The effectiveness of traditional vs. velocity-based strength training on explosive and maximal strength performance: A network meta-analysis

High Cognitive Effort Prior to Velocity-Based Training Sessions Reduces Rate of Force Development but Not Maximum Strength Gains in Untrained Male Adults

This study aimed to analyze the chronic effect of high cognitive effort immediately before resistance exercise sessions on neuromuscular performance in untrained male adults. We used a mixed experimental design, with the group as between-participants factor and time as within-participants factor. Thirty-four participants were randomly assigned to two parallel groups: high cognitive effort (n = 17) and control (n = 17). Subjects in the control group were seated for 30 min before the resistance exercise sessions, while the high cognitive effort group completed incongruent trials of the Stroop task until subjective mental fatigue was present immediately before resistance exercise sessions. Participants attended 45 sessions over 15 weeks, consisting of three familiarizations, three baseline evaluations, 36 velocity-based training sessions, and three postexperiment evaluation sessions. Rate of force development (RFD) during the isometric mid-thigh pull, half back-squat 1-RM, and countermovement jump (CMJ) were measured before and after the 12-week intervention. A significant group × time interaction effect was found for the average RFD at 0-250 ms (p < 0.05), with greater improvements for the control group than for the high cognitive effort group. There was no group × time interaction for half back-squat 1-RM (p > 0.05). Also, there was no group × time interaction for CMJ (p > 0.05). In conclusion, repeated high cognitive effort immediately prior to resistance exercise sessions is a phenomenon that can induce greater early velocity loss and, consequently, impairs the improvements in RFD. However, this did not inhibit the increased performance for explosive strength and CMJ in male untrained adults. High cognitive effort before resistance exercise sessions should be avoided.

Application of a New Monitoring Variable: Effects of Power Loss During Squat Training on Strength Gains and Sports Performance

ABSTRACT

Zhang, M, Chen, L, Dai, J, Yang, Q, Huang, Z, He, J, Ji, H, Sun, J, and Li, D. Application of a new monitoring variable: Effects of power loss during squat training on strength gains and sports performance. J Strength Cond Res 38(4): 656-670, 2024-This study aimed to compare the effects of power loss (PL) autoregulated volume (PL10 and PL20) with standardized fixed-load (FL) prescription on strength, sports performance, and lean body mass (LBM). Thirty-five female basketball players from a sports college were randomly assigned to 3 experimental groups (PL10, n = 12; PL20, n = 12; and FL, n = 11, respectively) that performed a resistance training (RT) program with wave-like periodization for 10 weeks using the back squat exercise. Assessments performed before (Pre) and after (Post) intervention included assessed 1 repetition maximum (1RM), body composition, 20-m sprint (T20M), change of direction (COD), and jump performance, including countermovement jump with arm swing, maximum vertical jump, and reactive strength index. Three groups showed significant improvements in strength (effect size [ES]: PL10 = 2.98, PL20 = 3.14, and FL = 1.90; p < 0.001) and jump performance (ES: PL10 = 0.74, PL20 = 1.50, and FL = 0.50; p <0.05-0.001). However, PL10 and PL20 demonstrated different advantages in sports performance compared with FL (group × time interaction, p <0.05). Specifically, PL10 significantly improved COD performance (ES = -0.79 ∼ -0.53, p <0.01), whereas PL20 showed greater improvements in sprint (ES = -0.57, p <0.05) and jump performance (ES = 0.67-1.64, p <0.01-0.001). Moreover, PL10 resulted in similar gains to PL20 and beneficial improvements compared with FL in LBM, despite performing the least repetitions. Overall, the study indicates that power loss-based autoregulation induces greater gains in LBM and sports performance, as well as eliciting a higher efficiency dose response than standardized FL prescriptions, particularly for PL10. Therefore, incorporating PL monitoring in training programs is recommended, and further studies on power-based RT would be worthwhile.

Effects of high-intensity interval training on strength, speed, and endurance performance among racket sports players: A systematic review

This study aims to present a critical review of the existing literature on the effects of High-Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) on strength, speed, and endurance performance among racket sports athletes. This study conducted a systematic literature review by PRISMA guidelines. Various well-known academic and scientific databases were used for research collection, including PubMed, EBSCOhost, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Out of 27 relevant studies, 10 were selected for inclusion in this systematic review, all meeting the required inclusion criteria. The quality of each study was assessed using the PEDro scale, with scores ranging from 3 to 5 for the selected studies. HIIT was found to improve racket players' VO2 max (maximum oxygen uptake), running and repetitive sprint performance, jumping performance, and hitting speed during play. Current findings indicate that HIIT can significantly benefit athletic performance. Long-term HIIT allows athletes to enhance their power while improving crucial variables related to both aerobic and anaerobic endurance. This anaerobic endurance and explosive power type is particularly vital for racket sports players. For example, athletes in table tennis and badminton must exert maximum effort during high-intensity middle and back-court play. Racket athletes also need to maintain a stable state while preserving ball speed and positioning, and must quickly recover to prepare for the next rally. This training mechanism can assist athletes in honing their skills and achieving more efficient hitting quality. Therefore, this paper recommends that racket sports athletes incorporate HIIT into their regular training routines. The suggested frequency is three times per week, with each training session lasting 30-40 minutes, and a total duration of six to eight weeks. Trial registration. Systematic Review Registration: [https://inplasy.com/], identififier[INPLASY20230080].

