seated chest press) and 1 lower-body (leg press or leg extension) exercise using child-size weight training machines. No injuries occurred during the study period, and the testing protocol was well tolerated by the subjects. No gender differences were found for any upper- or lower-body strength test. These findings demonstrate that healthy children can safely perform 1RM strength tests, provided that appropriate procedures are followed.     

Effects of 4 weeks of traditional resistance training vs. superslow strength training on early phase adaptations in strength, flexibility, and aerobic capacity in college-aged women

This study compared SuperSlow resistance training (SRT) to traditional resistance training (TRT) during early phase adaptations in strength, aerobic capacity, and flexibility in college-aged women. Subjects were randomly assigned to SRT (n = 14); TRT (n = 13); or control (CON; n = 8) groups. To equalize training times, TRT trained 3 times per week for 25 minutes each session, whereas SRT trained twice a week for 35 minutes each session. Both groups trained for 4 weeks, whereas the CON group maintained normal daily activities. Workouts consisted of 5 exercises: shoulder press, chest press, leg press, low row, and lat pull down. The SRT group completed 1 set of each exercise at 50% 1RM until momentary failure with a 10-second concentric and a 10-second eccentric phase. The TRT group completed 3 sets of 8 repetitions at 80% 1RM for each exercise, with 4 seconds of contraction time for each repetition. Groups were statistically similar at baseline. There was a significant (p ≤ 0.01) time main effect for flexibility with the greatest improvements occurring for the training groups (SRT 14.7% and TRT 11%). All strength tests had significant (p ≤ 0.01) time main effects but no group or group by time interactions. Both training groups had large percent improvements in strength compared to CON, but the large variability associated with the SRT group resulted in only the TRT group being significantly different from the CON group. In conclusion, percent improvements were similar for the TRT and SRT groups, but only the TRT group reached statistical significance for the strength improvements, and both groups were equally effective for improving flexibility.     

Physical performance and cardiovascular responses to an acute bout of heavy resistance circuit training versus traditional strength training

Circuit training effectively reduces the time devoted to strength training while allowing an adequate training volume to be achieved. Nonetheless, circuit training has traditionally been performed using relatively low loads for a relatively high number of repetitions, which is not conducive to maximal muscle size and strength gain. This investigation compared physical performance parameters and cardiovascular load during heavy-resistance circuit (HRC) training to the responses during a traditional, passive rest strength training set (TS). Ten healthy subjects (age, 26 +/- 1.6 years; weight, 80.2 +/- 8.78 kg) with strength training experience volunteered for the study. Testing was performed once weekly for 3 weeks. On day 1, subjects were familiarized with the test and training exercises. On the subsequent 2 test days, subjects performed 1 of 2 strength training programs: HRC (5 sets x (bench press + leg extensions + ankle extensions); 35-second interset rest; 6 repetition maximum [6RM] loads) or TS (5 sets x bench press; 3-minute interset rest, 6RM loads). The data confirm that the maximum and average bar velocity and power and the number of repetitions performed of the bench press in the 2 conditions was the same; however, the average heart rate was significantly greater in the HRC compared to the TS condition (HRC = 129 +/- 15.6 beats x min(-1), approximately 71% maximum heart rate (HRmax), TS = 113 +/- 13.1 beats x min(-1), approximately 62% HRmax; P < 0.05). Thus, HRC sets are quantitatively similar to traditional strength training sets, but the cardiovascular load is substantially greater. HRC may be an effective training strategy for the promotion of both strength and cardiovascular adaptations.     

