Mixed versus Focused Resistance Training during an Australian Football Pre-Season

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to determine the effect of a focused versus mixed-methods strength-power training plan on athletes undertaking high volumes of concurrent training. Fourteen junior elite male Australian football players were randomly assigned into either the focused or mixed group. Both training groups undertook a sequenced training intervention consisting of a four-week mesocycle emphasising heavy strength followed by a four-week mesocycle of high velocity emphasis. Training differed between groups by way of the degree of emphasis placed on the targeted attribute in each cycle and occurred during the preseason. Testing occurred pre- and post-training and consisted of the unloaded and loaded (+20 kg) countermovement jump (CMJ). Focused training elicited practical (non-trivial) improvements in flight time to contraction ratio (FT:CT) (g = 0.45, ±90% confidence interval 0.49) underpinned by a small reduction in contraction time (g = −0.46, ±0.45) and a small increase in braking (g = 0.36, ±0.42) and concentric phase mean force (g = 0.22, ±0.39). Conversely, the mixed group demonstrated an unchanged FT:CT (g = −0.13, ±0.56). Similar respective changes occurred in the loaded condition. Preferential improvements in FT:CT occur when a greater focus is placed on a targeted physical quality in a sequenced training plan of junior elite Australian football players during preseason training.

Practical Application of Traditional and Cluster Set Configurations Within a Resistance Training Program

“…In doing so, the concept of periodization, which is defined as "the logical integration and sequencing of training factors into mutually dependent periods designed to optimize specific physiological and performance outcomes at predetermined time points" (33), should be understood and applied to introduce training variations into the training program in a systematic manner. Although a detailed discussion about periodization is beyond the scope of this review (See Stone et al (101), Plisk and Stone (83), and Haff (34) for more detailed discussions), adopting a training model consisting of several training phases that are performed sequentially may be ideal for improving maximal strength and rapid force-generating capacity that underpins athletic performance (14,15,48,68,102,105,137). Thus, the practical application of different set configurations should be considered in the context of 3 different training phases, specifically the hypertrophy, basic strength, and strength-power phases (102,104) (Figure 2).…”