The Effects of Ballistic and Nonballistic Bench Press on Mechanical Variables

What do we Know about Complex-Contrast Training? A Systematic Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

The complex-contrast training (CCT) method utilizes two exercises with different loads and movement velocities in a set-by-set fashion to induce multiple neuromuscular adaptations. The speculated primary mechanism involves the post-activation potentiation or post-activation performance enhancement (PAPE) of the muscles used during the heavy load (low velocity) exercise, thereby improving the performance of lower load (high velocity) exercise. However, no previous study has attempted to systematically synthesize the available evidence on CCT (e.g., if post-activation potentiation or PAPE was measured during the training sessions during the intervention period). This study aimed to synthesize the available evidence on CCT using a systematic scoping review approach. More specifically, we identified gaps in the literature using an evidence gap map (EGM), and provided future directions for research.

METHODS

Three electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) were searched up to 20th February 2024. Data were extracted under a PICO framework: (a) Participants-related data (e.g., age, sex, type of sport); (b) Intervention-related data (e.g., duration of training); (c) Comparators (when available); and (d) Outcomes (e.g., measures of physical fitness). Interactive EGMs were created using the EPPI mapper software.

RESULTS

From the 5,695 records screened, 68 studies were eligible for inclusion, involving 1,821 participants (only 145 females from 5 studies). All CCT interventions lasted ≤ 16 weeks. More than half of the studies assessed countermovement jump, sprint, and maximal strength performances. No studies were identified which examined upper-body CCT exercises alone, and no study assessed PAPE during the CCT sessions. Overall, the available evidence was rated with a low level of confidence.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, whether CCT produces a PAPE that translates into longitudinal performance gains remains unclear. Moreover, the available evidence on the effects of CCT on various outcomes provides low confidence regarding the most effective way to implement this training method, particularly among females, and beyond long-term interventions.

Effects of complex training compared to resistance training alone on physical fitness of healthy individuals: A systematic review with meta-analysis

Combining traditional resistance and ballistic exercises in a complex training (CT) format has shown improved physical fitness compared to the control conditions. However, no meta-analysis has directly compared CT with traditional resistance training (RT) alone. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and WoS. Thirty-two studies involving 726 participants were included. Both RT and CT similarly improved one-repetition maximum (1RM) squat and bench press, 10 m and 30-60 m linear sprint time, squat jump height, jump power, reactive strength index, and standing long jump distance. Compared to RT, CT favoured 5-m (ES = 0.96) and 20-m linear sprint (ES = 0.52), change-of-direction speed (CODS; ES = 0.39), and countermovement jump height (CMJ; ES = 0.36). Furthermore, moderating effects of training frequency, duration, and complex training type were reported. Certainty of evidence was considered low for 5-m and 20-m linear sprints and CODS and very low for other outcomes. Compared to traditional resistance training, complex training may improve 5-m and 20-m linear sprints, CODS, and CMJ height. The effects of complex training may be optimised by longer interventions (≥7 weeks), with ~ 3 weekly training sessions, and using ascending and contrast training formats. However, the certainty of evidence ranges from very low to low.

Sex differences in the determination of prescribed load in ballistic bench press

Introduction: The objectives of the present study were twofold: first, to identify the specific relative load at which the concentric motion transforms into a purely propulsive action among women, and second, to compare the load-velocity relationships between men and women during the bench press throw. Methods: Fourteen men and fourteen women participated in a test where they progressively increased the load until reaching their one-repetition maximum (1RM) in the bench press exercise. Linear regression models were employed to elucidate the relationships between load and velocity, as well as load and the propulsive phase (% of total concentric time). Additionally, ANCOVA was utilized to compare the linear regression models between men and women. Results: The results revealed strong and linear associations between load and mean propulsive velocity (MPV) for both men and women, as well as between load and the propulsive phase. Notably, there were significant differences in MPV and the propulsive phase concerning load between men and women. Women transitioned into a fully propulsive concentric phase at approximately 80% of their 1RM, while men achieved this entirely propulsive phase at around 85% of their 1RM. Furthermore, women exhibited reduced velocities when handling lighter relative loads compared to men. Conversely, women demonstrated higher velocities when dealing with loads exceeding 85% of their 1RM in contrast to their male counterparts. Discussion: These findings hold notable implications for prescribing bench press throw loads for women, which should differ from those recommended for men. Further studies are necessary to validate the efficacy of the proposed load recommendations.

The Effect of High Volume Power Training on Repeated High-Intensity Performance and the Assessment of Repeat Power Ability: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

High volume power training (HVPT) involves high volumes of high-velocity resistance training, with the aim to improve repeated high-intensity efforts (RHIEs). Repeat power ability (RPA) is the ability to repeatedly produce maximal or near maximal efforts. Assessments of RPA using external loading may determine the ability to perform repeat RHIEs typical of many sports and, therefore, provide useful information on the effectiveness of training.