Detraining in the older adult: effects of prior training intensity on strength retention

In this study, we assessed the influence of training intensity on strength retention and loss incurred during detraining in older adults. In a previous study, untrained seniors (age = 71.0 +/- 5.0; n = 61) were randomly divided into 3 exercise groups and 1 control group. Exercise groups trained 2 days per week for 18 weeks with equivalent volumes and acute program variables but intensities of 2 x 15 repetitions maximum (RM), 3 x 9RM, or 4 x 6RM. Thirty of the original training subjects (age 71.5 +/- 5.2 years) participated in a 20-week detraining period. A 1RM for 8 exercises was obtained pre- and posttraining and at 6 and 20 weeks of detraining. The total of 1RM for the 8 exercises served as the dependent variable. Analysis of variance procedures demonstrated significant increases in strength with training (44-51%; p < 0.05), but no group effect. All training groups demonstrated significant strength decreases at both 6 and 20 weeks of detraining independent of prior training intensity (all group average 4.5% at 6 weeks and 13.5% at 20 weeks; p < 0.04). However, total-body strength was significantly greater than pretraining values after the detraining period (all group average 82% at 6 weeks and 49% at 20 weeks; p < 0.001). The results suggest that when older adults participate in progressive resistance exercise for 18 weeks, then stop resistance training (i.e., detrain), strength losses occur at both 6 and 20 weeks of detraining independent of prior resistance training intensity. However, despite the strength losses, significant levels of strength are retained even after 20 weeks of detraining. The results have important implications for resistance-trained older adults who could undergo planned or unplanned training interruptions of up to 5 months.     

Similarity in adaptations to high-resistance circuit vs. traditional strength training in resistance-trained men

To compare the effects of 8 weeks of high-resistance circuit (HRC) training (3-6 sets of 6 exercises, 6 repetition maximum [RM], ～35-second interset recovery) and traditional strength (TS) training (3-6 sets of 6 exercises, 6RM, 3-minute interset recovery) on physical performance parameters and body composition, 33 healthy men were randomly assigned to HRC, TS, or a control group. Training consisted of weight lifting 3 times a week for 8 weeks. Before and after the training, 1RM strength on bench press and half squat exercises, bench press peak power output, and body composition (dual x-ray absorptiometry ) were determined. Shuttle run and 30-second Wingate tests were also completed. Upper limb (UL) and lower limb 1RM increased equally after both TS and HRC training. The UL peak power at various loads was significantly higher at posttraining for both groups (p ≤ 0.01). Shuttle-run performance was significantly better after both HRC and TS training, however peak cycling power increased only in TS training (p ≤ 0.05). Significant decreases were found in % body fat in the HRC group only; HRC and TS training both resulted in an increased lean but not bone mass. The HRC training was as effective as TS for improving weight lifting 1RM and peak power, shuttle-run performance and lean mass. Thus, HRC training promoted a similar strength-mass adaptation as traditional training while using a shorter training session duration.     

Acute negative effect of a hypertrophy-oriented training bout on subsequent upper-body power output

Athletes regularly combine maximal strength, power, and hypertrophy-oriented training within the same workout. Traditionally, it has been suggested that power-oriented exercises precede strength and hypertrophy-oriented training within a workout to avoid the possible negative effects that the latter types of training may have on power output. However, with regard to upper-body training, little study has been performed to verify this commonly held belief. The purpose of this study was to determine the extent, if any, of a high-repetition, short-rest-period, hypertrophy-oriented training dose on upper-body power output. Twenty-seven college-aged rugby league players were tested for average power output during bench press throws with a resistance of 40 kg (BT P40). The experimental group (Hyp, n = 15) then performed a typical hypertrophy-oriented work bout (3 x 10 at 65% 1 repetition maximum bench press, 1RM BP) before being retested for power output with the same resistance. In comparison with the control group (Con, n = 12), whose power output remained unchanged between the pre- and posttest periods, the Hyp group experienced a large, significant decrease in BT P40 power output. Even after further passive rest of 7 minutes, power output remained suppressed from the pretest values. Furthermore, the strongest 5 subjects experienced significantly larger percentage declines in power output than did the 5 less strong subjects. This study shows that a high-repetition, short-rest-period training can acutely decrease power output. Coaches should plan the order of exercises carefully when combining power and hypertrophy training.