PURPOSE: To compare the effects of two different resistance training programs, high intensity (INT) and high volume (VOL), on changes in isometric force (FRC), rate of force development (RFD), and barbell velocity during dynamic strength testing. METHODS:Twenty-nine resistance-trained men were randomly assigned to either the INT (n = 15, 3-5 RM, 3-min rest interval) or VOL (n = 14, 10-12 RM, 1-min rest interval) training group for 8 weeks. All participants completed a 2-week preparatory phase prior to randomization. Measures of barbell velocity, FRC, and RFD were performed before (PRE) and following (POST) the 8-week training program. Barbell velocity was determined during one-repetition maximum (1RM) testing of the squat (SQ) and bench press (BP) exercises. The isometric mid-thigh pull was used to assess FRC and RFD at specific time bands ranging from 0 to 30, 50, 90, 100, 150, 200, and 250 ms. RESULTS: Analysis of covariance revealed significant (p < 0.05) group differences in peak FRC, FRC at 30-200 ms, and RFD at 50-90 ms. Significant (p < 0.05) changes in INT but not VOL in peak FRC (INT: 9.2 ± 13.8 %; VOL: -4.3 ± 10.2 %), FRC at 30-200 ms (INT: 12.5-15.8 %; VOL: -1.0 to -4.3 %), and RFD at 50 ms (INT: 78.0 ± 163 %; VOL: -4.1 ± 49.6 %) were observed. A trend (p = 0.052) was observed for RFD at 90 ms (INT: 58.5 ± 115 %; VOL: -3.5 ± 40.1 %). No group differences were observed for the observed changes in barbell velocity. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that INT is more advantageous than VOL for improving FRC and RFD, while changes in barbell velocity during dynamic strength testing are similarly improved by both protocols in resistance-trained men.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To compare the effects of two different resistance training programs, high intensity (INT) and high volume (VOL), on changes in isometric force (FRC), rate of force development (RFD), and barbell velocity during dynamic strength testing. METHODS: Twenty-nine resistance-trained men were randomly assigned to either the INT (n = 15, 3-5 RM, 3-min rest interval) or VOL (n = 14, 10-12 RM, 1-min rest interval) training group for 8 weeks. All participants completed a 2-week preparatory phase prior to randomization. Measures of barbell velocity, FRC, and RFD were performed before (PRE) and following (POST) the 8-week training program. Barbell velocity was determined during one-repetition maximum (1RM) testing of the squat (SQ) and bench press (BP) exercises. The isometric mid-thigh pull was used to assess FRC and RFD at specific time bands ranging from 0 to 30, 50, 90, 100, 150, 200, and 250 ms. RESULTS: Analysis of covariance revealed significant (p < 0.05) group differences in peak FRC, FRC at 30-200 ms, and RFD at 50-90 ms. Significant (p < 0.05) changes in INT but not VOL in peak FRC (INT: 9.2 ± 13.8 %; VOL: -4.3 ± 10.2 %), FRC at 30-200 ms (INT: 12.5-15.8 %; VOL: -1.0 to -4.3 %), and RFD at 50 ms (INT: 78.0 ± 163 %; VOL: -4.1 ± 49.6 %) were observed. A trend (p = 0.052) was observed for RFD at 90 ms (INT: 58.5 ± 115 %; VOL: -3.5 ± 40.1 %). No group differences were observed for the observed changes in barbell velocity. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that INT is more advantageous than VOL for improving FRC and RFD, while changes in barbell velocity during dynamic strength testing are similarly improved by both protocols in resistance-trained men.
Entities:
Keywords:
Back squat velocity; Bench press velocity; Isometric strength; Rate of force development
Authors: Attila J Zink; Arlette C Perry; Bobby L Robertson; Kathryn E Roach; Joseph F Signorile Journal: J Strength Cond Res Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: Kristian Vissing; Mads Brink; Simon Lønbro; Henrik Sørensen; Kristian Overgaard; Kasper Danborg; Jesper Mortensen; Ole Elstrøm; Nikolaj Rosenhøj; Steffen Ringgaard; Jesper L Andersen; Per Aagaard Journal: J Strength Cond Res Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: Felipe B D Oliveira; Anderson S C Oliveira; Guilherme F Rizatto; Benedito S Denadai Journal: J Sports Sci Med Date: 2013-09-01 Impact factor: 2.988
Authors: Matthew Buckthorpe; Furio Danelon; Giovanni La Rosa; Gianni Nanni; Matthew Stride; Francesco Della Villa Journal: Sports Med Date: 2020-12-17 Impact factor: 11.136
Authors: Hendrickus G J Aben; Samuel P Hills; Darren Higgins; Carlton B Cooke; Danielle Davis; Ben Jones; Mark Russell Journal: Sports (Basel) Date: 2020-05-22
Authors: Jason Michael Cholewa; Andrea Hudson; Taylor Cicholski; Amanda Cervenka; Karley Barreno; Kayla Broom; McKenzie Barch; Stuart A S Craig Journal: J Int Soc Sports Nutr Date: 2018-07-31 Impact factor: 5.150