OBJECTIVES

(1) Identify the different HVPT protocols; (2) examine the acute responses and chronic adaptations to different HVPT protocols; (3) identify different lower body RPA assessment protocols and highlight similarities, differences and potential limitations between each protocol, and; (4) describe the reliability and validity of RPA assessments.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed using SPORTDiscus, PubMed, CINAHL and Embase for studies utilising HVPT protocols and assessments of RPA. Eligible studies included peer-reviewed journal articles published in English.

RESULTS

Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria of the final review. Of the eight longitudinal studies, three were rated as fair and five were rated as poor methodological quality, respectively. In contrast, all 12 cross-sectional studies were considered to have a low risk of bias. Preliminary evidence suggests that HVPT can enhance RHIE, RPA, anaerobic capacity, anaerobic power and aerobic performance. HVPT generally consists of 2-3 sessions per week, utilising loads of 30-40% 1 repetition maximum (RM), for 3-5 sets of 10-20 repetitions, with inter-set rest periods of 2-3 min. RPA assessments can be valid and reliable and may provide useful information on an athlete's ability to perform RHIE and the success of HVPT programmes.

CONCLUSIONS

HVPT can be used to improve a number of physical qualities including RPA and RHIE; while a variety of RPA assessments provide valid and reliable information regarding the athlete's ability to perform RHIEs. Considering the heterogeneity in the HVPT protocols currently used and the relatively low volume and quality of longitudinal publications in this area, further studies are needed to identify the effects of a variety of HVPT methods on RPA, RHIE and other performance outcomes and to identify the most valid and reliable RPA outcomes to use in such studies.

Determining the One Repetition Maximum in the Ballistic Bench Press Exercise

Loturco, I, McGuigan, MR, Suchomel, T, Freitas, TT, Rodríguez-Rosell, D, Pereira, LA, and Pareja-Blanco, F. Determining the one repetition maximum in the ballistic bench press exercise. J Strength Cond Res 34(12): 3321-3325, 2020-The purpose of this study was to determine the relative load (% of one repetition maximum [1RM]) at which the concentric action becomes entirely propulsive in the bench press (BP) exercise and verify whether this relative load varies between athletes with different strength levels. Twenty-eight professional athletes (Olympic boxers, professional mixed martial arts fighters, and elite rugby players) performed a progressive loading test up to their 1RM in the BP exercise (BP-1RM). Athletes were ordered according to their relative strength values and equally divided into 2 different groups: "low" (≤1.34) and "high" (≥1.38) strength levels. An independent t-test was used to compare the variables between groups. Significance level was set at p < 0.05. No significant differences were observed between the groups for the mean propulsive velocity attained at 1RM and for the maximum load that required braking action during the execution of the traditional BP exercise (effect size = 0.27 and 0.15, respectively; p > 0.05). Our results revealed that at 80% 1RM the concentric action can already be considered as 100% propulsive in the BP exercise. Importantly, this occurrence was independent of strength level. Therefore, this relative strength measure (i.e., 80% BP-1RM) may be used as a reference for the 1RM in the BP throw.

Mechanical Characteristics of Heavy vs. Light Load Ballistic Resistance Training in Older Adults

Rodriguez-Lopez, C, Alcazar, J, Sánchez-Martín, C, Ara, I, Csapo, R, and Alegre, LM. Mechanical characteristics in heavy vs. light load ballistic resistance training in older adults. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2020-Although power-oriented resistance training (RT) is strongly recommended to counter age-related neuromuscular function declines, there is still controversy about which intensities of load should be used to elicit optimal training adaptations. Knowledge of the mechanical characteristics of power-oriented RT performed at different intensities might help to better understand the training stimulus that triggers load-dependent adaptations in older adults. Using a cross-over design, 15 well-functioning older volunteers (9 men and 6 women; 73.6 ± 3.8 years) completed 2 volume × load-matched ballistic RT sessions with heavy (HL: 6 × 6 × 80% 1-repetition maximum [1RM]) and light-load (LL: 6 × 12 × 40% 1RM) on a horizontal leg press exercise. Electromyographic (EMG) and mechanical variables (work, force, velocity, and power) as well as intraset neuromuscular fatigue (i.e., relative losses in force, velocity, and power) were analyzed. More concentric mechanical work was performed in the LL training session, compared with HL (36.2 ± 11.2%; p < 0.001). Despite the higher mean EMG activity of the quadriceps femoris muscle (13.2 ± 21.1%; p = 0.038) and greater concentric force (35.2 ± 7.6%; p < 0.001) during HL, higher concentric velocity (41.0 ± 12.7%, p < 0.001) and a trend toward higher concentric power (7.2 ± 18.9%, p = 0.075) were found for LL. Relative velocity losses were similar in both sessions (≈10%); however, relative force losses were only found in LL (7.4 ± 6.5%, p = 0.003). Considering the greater mechanical work performed and concentric power generated, ballistic RT using LL may, therefore, represent a stronger stimulus driving training adaptations as compared with volume × load-matched heavy-load training. Relative losses in force and power should be monitored in addition to velocity losses during ballistic RT.