ABSTRACT
The aim of the present study was to assess the short-term effects of four weeks of beta-alanine supplementation (BA) (6.4 g/day) on the total volume performed and perceived effort of resistance-trained individuals. Sixteen trained men (age: 27.3 ± 5.0 years, height: 1.78 ± 0.1 cm, total body mass: 84.3 ± 8.4 kg, RT experience: 5.9 ± 3.3 years) were allocated in one of the following groups: BA or Placebo (PLA). In addition, during the same period, participants were submitted to a resistance training program. Volume index (VI) and the rate of perceived exertion (RPE) were collected during the experimental period for both groups. Significant increases from the first to the last intervention week in VI were observed only for BA (+6.5%, d = 0.61, p = 0.04). In addition, supplementation induced a lower mean RPE (BA: 8.8 ± 0.5 AU vs. PLA: 9.4 ± 0.3 AU, p = 0.02). In conclusion, four weeks of BA supplementation were able to increase resistance-training volume without affecting the perceived effort of trained men.
ABSTRACT
The aim of the present study was to assess the chronic effects of different order of resistance training cycles on strength and muscle thickness of recreationally resistance-trained men. The study sample was composed of 16 healthy men (age: 25.0 ± 3.8 years, height: 1.77 ± 7.6 cm, total body mass: 81.7 ± 10.4 kg, RT experience: 4.6 ± 0.7 years, relative bench press one repetition maximum: 1.2 ± 0.1, relative squat one-repetition maximum: 1.5 ± 0.2). According to baseline maximal strength, participants were allocated in one of the following groups: Maximal Strength-Strength Endurance (MS-SE) (six weeks of a maximal strength cycle followed by six weeks of a strength endurance cycle); Strength Endurance -Maximal Strength (MS-SE) (six weeks of a strength endurance cycle followed by six weeks of a maximal strength cycle). The following measurements were performed in the pre and post intervention periods: one-repetition maximum (1RM) on parallel back squat and bench press exercises, muscle thickness evaluation of biceps brachialis (MTBB), triceps brachialis (MTTB), and vastus lateralis (MTVL) by ultrasonography. Total load lifted (TLL) and Internal training load (ITL) were also assessed. Both groups presented significant increases in bench press (MS-SE p = 0.001, SE-MS p = 0.003) and half squat (MS-SE p = 0.004, SE-MS p = 0.001) 1RM, MTBB (MS-SE p = 0.020, SE-MS p = 0.005) and MTTB (MS-SE p = 0.001, SE-MS p = 0.001). For MTVL, a significant increase was observed only for MS-SE group (MS-SE p = 0.032, SE-MS p = 0.143). No significant difference between groups was observed for any strength or morphological outcomes. In conclusion, both MS-SE and SE-MS training cycles are effective strategies to enhance resistance training adaptations in trained men.
ABSTRACT
Background: Trained subjects have difficulty in achieving continued results following years of training, and the manipulation of training variables through advanced resistance training (RT) methods is widely recommended to break through plateaus. Objective: The purpose of the present study was to compare the acute effects of traditional RT (TRT) versus two types of sarcoplasma stimulating training (SST) methods on total training volume (TTV), lactate, and muscle thickness (MT). Methods: Twelve trained males (20.75 ± 2.3 years; 1.76 ± 0.14 meters; body mass = 79.41 ± 4.6 kg; RT experience = 4.1 ± 1.8 years) completed three RT protocols in a randomly sequenced order: TRT, SST contraction type (SST-CT), or SST rest interval variable (SST-RIV) with 7 days between trials in arm curl (elbow flexors) and triceps pulley extension (elbow extensors) performed on the same day. Results: The SST groups displayed greater acute biceps and triceps brachii (TB) MT versus the TRT session, with no difference in lactate levels between them. The SST-CT resulted in greater biceps and TB MT versus the SST-RIV session. The TTV was greater for the TRT session versus the SST sessions, except in the case of the elbow flexors (no difference was observed between TRT and SST-CT), and higher for the SST-CT versus the SST-RIV. Conclusion: Trained subjects may benefit from using the SST method as this method may offer a superior MT stimulus and reduced training time, even with a lower TTV.
