Chae, S, Bailey, CA, Hill, DW, McMullen, SM, Moses, SA, and Vingren, JL. Acute kinetic and kinematic responses to rest redistribution with heavier loads in resistance-trained men. J Strength Cond Res 37(5): 987-993, 2023-The purpose of this study was to examine mechanical responses to rest redistribution with heavier loads (RR + L) in resistance-trained men. Eight men (23.0 6 4.8 years, 1.76 6 0.06 m, 78.5 6 8.6 kg, back squat [BS] one-repetition maximum [1RM] of 138.7 6 27.9 kg) completed 2 BS exercise sessions in a counterbalanced and a randomized order; RR + L: 4 sets of (2 3 5) repetitions with 90-second interset rest and 30-second intraset rest using 75% BS 1RM and traditional sets (TS): 4 sets of 10 repetitions with 120-second interset rest using 70% BS 1RM. During the concentric phase, mean force ( xF), velocity ( xV), and power ( xP) were collected for each repetition using a linear position transducer and analyzed the first 3 sets. Compared with TS, RR + L resulted in significantly greater xF (1820 6 260 N vs. 1753 6 248 N; p , 0.001; g 5 0.25) and lower xV (0.47 6 0.07 m•s 21 vs. 0.50 6 0.09 m•s 21 ; p 5 0.005; g 5 20.35). However, no significant difference in xP (836 6 165 W vs. 871 6 197 W; p 5 0.082; g 5 20.18) was found between RR + L and TS. In conclusion, the lack of difference in xP might be the result of the combination of greater xF and lower xV for RR + L compared with TS. Therefore, practitioners may consider using RR + L to augment xF without compromising xP and increasing total rest time. However, given the approximate 4% difference in xF, the effect of RR + L training on chronic strength adaptation is expected to be small.

Chae, S, Hill, DW, Bailey, CA, Moses, SA, McMullen, SM, and Vingren, JL. Acute physiological and perceptual responses to rest redistribution with heavier loads in resistance-trained men. J Strength Cond Res 37(5): 994–1000, 2023—The purpose of this study was to explore the effect of rest redistribution with heavier loads (RR + L) on physiological and perceptual responses in resistance-trained men. Eight men who had back squat (BS) 1 repetition maximum (1RM) to body mass ratio; 1.8 ± 0.2 completed 2 BS exercise sessions in a counterbalanced and a randomized order; RR + L: 4 sets of (2 × 5) repetitions with 90-second interset rest and 30-second intraset rest using 75% BS 1RM and traditional sets (TS): 4 sets of 10 repetitions with 120-second interset rest using 70% BS 1RM. Blood samples were collected before exercise, immediately post exercise, and 5, 15, and 30 minutes post exercise for the analysis of growth hormone (GH), total testosterone (TT), cortisol (C), and blood lactate (BL), whereas rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and heart rate (HR) were measured immediately after each set of the BS exercise. While neither main effect of condition nor interaction existed, there was a significant (p < 0.05) main effect of time point (and set) for GH, TT, C, BL, RPE, and HR. Volume load was greater for RR + L compared with TS (4,074.9 ± 786.7 kg vs. 3,796.3 ± 714.8 kg). In conclusion, RR + L increases volume load by approximately 7% but does not seem to influence GH (g = −0.15), TT (g = −0.09), BL (g = −0.22), RPE (g = 0.14), and HR (g = −0.08) responses. Practitioners may consider using RR + L to increase volume load without increasing acute fatigue responses.

Purpose: Many athletes report consuming alcohol the day before their event, which might negatively affect their performance. However, the effects of previous-day alcohol ingestion on performance are equivocal, in part, due to no standardization of alcohol dose in previous studies. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of a standardized previous-day alcohol dose and its corresponding impact on morning-after muscular strength, muscular power, and muscular fatigue in a short-duration test and on performance of severe-intensity exercise. Methods: On 2 occasions, 12 recreationally active individuals reported to the Applied Physiology Laboratory in the evening and ingested a beverage containing either 1.09 g ethanol·kg−1 fat-free body mass (ALC condition) or water (PLA condition). The following morning, they completed a hangover symptom questionnaire, vertical jumps, isometric midthigh pulls, biceps curls, and a constant-power cycle ergometer test to exhaustion. The responses from ALC and PLA were compared using paired-means t tests. Results: Time to exhaustion in the cycle ergometer tests was less (P = .03) in the ALC condition (181 [39] s vs 203 [34] s; –11%, Cohen d = 0.61). There was no difference in performance in vertical jump test, isometric midthigh pulls, and biceps curls tests between the ALC and PLA conditions. Conclusions: Previous-day alcohol consumption significantly reduces morning-after performance of severe-intensity exercise. Practitioners should educate their athletes, especially those whose events rely on anaerobic capacity and/or a rapid response of the aerobic pathways, of the adverse effect of previous-day alcohol consumption on performance.