RESUMO
The purpose of this study was to compare a periodized versus a non-periodized protocol of kettlebell (KTB) swings over six weeks on strength, power, and muscular endurance. Twenty-eight high intensity functional training (HIFT) practitioners were assigned to non-periodized (NPG = 11), periodized (PG = 11), or control groups (CG = 6). NPG used the same load (20 kg) throughout the training period while the PG used a step loading progression (with an added four kilograms every two weeks). Measures of strength and muscular endurance in the deadlift exercise, and power in the countermovement jump were assessed before and after six weeks. A two-way ANOVA was used to verify pre- to post-test differences in strength, power, and muscular endurance. An analysis of the effect size was also incorporated. For strength and power, statistical differences from pre- to post-test were found for both the NPG (p < 0.001; 1-RM improvement = 8.7%; jump height improvement = 8.7%) and PG (p < 0.001; 1-RM improvement = 7.8%; jump height improvement = 10.1%), with no difference between groups. For muscular endurance, only the PG showed significant differences from pre- to post-test (p = 0.013; muscular endurance improvement = 23.8%). In conclusion, when the goal is to increase strength and power performances in HIFT practitioners, periodized and non-periodized KTB models appear to be equally effective, and this can simplify the strength coach's practice in programming KTB swing training periods. For muscular endurance, the addition of KTB swing on a periodized basis seems to be a more effective strategy.
RESUMO
ABSTRACT: Simão, R, Polito, M, de Salles, BF, Marinho, DA, Garrido, ND, Santos Junior, ERT, and Willardson, JM. Acute and long-term comparison of fixed vs. self-selected rest interval between sets on upper-body strength. J Strength Cond Res 36(2): 540-544, 2022-The effects of different rest interval durations between sets has been widely studied, but only recently, the self-selected rest interval (SSRI) has been a matter of interest. However, previous studies comparing fixed and SSRI have investigated only acute responses. The purpose of this study was to analyze the acute and long-term effects of a fixed rest interval (FRI) vs. an SSRI between sets on upper-body performance and strength gains. Thirty-three trained men were randomly divided into 2 groups: FRI (75 seconds between sets), and SSRI. Both groups performed 3 sets with 75% of 1-repetition maximum until repetition failure in the chest press (CP), lat pull-down (LPD), shoulder press (SP), and seated row (SR) 3 times a week for 8 weeks. The results demonstrated that the SSRI allowed for significantly greater repetition performance vs. the FRI in the CP (26.1 ± 2.0 vs. 21.5 ± 1.8), LPD (30.1 ± 2.3 vs. 24.9 ± 1.9), SP (24.0 ± 2.8 vs. 17.4 ± 1.5), and SR (26.3 ± 1.6 vs. 22.0 ± 1.6). In addition, the following strength gains were observed: SSRI (CP: 6.8%, LPD: 8.0%, SP: 6.7%, SR: 7.8%) and FRI (CP: 7.4%, LPD: 6.7%, SP: 6.1%, SR: 7.0%) without significant differences between the groups. In conclusion, within an 8-week period, both protocols seem to be effective for strength gains, despite the higher training volume accomplished by the SSRI group. However, the FRI was 37% more time efficient.
