A brief review: factors affecting the length of the rest interval between resistance exercise sets

Research has indicated that multiple sets are superior to single sets for maximal strength development. However, whether maximal strength gains are achieved may depend on the ability to sustain a consistent number of repetitions over consecutive sets. A key factor that determines the ability to sustain repetitions is the length of rest interval between sets. The length of the rest interval is commonly prescribed based on the training goal, but may vary based on several other factors. The purpose of this review was to discuss these factors in the context of different training goals. When training for muscular strength, the magnitude of the load lifted is a key determinant of the rest interval prescribed between sets. For loads less than 90% of 1 repetition maximum, 3-5 minutes rest between sets allows for greater strength increases through the maintenance of training intensity. However, when testing for maximal strength, 1-2 minutes rest between sets might be sufficient between repeated attempts. When training for muscular power, a minimum of 3 minutes rest should be prescribed between sets of repeated maximal effort movements (e.g., plyometric jumps). When training for muscular hypertrophy, consecutive sets should be performed prior to when full recovery has taken place. Shorter rest intervals of 30-60 seconds between sets have been associated with higher acute increases in growth hormone, which may contribute to the hypertrophic effect. When training for muscular endurance, an ideal strategy might be to perform resistance exercises in a circuit, with shorter rest intervals (e.g., 30 seconds) between exercises that involve dissimilar muscle groups, and longer rest intervals (e.g., 3 minutes) between exercises that involve similar muscle groups. In summary, the length of the rest interval between sets is only 1 component of a resistance exercise program directed toward different training goals. Prescribing the appropriate rest interval does not ensure a desired outcome if other components such as intensity and volume are not prescribed appropriately.     

The effect of rest interval length on bench press performance with heavy vs. light loads

The purpose of the current study was to compare the effect of 3 different rest intervals on multiple sets of the bench press exercise performed with heavy vs. light loads. Sixteen resistance-trained men performed 2 testing sessions each week for 3 weeks. During the first testing session each week, 5 consecutive sets of the bench press were performed with 80% of 1 repetition maximum (1RM) and with a 1-, 2-, or 3-minute rest interval between sets. During the second testing session each week the same procedures were repeated with 50% of 1RM. The total repetitions completed and the sustainability of repetitions were compared between rest conditions and between loads. For each load, resting 3 minutes between sets resulted in significantly greater total repetitions vs. resting 2 minutes (p = 0.000) or 1 minute (p = 0.000) between sets. However, the sustainability of repetitions was not significantly different between loads (p = 0.849). These results can be applied to weekly bench press workouts that undulate between heavy (i.e., 80% 1RM) and light (i.e., 50% 1RM) intensities. When the training goal is maximal strength development, 3 minutes of rest should be taken between sets to avoid significant declines in repetitions. The ability to sustain repetitions while keeping the intensity constant may result in a higher training volume and consequently greater gains in muscular strength.     

Differential effects of strength training leading to failure versus not to failure on hormonal responses, strength, and muscle power gains.

The purpose of this study was to examine the efficacy of 11 wk of resistance training to failure vs. nonfailure, followed by an identical 5-wk peaking period of maximal strength and power training for both groups as well as to examine the underlying physiological changes in basal circulating anabolic and catabolic hormones. Forty-two physically active men were matched and then randomly assigned to either a training to failure (RF; n = 14), nonfailure (NRF; n = 15), or control groups (C; n = 13). Muscular and power testing and blood draws to determine basal hormonal concentrations were conducted before the initiation of training (T0), after 6 wk of training (T1), after 11 wk of training (T2), and after 16 wk of training (T3). Both RF and NRF resulted in similar gains in 1-repetition maximum bench press (23 and 23%) and parallel squat (22 and 23%), muscle power output of the arm (27 and 28%) and leg extensor muscles (26 and 29%), and maximal number of repetitions performed during parallel squat (66 and 69%). RF group experienced larger gains in the maximal number of repetitions performed during the bench press. The peaking phase (T2 to T3) after NRF resulted in larger gains in muscle power output of the lower extremities, whereas after RF it resulted in larger gains in the maximal number of repetitions performed during the bench press. Strength training leading to RF resulted in reductions in resting concentrations of IGF-1 and elevations in IGFBP-3, whereas NRF resulted in reduced resting cortisol concentrations and an elevation in resting serum total testosterone concentration. This investigation demonstrated a potential beneficial stimulus of NRF for improving strength and power, especially during the subsequent peaking training period, whereas performing sets to failure resulted in greater gains in local muscular endurance. Elevation in IGFBP-3 after resistance training may have been compensatory to accommodate the reduction in IGF-1 to preserve IGF availability.     

