This study aimed to compare the effects of 2 resistance training (RT) programs with different velocity losses (VLs) allowed in each set: 10% (VL10%) versus 30% (VL30%) on neuromuscular performance and hormonal response. Twenty-five young healthy males were randomly assigned into 2 groups: VL10% (n = 12) or VL30% (n = 13). Subjects followed a velocity-based RT program for 8 weeks (2 sessions per week) using only the full-squat (SQ) exercise at 70%–85% 1-repetition maximum (1RM). Repetition velocity was recorded in all training sessions. A 20-m running sprint, countermovement jump (CMJ), 1RM, muscle endurance, and electromyogram (EMG) during SQ exercise and resting hormonal concentrations were assessed before and after the RT program. Both groups showed similar improvements in muscle strength and endurance variables (VL10%: 7.0%–74.8%; VL30%: 4.2%–73.2%). The VL10% resulted in greater percentage increments in CMJ (9.2% vs. 5.4%) and sprint performance (–1.5% vs. 0.4%) than VL30%, despite VL10% performing less than half of the repetitions than VL30% during RT. In addition, only VL10% showed slight increments in EMG variables, whereas no significant changes in resting hormonal concentrations were observed. Therefore, our results suggest that velocity losses in the set as low as 10% are enough to achieve significant improvements in neuromuscular performance, which means greater efficiency during RT. Novelty The VL10% group showed similar or even greater percentage of changes in physical performance compared with VL30%. No significant changes in resting hormonal concentrations were observed for any training group. Curvilinear relationships between percentage VL in the set and changes in strength and CMJ performance were observed.

Pareja-Blanco, F, Rodríguez-Rosell, D, Aagaard, P, Sánchez-Medina, L, Ribas-Serna, J, Mora-Custodio, R, Otero-Esquina, C, Yáñez-García, JM, and González-Badillo, JJ. Time course of recovery from resistance exercise with different set configurations. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2018-This study analyzed the response to 10 resistance exercise protocols differing in the number of repetitions performed in each set (R) with respect to the maximum predicted number (P). Ten males performed 10 protocols (R(P): 6(12), 12(12), 5(10), 10(10), 4(8), 8(8), 3(6), 6(6), 2(4), and 4(4)). Three sets with 5-minute interset rests were performed in each protocol in bench press and squat. Mechanical muscle function (countermovement jump height and velocity against a 1 m·s load, V1-load) and biochemical plasma profile (testosterone, cortisol, growth hormone, prolactin, IGF-1, and creatine kinase) were assessed at several time points from 24-hour pre-exercise to 48-hour post-exercise. Protocols to failure, especially those in which the number of repetitions performed was high, resulted in larger reductions in mechanical muscle function, which remained reduced up to 48-hour post-exercise. Protocols to failure also showed greater increments in plasma growth hormone, IGF-1, prolactin, and creatine kinase concentrations. In conclusion, resistance exercise to failure resulted in greater fatigue accumulation and slower rates of neuromuscular recovery, as well as higher hormonal responses and greater muscle damage, especially when the maximal number of repetitions in the set was high.

This study compared the time course of recovery following two resistance exercise protocols differing in the number of repetitions per set with regard to the maximum possible (to failure) number. Ten men performed three sets of 6 versus 12 repetitions with their 70% 1RM (3 × 6 [12] versus 3 × 12 [12]) in the bench press (BP) and squat (SQ) exercises. Mechanical [CMJ height, velocity against the 1 m s load (V -load)], biochemical [testosterone, cortisol, growth hormone, prolactin, insulin-like growth factor-1, creatine kinase (CK)] and heart rate variability (HRV) and complexity (HRC) were assessed pre-, postexercise (Post) and at 6, 24 and 48 h-Post. Compared with 3 × 6 [12], the 3 × 12 [12] protocol resulted in significantly: higher repetition velocity loss within each set (BP: 65% versus 26%; SQ: 44% versus 20%); reduced V -load until 24 h-Post (BP) and 6 h-Post (SQ); decreased CMJ height up to 48 h-Post; greater increases in cortisol (Post), prolactin (Post, 48 h-Post) and CK (48 h-Post); and reductions in HRV and HRC at Post. This study shows that the mechanical, neuroendocrine and autonomic cardiovascular response is markedly different when manipulating the number of repetitions per set. Halving the number of repetitions in relation to the maximum number that can be completed serves to minimize fatigue and speed up recovery following resistance training.

