The Importance of Recovery in Resistance Training Microcycle Construction.

Systemic resistance training aims to enhance performance by balancing stress, fatigue and recovery. While fatigue is expected, insufficient recovery may temporarily impair performance. The aim of this review was to examine evidence regarding manipulation of resistance training variables on subsequent effects on recovery and performance. PubMed, Medline, SPORTDiscus, Scopus and CINAHL were searched. Only studies that investigated recovery between resistance training sessions were selected, with a total of 24 articles included for review. Training to failure may lengthen recovery times, potentially impairing performance; however, it may be suitable if implemented strategically ensuring adequate recovery between sessions of similar exercises or muscle groups. Higher volumes may increase recovery demands, especially when paired with training to failure, however, with wide variation in individual responses, it is suggested to start with lower volume, monitor recovery, and gradually increase training volume if appropriate. Exercises emphasising the lower body, multi-joint movements, greater muscle recruitment, eccentric contractions, and/or the lengthened position may require longer recovery times. Adjusting volume and frequency of these exercises can affect recovery demands depending on the goals and training logistics. Daily undulating programming may maximise performance on priority sessions while maintaining purposeful and productive easy days. For example, active recovery in the form of training opposing muscle groups, light aerobic cardio, or low-volume power-type training may improve recovery and potentially elicit a post activation potentiation priming effect compared to passive recovery. However, it is possible that training cessation may be adequate for allowing sufficient recovery prior to sessions of importance.

Implementing a velocity-based approach to resistance training: the reproducibility and sensitivity of different velocity monitoring technologies.

This study examined the reproducibility of GymAware, PUSH2 and Vmaxpro velocity monitoring devices during resistance training (RT). The sensitivity of these devices to detect the smallest changes in velocity that correspond to true changes in RT performance was also investigated. Fifty-one resistance-trained men and women performed an incremental loading (1RM) test, and two repetitions to failure tests with different loads, 72 h apart. During all repetitions, mean velocity (MV) and peak velocity (PV) were simultaneously recorded by two devices of each brand. Overall, GymAware was the most reliable and sensitive device for detecting the smallest changes in RT performance, regardless of the velocity metric used. Vmaxpro can be considered as an equivalent, cheaper alternative to GymAware for RT monitoring and prescription, but only if the MV metric is used. Caution should be exercised when using PUSH2 in practice due to their comparatively higher, unacceptable measurement error and generally low sensitivity to detect changes in RT performance. Collectively, these findings support the use of MV and PV from GymAware and MV from Vmaxpro devices for RT monitoring and prescription due to their low magnitudes of error; thus, allowing for the detection of meaningful changes in neuromuscular status and functional performance during RT.

Range of Motion Predicts Performance in National-Level New Zealand Male Powerlifters.

ABSTRACT: Spence, AJ, Helms, ER, Sousa, CA, and McGuigan, MR. Range of motion predicts performance in National-level New Zealand male powerlifters. J Strength Cond Res 37(1): 123-128, 2023-Previous research established that male powerlifters have less range of motion (ROM) in several movements about the shoulder and hip compared with sedentary male subjects. It is unclear if these differences in ROM are related to strength, training type, and years of training experience or if individuals with less ROM have a better propensity to gain strength. The purpose of this study was to compare strength and ROM in male powerlifters and recreationally strength-trained male subjects and to determine if ROM would be an effective predictor of strength in these groups. Twelve powerlifters and 12 recreationally strength-trained control subjects completed 1 repetition maximum (1RM) squat and bench press testing. In a subsequent session, active ROM was measured, and velocity data were collected during submaximal squat repetitions. There was no significant difference (p > 0.05) between the groups for age, height, body mass, training experience, and training frequency. Powerlifters had significantly greater (p ≤ 0.05) training duration and absolute squat and bench press 1RM. Powerlifters had significantly less shoulder extension and horizontal abduction, and hip flexion, extension, and adduction than recreationally strength-trained men. Significant negative relationships were found between 2-lift Wilks score (body mass relative strength) and shoulder extension and horizontal abduction, as well as hip flexion and extension. In powerlifters, significant negative relationships were found between competition Wilks score, shoulder extension, and hip flexion. Because these relationships correspond to the bottom position of the squat and bench press, it may be best to ensure that shoulder extension and hip flexion remain sufficient to achieve competition depth.