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.     

The effect of rest interval length on the sustainability of squat and bench press repetitions

The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of 3 different rest intervals on the sustainability of squat and bench press repetitions over 5 consecutive sets performed with a 15 repetition maximum (RM)-load. Fifteen college-age men with previous resistance training experience were tested weekly over a period of 3 weeks. During each testing session, 5 consecutive sets of the squat and the bench press were performed with a 30-second, 1-minute, or 2-minute rest interval between sets. For each exercise, significant declines in repetitions occurred between the first and the fifth sets (p = 0.000). For the squat, a significant difference in the ability to sustain repetitions occurred between the 30-second and 2-minute rest condition (p = 0.003). However, differences were not significant between the 30-second and 1-minute rest conditions (p = 0.986) and between the 1-minute and 2-minute rest conditions (p = 0.042). For the bench press, significant differences in the ability to sustain repetitions occurred between the 30-second and 2-minute rest conditions (p = 0.000) and between the 1-minute and 2-minute rest conditions (p = 0.000). However, differences were not significant between the 30-second and 1-minute rest conditions (p = 0.019). For each exercise, the number of repetitions completed on the first set was not sustained over subsequent sets, irrespective of the rest condition. These results suggest that when short rest intervals are used to develop muscular endurance, the intensity should be lowered over subsequent sets to sustain repetitions within the range conducive to this training goal.     

Optimizing power output by varying repetition tempo

The effects of varying interrepetition rest and eccentric velocity on power output (PO) and the number of repetitions performed during a bench press set were examined in 24 college-aged resistance trained men. On 6 separate occasions, subjects performed a set of bench press at 80% 1 repetition maximum until volitional fatigue. For each of the 6 repetition tempo trials, the bench press set was paced by metronome to a unique repetition tempo involving a combination of the following: interrepetition rest of 0 or 4 seconds; eccentric velocity of 1 or 4 seconds and bottom rest of 0 or 3 seconds. The velocity of concentric contraction was maximal during all 6 tempo trials. During each trial, video data were captured to determine PO variables and number of successful repetitions completed at each tempo. One-way repeated measures analysis of variance showed tempos with a fast eccentric phase (1 second), and no bottom rest produced significantly greater (p ≤ 0.05) PO and repetitions than tempos involving slower eccentric velocity (4 seconds) or greater bottom rest (4 seconds). This combination of greater repetitions and PO resulted in a greater volume of work. Varying interrepetition rest (1 or 4 seconds) did not significantly affect PO or repetitions. The results of this study support the use of fast eccentric speed and no bottom rest during acute performance testing to maximize PO and number of repetitions during a set of bench press.     

Fatigue effects on bar kinematics during the bench press

The bench press is one of the most popular weight training exercises. Although most training regimens incorporate multiple repetition sets, there are few data describing how the kinematics of a lift change during a set to failure. To examine these changes, recreational lifters (10 men and 8 women) were recruited. The maximum weight each subject could bench press (1RM) was determined. Subjects then performed as many repetitions as possible at 75% of the 1RM load. Three-dimensional kinematic data were recorded and analyzed for all lifts. Statistical analysis revealed that differences between maximal and submaximal lifts and the kinematics of a submaximal lift change as a subject approaches failure in a set. The time to lift the bar more than doubled from the first to the last repetition, causing a decrease in both mean and peak upward velocity. Furthermore, the peak upward velocity occurred much earlier in the lift phase in these later repetitions. The path the bar followed also changed, with subjects keeping the bar more directly over the shoulder during the lift. In general, most of the kinematic variables analyzed became more similar to those of the maximal lift as the subjects progressed through the set, but there was considerable variation between subjects as to which repetition was most like the maximal lift. This study shows that there are definite changes in the lifting kinematics in recreational lifters during a set to failure and suggests it may be particularly important for coaches and less-skilled lifters to focus on developing the proper bar path, rather than reaching momentary muscular failure, in the early part of a training program.     

