Literature DB >> 26332783

Modified Daily Undulating Periodization Model Produces Greater Performance Than a Traditional Configuration in Powerlifters.

Michael C Zourdos1, Edward Jo, Andy V Khamoui, Sang-Rok Lee, Bong-Sup Park, Michael J Ormsbee, Lynn B Panton, Robert J Contreras, Jeong-Su Kim.   

Abstract

The primary aim of this study was to compare 2 daily undulating periodization (DUP) models on one-repetition maximum (1RM) strength in the squat, bench press, deadlift, total volume (TV) lifted, and temporal hormone response. Eighteen male, college-aged (21.1 ± 1.9 years) powerlifters participated in this study and were assigned to one of 2 groups: (a) traditional DUP training with a weekly training order: hypertrophy-specific, strength-specific, and power-specific training (HSP, n = 9) or (b) modified DUP training with a weekly training order: hypertrophy-specific, power-specific, and strength-specific training (HPS, n = 9). Both groups trained 3 nonconsecutive days per week for 6 weeks and performed the squat, bench press, and deadlift exercises. During hypertrophy and power sessions, subjects performed a fixed number of sets and repetitions but performed repetitions until failure at a given percentage during strength sessions to compare TV. Testosterone and cortisol were measured at pretesting and posttesting and before each strength-specific day. Hypertrophy, power, and strength produced greater TV in squat and bench press (p ≤ 0.05) than HSP, but not for deadlift (p > 0.05). For squat and deadlift, there was no difference between groups for 1RM (p > 0.05); however, HPS exhibited greater increases in 1RM bench press than HSP (p ≤ 0.05). Effect sizes (ES) showed meaningful differences (ES > 0.50) in favor of HPS for squat and bench press 1RM. Testosterone decreased (p ≤ 0.05) at weeks 5 and 6 and cortisol decline at weeks 3 and 4. However, neither hormone was different at posttesting compared with pretesting (p > 0.05). Our findings suggest that an HPS configuration of DUP has enhanced performance benefits compared with HSP.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26332783     DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001165

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Strength Cond Res        ISSN: 1064-8011            Impact factor:   3.775


  11 in total

Review 1.  Periodization: Variation in the Definition and Discrepancies in Study Design.

Authors:  Ryo Kataoka; Ecaterina Vasenina; Jeremy Loenneke; Samuel L Buckner
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2021-01-06       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 2.  Is Empirical Research on Periodization Trustworthy? A Comprehensive Review of Conceptual and Methodological Issues.

Authors:  José Afonso; Pantelis T Nikolaidis; Patrícia Sousa; Isabel Mesquita
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 2.988

Review 3.  Comparison of Periodized and Non-Periodized Resistance Training on Maximal Strength: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Tyler D Williams; Danilo V Tolusso; Michael V Fedewa; Michael R Esco
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 11.136

4.  A Scientific Rationale to Improve Resistance Training Prescription in Exercise Oncology.

Authors:  Ciaran M Fairman; Michael C Zourdos; Eric R Helms; Brian C Focht
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 11.136

5.  The Effect of Two Different Concurrent Training Programs on Strength and Power Gains in Highly-Trained Individuals.

Authors:  Henrik Petré; Pontus Löfving; Niklas Psilander
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 2.988

6.  "I Want to Create So Much Stimulus That Adaptation Goes Through the Roof": High-Performance Strength Coaches' Perceptions of Planned Overreaching.

Authors:  Lee Bell; Alan Ruddock; Tom Maden-Wilkinson; David Rogerson
Journal:  Front Sports Act Living       Date:  2022-05-02

7.  Effects of Periodization on Strength and Muscle Hypertrophy in Volume-Equated Resistance Training Programs: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lukas Moesgaard; Mikkel Malling Beck; Lasse Christiansen; Per Aagaard; Jesper Lundbye-Jensen
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2022-01-19       Impact factor: 11.928

8.  Effects of subjective and objective autoregulation methods for intensity and volume on enhancing maximal strength during resistance-training interventions: a systematic review.

Authors:  Stian Larsen; Eirik Kristiansen; Roland van den Tillaar
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2021-01-12       Impact factor: 2.984

9.  Bilateral back squat strength is increased during a 3-week undulating resistance training program with and without variable resistance in DIII collegiate football players.

Authors:  Jason Sawyer; Paul Higgins; Paul A Cacolice; Troy Doming
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2021-09-24       Impact factor: 2.984

10.  "Is It Overtraining or Just Work Ethic?": Coaches' Perceptions of Overtraining in High-Performance Strength Sports.

Authors:  Lee Bell; Alan Ruddock; Tom Maden-Wilkinson; Dave Hembrough; David Rogerson
Journal:  Sports (Basel)       Date:  2021-06-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.