Agreement Between Kinovea Video Analysis and The Open Barbell System for Resistance Training Movement Outcomes.

The purpose of this study was to examine the agreement between Kinovea video analysis software and the previously validated Open Barbell System (OBS) for assessing average concentric and eccentric velocity, eccentric duration, peak concentric velocity, height of peak concentric velocity, and concentric and eccentric range of motion. Sixteen resistance-trained males performed 11 repetitions at various intensities (between 60-100% of one-repetition maximum) on both the back squat and the bench press. For each repetition, all outcome measures were assessed with Kinovea and the OBS. Agreement between devices for each outcome measure was analyzed with paired t-tests, intraclass correlation coefficients with 95% confidence intervals, Bland-Altman plots, and folded empirical cumulative distribution plots (Mountain plots). All outcome variables were found to be statistically different (i.e. they did not agree) between the two devices (p < 0.001), except for average eccentric velocity (p = 0.315), as determined by the paired t-tests. Mountain plots had long tails for every outcome measure and Bland-Altman plots showed large limits of agreement for all outcome measures except concentric range of motion and the height of peak concentric velocity, demonstrating low agreement between devices. Based upon these findings and the previous validation of the OBS, these devices should not be used interchangeably.

Rating of Perceived Exertion and Velocity Relationships Among Trained Males and Females in the Front Squat and Hexagonal Bar Deadlift.

ABSTRACT: Odgers, JB, Zourdos, MC, Helms, ER, Candow, DG, Dahlstrom, B, Bruno, P, and Sousa, CA. Rating of perceived exertion and velocity relationships among trained males and females in the front squat and hexagonal bar deadlift. J Strength Cond Res 35(2S): S23-S30, 2021-This study examined the accuracy of intraset rating of perceived exertion (RPE) to predict repetitions in reserve (RIR) during sets to failure at 80% of 1 repetition maximum (1RM) on the front squat and high-handle hexagonal bar deadlift (HHBD). Furthermore, the relationship between RPE and average concentric velocity (ACV) during the sets to failure was also determined. Fourteen males (29 ± 6 years, front squat relative 1RM: 1.78 ± 0.2 kg·kg-1, and HHBD relative 1RM: 3.0 ± 0.1 kg·kg-1) and 13 females (30 ± 5 years, front squat relative 1RM: 1.60 ± 0.2 kg·kg-1, and HHBD relative 1RM: 2.5 ± 0.3 kg·kg-1) visited the laboratory 3 times. The first visit tested 1RM on both exercises. During visits 2 and 3, which were performed in a counterbalanced order, subjects performed 4 sets to failure at 80% of 1RM for both exercises. During each set, subjects verbally indicated when they believed they were at "6" and "9" on the RIR-based RPE scale, and ACV was assessed during every repetition. The difference between the actual and predicted repetitions performed was recorded as the RPE difference (RPEDIFF). The RPEDIFF was significantly (p < 0.001) lower at the called 9 RPE versus the called 6 RPE in the front squat for males (9 RPE: 0.09 ± 0.19 versus 6 RPE: 0.71 ± 0.70) and females (9 RPE: 0.19 ± 0.36 versus 6 RPE: 0.86 ± 0.88) and in the HHBD for males (9 RPE: 0.25 ± 0.46 versus 6 RPE: 1.00 ± 1.12) and females (9 RPE: 0.21 ± 0.44 versus 6 RPE: 1.19 ± 1.16). Significant inverse relationships existed between RPE and ACV during both exercises (r = -0.98 to -1.00). These results indicate that well-trained males and females can gauge intraset RPE accurately during moderate repetition sets on the front squat and HHBD.

Proximity to Failure and Total Repetitions Performed in a Set Influences Accuracy of Intraset Repetitions in Reserve-Based Rating of Perceived Exertion.