Higher muscle performance in adolescents compared with adults after a resistance training session with different rest intervals

The aim of the present study was to compare the effect of 3 different rest intervals between sets on the total training volume, number of repetitions, ratings of perceived exertion (RPE), and resistance to fatigue in adolescents and adults during a resistance training session in the isoinertial chest press exercise. Fifteen male adolescents (15.2 ± 1.2 years; 20.7 ± 2.0 kg·m(-2); Tanner -4; 61.5 ± 8.9, 10 repetition maximum [RM]) and 15 adults (22.2 ± 2.7 years; 23.3 ± 2.0 kg·m(-2); Tanner -5; 84.3 ± 13.5, 10RM) without previous experience with resistance training participated in the study. After 10RM test-retest on 3 different occasions, participants were randomly assigned to a resistance training protocol with 30-, 60-, and 120-second rest interval between sets. The protocol consisted of 3 sets with 10RM. In all studied variables, with exception to total training volume and RPE, adolescents presented superior results as compared with adults (p < 0.001). On the other hand, both adults and adolescents exhibited a higher resistance to fatigue, total training volume, and number of repetitions with a longer rest interval (120 > 60 > 30 seconds) (p < 0.01). Thus, these results indicate that adolescents present a higher recovery capacity between sets in a resistance training session than adults and a longer rest interval results in a higher number of repetitions completed, total training volume, and resistance to fatigue.     

Moderate volume of high relative training intensity produces greater strength gains compared with low and high volumes in competitive weightlifters

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of 3 volumes of heavy resistance, average relative training intensity (expressed as a percentage of 1 repetition maximum that represented the absolute kilograms lifted divided by the number of repetitions performed) programs on maximal strength (1RM) in Snatch (Sn), Clean & Jerk (C&J), and Squat (Sq). Twenty-nine experienced (>3 years), trained junior weightlifters were randomly assigned into 1 of 3 groups: low-intensity group (LIG; n = 12), moderate-intensity group (MIG; n = 9), and high-intensity group (HIG; n = 8). All subjects trained for 10 weeks, 4-5 days a week, in a periodized routine using the same exercises and training volume (expressed as total number of repetitions performed at intensities equal to or greater than 60% of 1RM), but different programmed total repetitions at intensities of >90-100% of 1RM for the entire 10-week period: LIG (46 repetitions), MIG (93 repetitions), and HIG (184 repetitions). During the training period, MIG and LIG showed a significant increase (p < 0.01-0.05) for C&J (10.5% and 3% for MIG and LIG, respectively) and Sq (9.5% and 5.3% for MIG and LIG, respectively), whereas in HIG the increase took place only in Sq (6.9%, p < 0.05). A calculation of effect sizes revealed greater strength gains in the MIG than in HIG or LIG. There were no significant differences between LIG and HIG training volume-induced strength gains. All the subjects in HIG were unable to fully accomplish the repetitions programmed at relative intensities greater than 90% of 1RM. The present results indicate that short-term resistance training using moderate volumes of high relative intensity tended to produce higher enhancements in weightlifting performance compared with low and high volumes of high relative training intensities of equal total volume in experienced, trained young weightlifters. Therefore, for the present population of weightlifters, it may be beneficial to use the MIG training protocol to improve the weightlifting program at least in a short-term (10 weeks) cycle of training.     

The effect of different rest intervals between sets on volume components and strength gains

The purpose of this study was to compare squat strength gains and volume components when resting 2 minutes vs. 4 minutes between sets over multiple mesocycles. After the first squat 1 repetition maximum, 15 trained men were matched and randomly assigned to either a 2-minute (n = 7) or a 4-minute (n = 8) rest interval group. Each group performed the same training program, with the only difference being the length of the rest interval between sets. Subjects performed two squat workouts per week; one was labeled as Heavy and the other was labeled as Light. The squat workouts varied in the intensity, number of sets, and repetitions performed per set in a nonlinear periodized manner throughout each mesocycle. Differences in strength gains and volume components (the load utilized per set, the repetitions performed per set, the intensity per set, and the volume performed per workout) were compared between groups. Both groups demonstrated large strength gains; however, these differences were not significant between groups (P = 0.47). During all mesocycles, the 4-minute group demonstrated significantly higher total volumes for the Heavy workouts (P < 0.05). The findings of the present study indicate that large squat strength gains can be achieved with a minimum of 2 minutes' rest between sets, and little additional gains are derived from resting 4 minutes between sets. Therefore, athletes attempting to achieve specific volume goals may need longer rest intervals initially but may later adapt so that shorter rest intervals can be utilized without excessive fatigue, leaving additional time to focus on other conditioning priorities.     

