Reducing the Loss of Velocity and Power in Women Athletes via Rest Redistribution

Abstract

Purpose: To examine rest redistribution (RR) effects on back squat kinetics and kinematics in resistance-trained women. Methods: Twelve women from strength and college sports (5.0 [2.2] y training history) participated in the randomized crossover design study with 72 hours between sessions (3 total). Participants completed 4 sets of 10 repetitions using traditional sets (120-s interset rest) and RR (30-s intraset rest in the middle of each set; 90-s interset rest) with 70% of their 1-repetition maximum. Kinetics and kinematics were sampled via force plate and 4 linear position transducers. The greatest value of repetitions 1 to 3 (peak repetition) was used to calculate percentage loss, [(repetition 10–peak repetition)/(peak repetition) × 100], and maintenance, {100–[(set mean–peak repetition)/(peak repetition)] × 100}, of velocity and power for each set. Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used for analyses (P < .05). Results: Mean and peak force did not differ between conditions. A condition × repetition interaction existed for peak power (P = .049) but not for peak velocity (P = .110). Peak power was greater in repetitions 7 to 9 (P < .05; d = 1.12–1.27) during RR. The percentage loss of velocity (95% confidence interval, –0.22% to –7.22%; P = .039) and power (95% confidence interval, –1.53% to –7.87%; P = .008) were reduced in RR. Mean velocity maintenance of sets 3 (P = .036; d = 1.90) and 4 (P = .015; d = 2.30) and mean power maintenance of set 4 (P = .006; d = 2.65) were greater in RR. Conclusion: By redistributing a portion of long interset rest into the middle of a set, velocity and power were better maintained. Therefore, redistributing rest may be beneficial for reducing fatigue in resistance-trained women.

Is the OUTPUT Sports Unit Reliable and Valid When Estimating Back Squat and Bench Press Concentric Velocity?

“…Subjects reported 6.6 ± 4.3 years of experience with the bench press and back squat, training these exercises at least once a week for the year leading up to this study, and no musculoskeletal injury in the past 6 months. Women were able to at least bench 70% and squat 120% of their body mass, whereas men were at least capable of benching 100% and squatting 150% of their body mass, in line with the previous literature (1,30). These numbers are in line with other cutoffs used in the previous literature.…”

“…Although assessing velocity across a spectrum of loads may not accurately predict a person's maximal strength capabilities (4,18), it may enable load-velocity profile comparisons among populations (1) and individual training based on the load-velocity profile (20). The barbell velocity during common resistance exercises has also been used to quantify neuromuscular fatigue during training (11,30,39). Despite the evidence supporting velocity-based training (14,16,21,36,39) and testing (38,40), the gold standard technology used to measure and compute velocity (i.e., motion capture and multiple linear position transducers) is expensive and may not be practical outside of laboratory settings.…”

Acute Kinetic and Kinematic Responses to Rest Redistribution With Heavier Loads in Resistance-Trained Men

“…The 75% 1RM was selected for RR 1 L to avoid repetition failure that will reduce the sample size because it is a maximal load estimated to allow for 10 repetitions in a TS format (1). The 70% 1RM was considered for TS because others have observed greater velocity or power for RR compared with TS when using the same load of 70% BS 1RM (24)(25)(26)(27)31). Therefore, it might be speculated that using slightly heavier loads (15% 1RM) could further augment power by providing greater force because of added mass without lower velocity when compared with TS.…”

“…However, because of adding extra intraset rests, regular cluster sets markedly increase the total duration of a session (7,9,12,13). Thus, investigators have focused on a subclass of cluster sets, called rest redistribution (RR), where an interset rest is redistributed to intraset rests, such that total rest time is kept constant (3,5,17,19,(24)(25)(26)(27)29,31,35,37). Two recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses demonstrated that RR allows for greater velocity compared with TS, despite the same total rest time for a session for RR and TS (18,23).…”

“…Previous literature compared RR (4 sets of [2 3 5] repetitions with 60 or 90 seconds of interset rest and 30 or 60 seconds of intraset rest) with TS (4 sets of 10 repetitions with 120-second interset rest) using 70 or 75% BS 1RM (17,(24)(25)(26)(27). These studies found that RR resulted in greater force, velocity, or power at the later repetitions (24)(25)(26)(27)31) and better maintained velocity and power in the third and fourth sets (24) than TS. It should be noted that using heavier loads, compared with TS, RR might further increase force because of added mass and power, provided velocity is maintained.…”