The velocity of resistance exercise does not accurately assess repetitions-in-reserve

This study assessed the reliability of mean concentric bar velocity from 3- to 0-repetitions in reserve (RIR) across four sets in different exercises (bench press and prone row) and with different loads (60 and 80% 1-repetition maximum; 1RM). Whether velocity values from set one could be used to predict RIR in subsequent sets was also examined. Twenty recreationally active males performed baseline 1RM testing before two randomised sessions of four sets to failure with 60 or 80% 1RM. A linear position transducer measured mean concentric velocity of repetitions, and the velocity associated with each RIR value up to 0-RIR. For both exercises, velocity decreased between each repetition from 3- to 0-RIR (p ≤ 0.010). Mean concentric velocity of RIR values was not reliable across sets in the bench press (mean intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.40, mean coefficient of variation [CV] = 21.3%), despite no significant between-set differences (p = 0.530). Better reliability was noted in the prone row (mean ICC = 0.80, mean CV = 6.1%), but velocity declined by 0.019-0.027 m·s-1 (p = 0.032) between sets. Mean concentric velocity was 0.050-0.058 m·s-1 faster in both exercises with 60% than 80% 1RM with (p < 0.001). At the individual level, the velocity of specific RIR values from set one accurately predicted RIR from 5- to 0-RIR for 30.9% of repetitions in subsequent sets. These findings suggest that velocity of specific RIR values vary across exercises, loads and sets. As velocity-based RIR estimates were not accurate for 69.1% of repetitions, alternative methods to should be considered for autoregulating of resistance exercise in recreationally active individuals.

The Effect of Various Training Variables on Developing Muscle Strength in Velocity-based Training: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Velocity-based training is an advanced auto-regulation method that uses objective indices to dynamically regulate training loads. However, it is unclear currently how to maximize muscle strength with appropriate velocity-based training settings. To fill this gap, we conducted a series of dose-response and subgroup meta-analyses to check the effects of training variables/parameters, such as intensity, velocity loss, set, inter-set rest intervals, frequency, period, and program, on muscle strength in velocity-based training. A systematic literature search was performed to identify studies via PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, EBSCO, and Cochrane. One repetition maximum was selected as the outcome to indicate muscle strength. Eventually, twenty-seven studies with 693 trained individuals were included in the analysis. We found that the velocity loss of 15 to 30%, the intensity of 70 to 80%1RM, the set of 3 to 5 per session, the inter-set rest interval of 2 to 4 min, and the period of 7 to 12 weeks could be appropriate settings for developing muscle strength. Three periodical programming models in velocity-based training, including linear programming, undulating programming, and constant programming, were effective for developing muscle strength. Besides, changing periodical programming models around every 9 weeks may help to avoid a training plateau in strength adaption.

Effects of Low- Versus High-Velocity-Loss Thresholds With Similar Training Volume on Maximal Strength and Hypertrophy in Highly Trained Individuals

AIMS

In the present intervention study, low-velocity-loss (LVL) versus high-velocity-loss (HVL) thresholds in the squat and bench press were compared for changes in muscle strength, power, and hypertrophy.

METHODS

Strength-trained volunteers (7♀ and 9♂; age: 27.2 [3.4] y; height: 174.6 [8.0] cm; body mass: 75.3 [10.1] kg) were randomized into an LVL or HVL threshold group (LVL n = 3♀ + 5♂, and HVL n = 4♀ + 4♂). Training took place 3 times per week over 6 weeks (loads: ∼75%-90% of 1-repetition maximum [1RM]). The thresholds of LVLs and HVLs were set at 20% and 40% of maximal velocity, respectively, for the squat, and at 30% and 60%, respectively, for the bench press. Before and after the intervention, 1RM, leg press power, and squat jump were tested. The load (∼45% of 1RM) corresponding to 1-m/s velocity was assessed in all sessions for both exercises. In addition, the thickness of the vastus lateralis and triceps brachii and body composition (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry [DEXA]) were measured.

RESULTS

Squat and bench-press 1RM increased similarly in both groups by 7% to 11% (SD: 4%-6%, P < .05). No group differences were observed for changes in jump height, leg press power, or DEXA lean mass. However, HVL showed a small increase in muscle thickness of the vastus lateralis compared with LVL (6 ± 6% [95% CI] group difference, P < .05).

CONCLUSION

For strength-trained individuals, high-volume lower-velocity-loss thresholds were as effective as higher thresholds for improvements in 1RM strength; but local hypertrophy was seemingly elicited faster with higher velocity-loss thresholds.