Increased number of forced repetitions does not enhance strength development with resistance training

Some research suggests that strength improvements are greater when resistance training continues to the point at which the individual cannot perform additional repetitions (i.e., repetition failure). Performing additional forced repetitions after the point of repetition failure and thus further increasing the set volume is a common resistance training practice. However, whether short-term use of this practice increases the magnitude of strength development with resistance training is unknown and was investigated here. Twelve basketball and 10 volleyball players trained 3 sessions per week for 6 weeks, completing either 4 x 6, 8 x 3, or 12 x 3 (sets x repetitions) of bench press per training session. Compared with the 8 x 3 group, the 4 x 6 protocol involved a longer work interval and the 12 x 3 protocol involved higher training volume, so each group was purposefully designed to elicit a different number of forced repetitions per training session. Subjects were tested on 3- and 6-repetition maximum (RM) bench press (81.5 +/- 9.8 and 75.9 +/- 9.0 kg, respectively, mean +/- SD), and 40-kg Smith Machine bench press throw power (589 +/- 100 W). The 4 x 6 and 12 x 3 groups had more forced repetitions per session (p < 0.01) than did the 8 x 3 group (4.1 +/- 2.6, 3.1 +/- 3.5, and 1.2 +/- 1.8 repetitions, respectively), whereas the 12 x 3 group performed approximately 40% greater work and had 30% greater concentric time. As expected, all groups improved 3RM (4.5 kg, 95% confidence limits, 3.1- 6.0), 6RM (4.7 kg, 3.1-6.3), bench press throw peak power (57 W, 22-92), and mean power (23 W, 4-42) (all p < or = 0.02). There were no significant differences in strength or power gains between groups. In conclusion, when repetition failure was reached, neither additional forced repetitions nor additional set volume further improved the magnitude of strength gains. This finding questions the efficacy of adding additional volume by use of forced repetitions in young athletes with moderate strength training experience.     

Short vs. long rest period between the sets in hypertrophic resistance training: influence on muscle strength, size, and hormonal adaptations in trained men

Acute and long-term hormonal and neuromuscular adaptations to hypertrophic strength training were studied in 13 recreationally strength-trained men. The experimental design comprised a 6-month hypertrophic strength-training period including 2 separate 3-month training periods with the crossover design, a training protocol of short rest (SR, 2 minutes) as compared with long rest (LR, 5 minutes) between the sets. Basal hormonal concentrations of serum total testosterone (T), free testosterone (FT), and cortisol (C), maximal isometric strength of the leg extensors, right leg 1 repetition maximum (1RM), dietary analysis, and muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) of the quadriceps femoris by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were measured at months 0, 3, and 6. The 2 hypertrophic training protocols used in training for the leg extensors (leg presses and squats with 10RM sets) were also examined in the laboratory conditions at months 0, 3, and 6. The exercise protocols were similar with regard to the total volume of work (loads x sets x reps), but differed with regard to the intensity and the length of rest between the sets (higher intensity and longer rest of 5 minutes vs. somewhat lower intensity but shorter rest of 2 minutes). Before and immediately after the protocols, maximal isometric force and electromyographic (EMG) activity of the leg extensors were measured and blood samples were drawn for determination of serum T, FT, C, and growth hormone (GH) concentrations and blood lactate. Both protocols before the experimental training period (month 0) led to large acute increases (p < 0.05-0.001) in serum T, FT, C , and GH concentrations, as well as to large acute decreases (p < 0.05-0.001) in maximal isometric force and EMG activity. However, no significant differences were observed between the protocols. Significant increases of 7% in maximal isometric force, 16% in the right leg 1RM, and 4% in the muscle CSA of the quadriceps femoris were observed during the 6-month strength-training period. However, both 3-month training periods performed with either the longer or the shorter rest periods between the sets resulted in similar gains in muscle mass and strength. No statistically significant changes were observed in basal hormone concentrations or in the profiles of acute hormonal responses during the entire 6-month experimental training period. The present study indicated that, within typical hypertrophic strength-training protocols used in the present study, the length of the recovery times between the sets (2 vs. 5 minutes) did not have an influence on the magnitude of acute hormonal and neuromuscular responses or long-term training adaptations in muscle strength and mass in previously strength-trained men.     

