Despite consuming similar calories and protein during resistance training, daily supplementation with whey was more effective than soy protein or isocaloric carbohydrate control treatment conditions in promoting gains in lean body mass. These results highlight the importance of protein quality as an important determinant of lean body mass responses to resistance training.

The primary purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the influence of a whole body compression garment on recovery from a typical heavy resistance training workout in resistance-trained men and women. Eleven men (mean +/- SD: age, 23.0 +/- 2.9 years) and 9 women (mean +/- SD: age 23.1 +/- 2.2 years) who were highly resistance trained gave informed consent to participate in the study. A within-group (each subject acted as their own control), balanced, and randomized treatment design was used. Nutritional intakes, activity, and behavioral patterns (e.g., no pain medications, ice, or long showers over the 24 hours) were replicated 2 days before each test separated by 72 hours. An 8-exercise whole body heavy resistance exercise protocol using barbells (3 sets of 8-10 repetition maximum, 2.0- to 2.5-minute rest) was performed after which the subject showered and put on a specific whole body compression garment one designed for women and one for men (CG) or just wore his/her normal noncompression clothing (CON). Subjects were then tested after 24 hours. Dependent measures included sleep quality, vitality rating, resting fatigue rating, muscle soreness, muscle swelling via ultrasound, reaction movement times, bench throw power, countermovement vertical jump power, and serum concentrations of creatine kinase (CK) measured from a blood sample obtained via venipuncture of an arm vein. We observed significant (p < or = 0.05) differences between CG and CON conditions in both men and women for vitality (CG > CON), resting fatigue ratings (CG < CON), muscle soreness (CG < CON), ultrasound measure swelling (CG < CON), bench press throw (CG > CON), and CK (CG < CON). A whole body compression garment worn during the 24-hour recovery period after an intense heavy resistance training workout enhances various psychological, physiological, and a few performance markers of recovery compared with noncompressive control garment conditions. The use of compression appears to help in the recovery process after an intense heavy resistance training workout in men and women.

Although mouth guards were originally designed for injury prevention, even elite athletes are now using performance mouth guards to improve athletic success. Both expensive custom models and over-the-counter models are available, but the efficacy is not well known. Some athletes remain wary of the perceived potential for detriments using a mouth guard to their performance. Thus, the purpose of this study was to examine various physical performance tests when using a mouth guard including a customized over-the-counter mouth guard. Twenty-six trained men (25 ± 4 years; 1.78 ± 0.07 m; 83.3 ± 11.4 kg) and 24 trained women (23 ± 3 years; 1.65 ± 0.08 m; 62.6 ± 7.8 kg) volunteered for the investigation. The subjects completed a familiarization period and then balanced and randomized treatment conditions that included: (a) a customized Power Balance performance mouth guard (PB MG); (b) a regular over the counter boil-and-bite mouth guard (Reg MG); and (c) a no mouth guard (No MG) treatment condition. At each visit, the subjects completed a testing protocol that was sequenced in the following order: sit-and-reach flexibility, medial-lateral balance, visual reaction time, vertical jump, 10-m sprint, bench throw, and plyo press power quotient (3PQ). Heart rate and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) were recorded around the 3PQ. Significance was set at p ≤ 0.05. Expected significant sex differences existed for all power, strength, and speed variables. Bench throw power (watts) and force (newtons) were significantly higher under PB MG than either Reg MG or No MG or in both men and women. The 3PQ power and force production were higher than that for the other 2 treatments for the PB MG for men only. There were no significant differences for treatment conditions in the heart rate or RPE after the 3PQ test. Men were better able to maintain significantly higher 3PQ power production under PB MG treatment condition compared with the other 2 treatment conditions. Rate of power development was significantly higher in men for the vertical jump when using the PB MG compared with that for other treatment conditions in men only. No differences were observed in flexibility, balance, visual reaction time, or sprint time. The PB MG performance mouth guard improves performance of upper-body loaded power exercises in both men and women and lower body power exercise in men without compromising performance on any other performance parameters.

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between lower-body muscle structure and vertical jump performance. Twenty-five resistance-trained men (age, 23.3 +/- 3.2 years; height, 176.1 +/- 7.4 cm; and weight, 86.2 +/- 11.6 kg) took part in both anatomical and jump performance testing. Muscle fascicle thickness, fascicle length, and pennation angle were analyzed for the vastus lateralis (VL) and the lateral gastrocnemius (LG). Jump height and both relative and absolute power were measured for the squat jump (SJ), countermovement jump (CMJ), and depth drop jump (DDJ). Regressions were used to determine if jump performance could be predicted using the aforementioned structures. No VL measurements were significantly correlated with any of the jump measures. Lateral gastrocnemius pennation angle was a significant but weak predictor of jump height for all 3 jump types (SJ: r2 = 0.212, p = 0.021; CMJ: r2 = 0.186, p = 0.018; DDJ: r2 = 0.263, p = 0.005). When comparing jump height at increasing preloads, none of the variables of interest could significantly predict the jump height differences between CMJ and SJ. However, LG fascicle length had a weak but significant inverse relationship with DDJ-CMJ (r2 = 0.152; p = 0.031). Lateral gastrocnemius thickness was the strongest predictor of absolute power for all jump types and between jump types (SJ: r2 = 0.181, p = 0.034; CMJ: r2 = 0.201, p = 0.014; DDJ: r2 = 0.122, p = 0.049; CMJ-SJ: r2 = 0.201, p = 0.014; DDJ-CMJ: r2 = 0.146, p = 0.034). Lateral gastrocnemius pennation angle was also the best predictor of relative power for all 3 jump types and between jump types (SJ: r2 = 0.172, p = 0.038; CMJ: r2 = 0.416, p = 0.000; DDJ: r2 = 0.167, p = 0.024; CMJ-SJ: r2 = 0.391, p = 0.000; DDJ-CMJ: r2 = 0.136, p = 0.039). Results for jump performance differ from those previously found for sprinting in that greater pennation and shorter fascicles, positively predicting jumping ability at increased prestretch loads reinforcing the need for training specificity. Our findings in resistance-trained men indicate that where jumping is vital to athletic success one can benefit from developing LG muscle architecture along with addressing eccentric strength.

The purpose of this study was to verify the concurrent validity of a bar-mounted Myotest® instrument in measuring the force and power production in the squat and bench press exercises when compared to the gold standard of a computerized linear transducer and force platform system. Fifty-four men (bench press: 39-171 kg; squat: 75-221 kg) and 43 women (bench press: 18-80 kg; squat: 30-115 kg) (age range 18-30 years) performed a 1 repetition maximum (1RM) strength test in bench press and squat exercises. Power testing consisted of the jump squat and the bench throw at 30% of each subject's 1RM. During each measurement, both the Myotest® instrument and the Celesco linear transducer of the directly interfaced BMS system (Ballistic Measurement System [BMS] Innervations Inc, Fitness Technology force plate, Skye, South Australia, Australia) were mounted to the weight bar. A strong, positive correlation (r) between the Myotest and BMS systems and a high correlation of determination (R2) was demonstrated for bench throw force (r = 0.95, p < 0.05) (R2 = 0.92); bench throw power (r = 0.96, p < 0.05) (R2 = 0.93); squat jump force (r = 0.98, p < 0.05) (R2 = 0.97); and squat jump power (r = 0.91, p < 0.05) (R2 = 0.82). In conclusion, when fixed on the bar in the vertical axis, the Myotest is a valid field instrument for measuring force and power in commonly used exercise movements.