Background: The main objective of the current investigation was to evaluate the effects of caffeine on power output and bar velocity during an explosive bench press throw in athletes habituated to caffeine. Methods: Twelve resistance trained individuals habituated to caffeine ingestion participated in a randomized double-blind experimental design. Each participant performed three identical experimental sessions 60 min after the intake of a placebo, 3, and 6 mg/kg/b.m. of caffeine. In each experimental session, the participants performed 5 sets of 2 repetitions of the bench press throw (with a load equivalent to 30% repetition maximum (RM), measured in a familiarization trial) on a Smith machine, while bar velocity and power output were registered with a rotatory encoder. Results: In comparison to the placebo, the intake of caffeine increased mean bar velocity during 5 sets of the bench press throw (1.37 ± 0.05 vs. 1.41 ± 0.05 and 1.41 ± 0.06 m/s for placebo, 3, and 6 mg/kg/b.m., respectively; p < 0.01), as well as mean power output (545 ± 117 vs. 562 ± 118 and 560 ± 107 W; p < 0.01). However, caffeine was not effective at increasing peak velocity (p = 0.09) nor peak power output (p = 0.07) during the explosive exercise. Conclusion: The acute doses of caffeine before resistance exercise may increase mean power output and mean bar velocity during the bench press throw training session in a group of habitual caffeine users. Thus, caffeine prior to ballistic exercises enhances performance during a power-specific resistance training session.

The aim of the study was to determine the effect of the wide-grip bench press (WGBP) and the close-grip bench press (CGBP) on the number of performed repetitions (REPs) and time under tension (TUT) using a variable tempo of movement. Twenty (20) women experienced in resistance training were enrolled in the study (1RM-CGBP = 55.2 ± 9.5 kg; 1RM-WGBP = 52.7 ± 8.5 kg). Participants performed 5 sets of the BP with a maximal number of REPs at 70%1RM. Different tempos of movement, i.e., slow (6/0/X/0) and fast (2/0/X/0), and grip widths, i.e., the CGBP and the WGBP, were employed. The following variables were registered: maximal number of repetitions in every set (REPSet1-5), total number of repetitions performed in 5 sets (TREP), maximal time under tension in every set (TUTSet1-5) and total time under tension in 5 sets (TTUT). The two-way ANOVA revealed statistically significant differences between the WGBPFAST and the WGBPSLOW in TUTSet1-5 (p < 0.05) and TTUT (p < 0.01), as well as between the CGBPFAST and the CGBPSLOW in TUTSet1-5 (p < 0.01) and TTUT (p < 0.01). Significant differences between the WGBPFAST and the WGBPSLOW were also observed in REPSet1-5 (p < 0.01) and TREP (p < 0.01) as well as between the CGBPFAST and the CGBPSLOW in REPSet1-5 (p < 0.01) and TREP (p < 0.01). No significant differences between the WGBPSLOW and the CGBPSLOW nor the WGBPFAST and the CGBPFAST were found. The study demonstrates that the tempo of movement, regardless of the width grip, has a significant effect on the volume of effort in resistance training.

Blood flow restriction (BFR) combined with resistance training (RT-BFR) shows significant benefits in terms of muscle strength and hypertrophy. Such effects have been observed in clinical populations, in groups of physically active people, and among competitive athletes. These effects are comparable or, in some cases, even more efficient compared to conventional resistance training (CRT). RT-BFR stimulates muscle hypertrophy and improves muscle strength even at low external loads. Since no extensive scientific research has been done in relation to groups of athletes, the aim of the present study was to identify technical, physiological and methodological aspects related to the use of RT-BFR in competitive athletes from various sport disciplines. RT-BFR in groups of athletes has an effect not only on the improvement of muscle strength or muscle hypertrophy, but also on specific motor abilities related to a particular sport discipline. The literature review reveals that most experts do not recommend the use RT-BFR as the only training method, but rather as a complementary method to CRT. It is likely that optimal muscle adaptive changes can be induced by a combination of CRT and RT-BFR. Some research has confirmed benefits of using CRT followed by RT-BFR during a training session. The use of BFR in training also requires adequate progression or modifications in the duration of occlusion in a training session, the ratio of exercises performed with BFR to conventional exercises, the value of pressure or the cuff width.

This study evaluated the effects of continuous and intermittent blood flow restriction (BFR) with 70% of full arterial occlusion pressure on bar velocity during the bench press exercise against a wide range of resistive loads. Eleven strength-trained males (age: 23.5 ± 1.4 years; resistance training experience: 2.8 ± 0.8 years, maximal bench press strength – 1RM = 101.8 ± 13.9 kg; body mass = 79.8 ± 10.4 kg), performed three different testing protocols in random and counterbalanced order: without BFR (NO-BFR); intermittent BFR (I-BFR) and continuous BFR (C-BFR). During each experimental session, subjects performed eight sets of two repetitions each, with increasing loads from 20 to 90% 1RM (10% steps), and 3 min rest between each set. In the C-BFR condition occlusion was kept throughout the trial, while in the I-BFR, occlusion was released during each 3 min rest interval. Peak bar velocity (PV) during the bench press exercise was higher by 12–17% in both I-BFR and C-BFR compared with NO-BFR only at the loads of 20, 30, 40, and 50% 1RM (p &lt; 0.001), while performance at higher loads remained unchanged. Mean bar velocity (MV) was unaffected by occlusion (p = 0.342). These results indicate that BFR during bench press exercise increases PV and this may be used as an enhanced stimulus during explosive resistance training. At higher workloads, bench press performance was not negatively affected by BFR, indicating that the benefits of exercise under occlusion can be obtained while explosive performance is not impaired.

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effects of external compression with blood flow restriction on power output and bar velocity changes during the back-squat exercise (SQ). The study included 10 judo athletes (age = 28.4 ± 5.8 years; body mass = 81.3 ± 13.1 kg; SQ one-repetition maximum (1-RM) 152 ± 34 kg; training experience 10.7 ± 2.3 years). Methods: The experiment was performed following a randomized crossover design, where each participant performed three different exercise protocols: (1) control, without external compression (CONT); (2) intermittent external compression with pressure of 100% arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) (EC-100); and (3) intermittent external compression with pressure of 150% AOP (EC-150). To assess the differences between conditions, the participants performed 3 sets of 3 repetitions of the SQ at 70% 1-RM. The differences in peak power output (PP), mean power output (MP), peak bar velocity (PV), and mean bar velocity (MV) between the three conditions were examined using repeated measures two-way ANOVA. Results: The post hoc analysis for the main effect of conditions showed a significant increase in PP (p = 0.03), PV (p = 0.02), MP (p = 0.04), and MV (p = 0.03), for the EC-150, compared to the CONT. Furthermore, a statistically significant increase in PP (p = 0.04), PV (p = 0.03), MP (p = 0.02), and MV (p = 0.01) were observed for the EC-150 compared to EC-100. There were no significant changes in PP, PV, MP, and MV, between EC-100 and CONT conditions. Conclusion: The results indicate that the use of extremely high-pressure external compression (150% AOP) during high-loaded (70% 1-RM) lower limb resistance exercise elicits an acute increase in power output and bar velocity.