Training leading to repetition failure enhances bench press strength gains in elite junior athletes

The purpose of this study was to investigate the importance of training leading to repetition failure in the performance of 2 different tests: 6 repetition maximum (6RM) bench press strength and 40-kg bench throw power in elite junior athletes. Subjects were 26 elite junior male basketball players (n = 12; age = 18.6 +/- 0.3 years; height = 202.0 +/- 11.6 cm; mass = 97.0 +/- 12.9 kg; mean +/- SD) and soccer players (n = 14; age = 17.4 +/- 0.5 years; height = 179.0 +/- 7.0 cm; mass = 75.0 +/- 7.1 kg) with a history of greater than 6 months' strength training. Subjects were initially tested twice for 6RM bench press mass and 40-kg Smith machine bench throw power output (in watts) to establish retest reliability. Subjects then undertook bench press training with 3 sessions per week for 6 weeks, using equal volume programs (24 repetitions x 80-105% 6RM in 13 minutes 20 seconds). Subjects were assigned to one of two experimental groups designed either to elicit repetition failure with 4 sets of 6 repetitions every 260 seconds (RF(4 x 6)) or allow all repetitions to be completed with 8 sets of 3 repetitions every 113 seconds (NF(8 x 3)). The RF(4 x 6) treatment elicited substantial increases in strength (7.3 +/- 2.4 kg, +9.5%, p < 0.001) and power (40.8 +/- 24.1 W, +10.6%, p < 0.001), while the NF(8 x 3) group elicited 3.6 +/- 3.0 kg (+5.0%, p < 0.005) and 25 +/- 19.0 W increases (+6.8%, p < 0.001). The improvements in the RF(4 x 6) group were greater than those in the repetition rest group for both strength (p < 0.005) and power (p < 0.05). Bench press training that leads to repetition failure induces greater strength gains than nonfailure training in the bench press exercise for elite junior team sport athletes.     

Change in power output across a high-repetition set of bench throws and jump squats in highly trained athletes

Athletes experienced in maximal-power and power-endurance training performed 1 set of 2 common power training exercises in an effort to determine the effects of moderately high repetitions upon power output levels throughout the set. Twenty-four and 15 athletes, respectively, performed a set of 10 repetitions in both the bench throw (BT P60) and jump squat exercise (JS P60) with a resistance of 60 kg. For both exercises, power output was highest on either the second (JS P60) or the third repetition (BT P60) and was then maintained until the fifth repetition. Significant declines in power output occurred from the sixth repetition onwards until the 10th repetition (11.2% for BT P60 and 5% for JS P60 by the 10th repetition). These findings suggest that athletes attempting to increase maximal power limit their repetitions to 2 to 5 when using resistances of 35 to 45% 1RM in these exercises.     

Effect of two different rest period lengths on the number of repetitions performed during resistance training

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of 2 different rest period lengths during a resistance training session with the number of repetitions completed per set of each exercise, the volume completed over 3 sets of each exercise, and the total volume during a training session. Fourteen experienced, weight-trained men volunteered to participate in the study. All subjects completed 2 experimental training sessions. Both sessions consisted of 3 sets of 8 repetitions with an 8 repetition maximum resistance of 6 upper body exercises performed in a set manner (wide grip lat pull-down, close grip pull-down, machine seated row, barbell row lying on a bench, dumbbell seated arm curl, and machine seated arm curl). The 2 experimental sessions differed only in the length of the rest period between sets and exercises: 1 session with a 1-minute and the other with a 3-minute rest period. For all exercises, results demonstrate a significantly lower total number of repetitions for all 3 sets of an exercise when 1-minute rest periods were used (p < or = 0.05). The 3- and 1-minute protocols both resulted in a significant decrease from set 1 to set 3 in 4 of the 6 exercises (p < or = 0.05), whereas the 1-minute protocol also demonstrated a significant decrease from set 1 to set 2 in 2 of the 6 exercises (p < or = 0.05). The results indicate that, during a resistance training session composed of all upper body exercises, 1-minute rest periods result in a decrease in the total number of repetitions performed compared with 3-minute rest periods between sets and exercises.     