ABSTRACT: Zourdos, MC, Goldsmith, JA, Helms, ER, Trepeck, C, Halle, JL, Mendez, KM, Cooke, DM, Haischer, MH, Sousa, CA, Klemp, A, and Byrnes, RK. Proximity to failure and total repetitions performed in a set influences accuracy of intraset repetitions in reserve-based rating of perceived exertion. J Strength Cond Res 35(2S): S158-S165, 2021-The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of predicting repetitions in reserve (RIR) intraset using the RIR-based rating of perceived exertion (RPE) scale. Twenty-five men (age: 25.3 ± 3.3 years, body mass: 89.0 ± 14.7 kg, height: 174.69 ± 6.7 cm, and training age: 4.7 ± 3.2 years) reported to the laboratory. Subjects performed a 1 repetition maximum (1RM) squat followed by one set to failure at 70% of 1RM. During the 70% set, subjects verbally indicated when they believed they were at a 5RPE (5RIR), 7RPE (3RIR), or 9RPE (1RIR), and then continued to failure. The difference between actual repetitions performed and participant-predicted repetitions was calculated as the RIR difference (RIRDIFF). The average load used for the 70% set was 123.10 ± 24.25 kg and the average repetitions performed were 16 ± 4. The RIRDIFF was lower (RPEs were more accurate) closer to failure (RIRDIFF at 9RPE = 2.05 ± 1.73; RIRDIFF at 7RPE = 3.65 ± 2.46; and RIRDIFF at 5RPE = 5.15 ± 2.92 repetitions). There were significant relationships between total repetitions performed and RIRDIFF at 5RPE (r = 0.65, p = 0.001) and 7RPE (r = 0.56, p = 0.004), but not at 9RPE (r = 0.01, p = 0.97). Thus, being farther from failure and performing more repetitions in a set were associated with more inaccurate predictions. Furthermore, a multiple linear regression revealed that more repetitions performed per set was a significant predictor of RIR prediction inaccuracy at the called 5 (p = 0.003) and 7 (p = 0.011) RPEs, while training age (p > 0.05) was not predictive of rating accuracy. These data indicate RIR predictions are improved during low to moderate repetition sets and when there is close proximity to failure.

Methods for Regulating and Monitoring Resistance Training.

Individualisation can improve resistance training prescription. This is accomplished via monitoring or autoregulating training. Autoregulation adjusts variables at an individualised pace per performance, readiness, or recovery. Many autoregulation and monitoring methods exist; therefore, this review's objective was to examine approaches intended to optimise adaptation. Up to July 2019, PubMed, Medline, SPORTDiscus, Scopus and CINAHL were searched. Only studies on methods of athlete monitoring useful for resistance-training regulation, or autoregulated training methods were included. Eleven monitoring and regulation themes emerged across 90 studies. Some physiological, performance, and perceptual measures correlated strongly (r ≥ 0.68) with resistance training performance. Testosterone, cortisol, catecholamines, cell-free DNA, jump height, throwing distance, barbell velocity, isometric and dynamic peak force, maximal voluntary isometric contractions, and sessional, repetitions in reserve-(RIR) based, and post-set Borg-scale ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) were strongly associated with training performance, respectively. Despite strong correlations, many physiological and performance methods are logistically restrictive or limited to lab-settings, such as blood markers, electromyography or kinetic measurements. Some practical performance tests such as jump height or throw distance may be useful, low-risk stand-ins for maximal strength tests. Performance-based individualisation of load progression, flexible training configurations, and intensity and volume modifications based on velocity and RIR-based RPE scores are practical, reliable and show preliminary utility for enhancing performance.

Low-volume acute multi-joint resistance exercise elicits a circulating brain-derived neurotrophic factor response but not a cathepsin B response in well-trained men.