This study aimed to compare the effects of three resistance training (RT) programs differing in the magnitude of velocity loss (VL) allowed in each exercise set: 10%, 30%, or 45% on changes in strength, vertical jump, sprint performance, and EMG variables. Thirty‐three young men were randomly assigned into three experimental groups (VL10%, VL30%, and VL45%; n = 11 each) that performed a velocity‐based RT program for 8 weeks using only the full squat exercise (SQ). Training load (55–70% 1RM), frequency (2 sessions/week), number of sets (3), and inter‐set recovery (4 min) were identical for all groups. Running sprint (20 m), countermovement jump (CMJ), 1RM, muscle endurance, and EMG during SQ were assessed pre‐ and post‐training. All groups showed significant (VL10%: 6.4–58.6%; VL30%: 4.5–66.2%; VL45%: 1.8–52.1%; p < 0.05–0.001) improvements in muscle strength and muscle endurance. However, a significant group × time interaction (p < 0.05) was observed in CMJ, with VL10% showing greater increments (11.9%) than VL30% and VL45%. In addition, VL10% resulted in greater percent change in sprint performance than the other two groups (VL10%: −2.4%; VL30%: −1.8%; and VL45%: −0.5%). No significant changes in EMG variables were observed for any group. RT with loads of 55–70% 1RM characterized by a low‐velocity loss (VL10%) provides a very effective and efficient training stimulus since it yields similar strength gains and greater improvements in sports‐related neuromuscular performance (jump and sprint) compared to training with higher velocity losses (VL30%, VL45%). These findings indicate that the magnitude of VL reached in each exercise set considerably influences the observed training adaptations.

No abstract

No abstract

For more than a century, many concepts and several theories and principles pertaining to the goals, organization, methodology and evaluation of the effects of resistance training (RT) have been developed and discussed between coaches and scientists. This cumulative body of knowledge and practices has contributed substantially to the evolution of RT methodology. However, a detailed and rigorous examination of the existing literature reveals many inconsistencies that, unless resolved, could seriously hinder further progress in our field. The purpose of this review is to constructively expose, analyze and discuss a set of anomalies present in the current RT methodology, including: (a) the often inappropriate and misleading terminology used, (b) the need to clarify the aims of RT, (c) the very concept of maximal strength, (d) the control and monitoring of the resistance exercise dose, (e) the existing programming models and (f) the evaluation of training effects. A thorough and unbiased examination of these deficiencies could well lead to the adoption of a revised paradigm for RT. This new paradigm must guarantee a precise knowledge of the loads being applied, the effort they involve and their effects. To the best of our knowledge, currently this can only be achieved by monitoring repetition velocity during training. The main contribution of a velocity-based RT approach is that it provides the necessary information to know the actual training loads that induce a specific effect in each athlete. The correct adoption of this revised paradigm will provide coaches and strength and conditioning professionals with accurate and objective information concerning the applied load (relative load, level of effort and training effect). This knowledge is essential to make rational and informed decisions and to improve the training methodology itself.

This study aimed to analyze the acute mechanical, metabolic and EMG response to five resistance exercise protocols (REP) in the full squat (SQ) exercise performed with 2 velocity conditions: maximal intended velocity (MaxV) vs. half-maximal velocity (HalfV). Eleven resistance-trained men performed 10 REP (5 with each velocity conditions) in random order (72-96 h apart). The REP consisted of 3 sets of 8-3 repetitions against 45-65% 1RM. The percent change in countermovement jump (CMJ) height, velocity attained with the load that elicited a ~1.00 m·s-1 (V1-load), surface EMG variables and blood lactate concentration were assessed pre- vs. post-exercise protocols. MaxV resulted in greater percent changes (Δ: 12-25%) and intra-condition effect sizes (ES: 0.76-4.84) in loss of V1-load and CMJ height compared to HalfV (Δ: 10-16%; ES: 0.65-3.90) following all REP. In addition, MaxV showed higher post-exercise lactate concentration than HalfV (ES: 0.46-0.83; p<0.05). For EMG variables, only the Dimitrov index resulted in relevant changes after each REP, with MaxV showing greater magnitude of changes (23-38%) than HalfV (12-25%) across all REP. These results suggest that voluntary movement velocity is a key aspect to consider since it clearly determines the overall training intensity during resistance exercise.