The effects of varied rest periods between sets to failure using the bench press in recreationally trained men

The purpose of this study was to determine the rate of recovery for recreational weight trainers between 2 sets of bench press to volitional exhaustion. Twenty-eight men performed 2 sets of the bench press at 75% of their previously determined 1 repetition maximum (1RM) to volitional exhaustion. Rest periods of 1, 3, or 5 minutes between sets were utilized on the 3 separate testing days. There was a significant decrease in the number of repetitions performed between the second sets at all rest periods. There were no significant differences in work performed (repetitions x weight) during the second set with the 3- and 5-minute rest periods, but the total work with a 1-minute rest period (1,389.1 +/- 529.9) was significantly less than both the 3- (1,494.9 +/- 451.0) and 5-minute (1,711.4 +/- 478.0) rest period. The data indicated that subjects were unable to fully recover between the first and second sets of maximal resistance exercise, regardless of the rest period. However, subjects were able to maintain a performance level of 8-12 repetitions and sustain the total work performed per set with as little as 3 minutes rest between sets.     

A comparison of linear and daily undulating periodized programs with equated volume and intensity for local muscular endurance

The purpose of this study was to compare linear periodization (LP), daily undulating periodization (DUP), and reverse linear periodization (RLP) for gains in local muscular endurance and strength. Sixty subjects (30 men, 30 women) were randomly assigned to LP, DUP, or RLP groups. Maximal repetitions at 50% of the subject's body weight were recorded for leg extensions as a pretest, midtest, and posttest. Training involved 3 sets (leg extensions) 2 days per week. The LP group performed sets of 25 repetition maximum (RM), 20RM, and 15RM changing every 5 weeks. The RLP group progressed in reverse order (15RM, 20RM, 25RM), changing every 5 weeks. The DUP group adjusted training variables between each workout (25RM, 20RM, 15RM repeated for the 15 weeks). Volume and intensity were equated for each training program. No significant differences were measured in endurance gains between groups (RLP = 73%, LP = 56%, DUP = 55%; p = 0.58). But effect sizes (ES) demonstrated that the RLP treatment (ES = 0.27) was more effective than the LP treatment (control) and the DUP treatment (ES = -0.02) at increasing muscular endurance. Therefore, it was concluded that making gradual increases in volume and gradual decreases in intensity was the most effective program for increasing muscular endurance.     

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.     

Short-term effects of resistance training frequency on body composition and strength in middle-aged women

Although a dose-response relationship between resistance training frequency and strength has been identified, there is limited research regarding the association between frequency and body composition. This study evaluated the effects of 3 vs. 4 d·wk(-1) of resistance training on body composition and strength in middle-aged women. Twenty-one untrained women (age 47.6 ± 1.2 years) completed 8 weeks of resistance training either 3 nonconsecutive days of the week using a traditional total-body protocol (RT3) or 4 consecutive days of the week using an alternating split-training protocol (RT4). The RT3 completed 3 sets of 8 exercises, whereas RT4 completed 3 sets of 6 upper body exercises or 6 sets of 3 lower body exercises. Both groups completed 72 sets per week of 8-12 repetitions at 50-80% 1 repetition maximum. Weekly training volume load was calculated as the total number of repetitions × load (kg) completed per week. Body composition was measured using air displacement plethysmography. At baseline and after 8 weeks of resistance training, there were no significant between-group differences. Both protocols resulted in significant increases in absolute lean mass (1.1 ± 0.3 kg; p = 0.001), body weight (1.02 ± 0.3 kg; p = 0.005), body mass index (0.3 ± 0.1 kg·m(-2); p = 0.006), strength (p < 0.001), and weekly training volume load (p < 0.001). Correlation analysis revealed that weekly training volume load was strongly and positively related to gains in lean mass (r = 0.56, p = 0.05) and strength (r = 0.60, p = 0.006). In these untrained, middle-aged women, initial short-term gains in lean mass and strength were not influenced by training frequency when the number of training sets per week was equated.