This study examined if acute multi-joint resistance exercises (RE; back squat, bench press, and deadlift) to volitional failure elicited a postexercise increase in the circulating response of biomarkers associated with neuroprotection. Thirteen males (age: 24.5 ± 3.8 years, body mass: 84.01 ± 15.44 kg, height: 173.43 ± 8.57 cm, training age: 7.1 ± 4.2 years) performed 4 sets to failure at 80% of a 1-repetition maximum on the squat, bench press, and deadlift in successive weeks. The measured biomarkers were brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1), cathepsin B (CatB), and interleukin 6 (IL-6). Biomarkers were assessed immediately before and 10-min after exercise. There was a main time effect (pre-exercise: 24.00 ± 0.61 to postexercise: 27.38 ± 0.48 ng/mL; p < 0.01) for BDNF with increases in the deadlift (p = 0.01) and bench press (p = 0.01) conditions, but not in the squat condition (p = 0.21). There was a main time effect (pre-exercise: 0.87 ± 0.16 to postexercise: 2.03 ± 0.32 pg/mL; p < 0.01) for IL-6 with a significant increase in the squat (p < 0.01), but not the bench press (p = 0.88) and deadlift conditions (p = 0.24). No main time effect was observed for either CatB (p = 0.62) or IGF-1 (p = 0.56). In summary, acute multi-joint RE increases circulating BDNF. Further, this investigation is the first to report the lack of a transient change of CatB to an acute RE protocol. Novelty Low-volume RE to failure can increase BDNF. Resistance training does not confer an acute Cat B response.

The effects of eccentric phase duration on concentric outcomes in the back squat and bench press in well-trained males.

The velocity and magnitude in which the eccentric phase of an exercise is completed directly affects performance during the concentric phase. Therefore, the purpose of this research was to investigate the effects of eccentric phase duration on concentric outcomes at 60% and 80% of one-repetition maximum (1RM) in the squat and bench press. Sixteen college-aged, resistance-trained males completed 1RM testing, established normative eccentric durations, and performed fast (0.75 times normative) and slow (2.0 times normative) metronome-controlled eccentric duration repetitions. Outcome measures assessed during the concentric phase were: average concentric velocity (ACV), peak concentric velocity (PCV), rating of perceived exertion (RPE), range of motion (ROM), and barbell path. Eccentric duration was significantly and inversely correlated with ACV at 60% (r = -0.408, p = 0.004) and 80% (r = -0.477, p = 0.001) of 1RM squat. At 60% of 1RM squat, both fast and slow eccentric conditions produced greater (p < 0.001) PCV than normative duration with fast also producing greater PCV than slow (p = 0.044). Eccentric duration had no impact on RPE, ROM, or barbell path. Our results report for the first time that resistance-trained males performing a deliberately faster eccentric phase may enhance their own squat and bench press performance.

Time course of recovery is similar for the back squat, bench press, and deadlift in well-trained males.

This study examined the time course of recovery following resistance exercise sessions in the back squat, bench press, and deadlift. Twelve well-trained males (age: 24.5 ± 3.8 years, body mass: 84.01 ± 15.44 kg, training age: 7.1 ± 4.2 years) performed 4 sets to failure at 80% of a 1-repetition maximum (1RM) on the squat, bench press, and deadlift in successive weeks. The bench press was always performed in week 2 with the squat and deadlift order counterbalanced between weeks 1 and 3. Indirect muscle damage and performance fatigue was assessed immediately before and after exercise and at 24 h, 48 h, 72 h, and 96 h postexercise. Outcome measures included limb swelling, joint range of motion, delayed onset muscle soreness, average concentric velocity (ACV) at 70% of 1RM, creatine kinase, lactate dehydrogenase, and cell-free DNA (cfDNA). Most measures demonstrated a main time effect (p < 0.05) within conditions; however, no between condition (p > 0.05) differences existed. ACV decreased in the squat condition for up to 72 h (p = 0.02, -8.61%) and in the bench press (p < 0.01, -26.69%) immediately postexercise but did not decline during the deadlift condition (p > 0.05). There was a main time effect for increased cfDNA in the squat (p < 0.01) and bench press (p < 0.05), but not the deadlift (p = 0.153). Further, immediately postexercise increases in cfDNA were directly related (p < 0.05) to changes in ACV in all 3 conditions. These results suggest that the deadlift does not result in greater muscle damage and recovery time than the squat and bench press following volume-type training in well-trained men. Further, acute changes in cfDNA may predict performance during the recovery period.