Search

Background: This study explored the deloading practices of competitive strength and physique athletes. A 55-item anonymised web-based survey was distributed to a convenience-based, cross-sectional sample of competitive strength and physique athletes (n = 246; males = 181 [73.6%], females = 65 [26.4%]; age = 29.5 ± 8.6 years) who had 8.2 ± 6.2 years of resistance training and 3.8 ± 3.1 years of competition experience. Results: All athletes deloaded within training with energy and fatigue management being the main reasons to do so. The typical duration of a deload was 6.4 ± 1.7 days, integrated into the training programme every 5.6 ± 2.3 weeks. Deloading was undertaken using a proactive, pre-planned strategy (or in combination with an autoregulated approach) and undertaken when performance stalled or during periods of increased muscle soreness or joint aches. Athletes reported that training volume would decrease (through a reduction in both repetitions per set and sets per week), but training frequency would remain unchanged during deloads. Additionally, athletes reported that training intensity (load lifted) would decrease, and effort would be reduced (facilitated through an increase in repetitions in reserve). Athletes would generally maintain the same exercise selection during deloading. For athletes that supplemented deloading with additional recovery modalities (n = 118; 48%), the most reported strategies were massage, static stretching and foam rolling. Conclusion: Results from this research might assist strength and physique athletes and coaches to plan their deloading. Future research should empirically investigate the findings from this study to further evaluate the potential utility of deloading in strength and physique sports. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to compare kinetics and kinematics of 2 lower-body free-weight exercises, calculated from concentric and propulsion subphases, across multiple loads. Sixteen strength-trained men performed back squat 1 repetition maximum (1RM) tests (visit 1), followed by 2 incremental back squat and jump squat protocols (visit 2) (loads = 0% and 30-60%, back squat 1RM). Concentric phase and propulsion phase force-time-displacement characteristics were derived from force plate data and compared using analysis of variance and Hedges' g effect sizes. Intrasession reliability was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of variation (CV). All dependent variables met acceptable reliability (ICC >0.7; CV < 10%). Statistically significant 3-way interactions (load × phase × exercise) and 2-way main effects (phase × exercise) were observed for mean force, velocity (30-60% 1RM), power, work, displacement, and duration (0%, 30-50% 1RM) (p < 0.05). A significant 2-way interaction (load × exercise) was observed for impulse (p < 0.001). Jump squat velocity (g = 0.94-3.80), impulse (g = 1.98-3.21), power (g = 0.84-2.93), and work (g = 1.09-3.56) were significantly larger across concentric and propulsion phases, as well as mean propulsion force (g = 0.30-1.06) performed over all loads (p < 0.001). No statistically significant differences were observed for mean concentric force. Statistically longer durations (g = 0.38-1.54) and larger displacements (g = 2.03-4.40) were evident for all loads and both subphases (p < 0.05). Ballistic, lower-body exercise produces greater kinetic and kinematic outputs than nonballistic equivalents, irrespective of phase determination. Practitioners should therefore use ballistic methods when prescribing or testing lower-body exercises to maximize athlete's force-time-displacement characteristics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigated the effects of creatine and sodium bicarbonate coingestion on mechanical power during repeated sprints. Nine well-trained men (age = 21.6 ± 0.9 yr, stature = 1.82 ± 0.05 m, body mass = 80.1 ± 12.8 kg) participated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, counterbalanced, crossover study using six 10-s repeated Wingate tests. Participants ingested either a placebo (0.5 g·kg-1 of maltodextrin), 20 g·d-1 of creatine monohydrate + placebo, 0.3 g·kg-1 of sodium bicarbonate + placebo, or coingestion + placebo for 7 days, with a 7-day washout between conditions. Participants were randomized into two groups with a differential counterbalanced order. Creatine conditions were ordered first and last. Indices of mechanical power output (W), total work (J) and fatigue index (W·s-1) were measured during each test and analyzed using the magnitude of differences between groups in relation to the smallest worthwhile change in performance. Compared with placebo, both creatine (effect size (ES) = 0.37-0.83) and sodium bicarbonate (ES = 0.22-0.46) reported meaningful improvements on indices of mechanical power output. Coingestion provided small meaningful improvements on indices of mechanical power output (W) compared with sodium bicarbonate (ES = 0.28-0.41), but not when compared with creatine (ES = -0.21-0.14). Coingestion provided a small meaningful improvement in total work (J; ES = 0.24) compared with creatine. Fatigue index (W·s-1) was impaired in all conditions compared with placebo. In conclusion, there was no meaningful additive effect of creatine and sodium bicarbonate coingestion on mechanical power during repeated sprints. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Optimal prescription of resistance exercise load (kg) is essential for the development of maximal strength. Two methods are commonly used in practice with no clear consensus on the most effective approach for the improvement of maximal strength. Objective: The primary aim of this review was to compare the effectiveness of percentage 1RM (% 1RM) and repetition maximum targets (RM) as load prescription methods for the development of maximal strength. Methods: Electronic database searches of MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, Scopus, and CINAHL Complete were conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Studies were eligible for inclusion if a direct measure of maximal strength was used, a non-training control group was a comparator, the training intervention was > 4 weeks in duration and was replicable, and participants were defined as healthy and between the ages of 18–40. Methodological quality of the studies was evaluated using a modified Downs and Black checklist. Percentage change (%) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for all strength-based training groups were calculated. Statistical significance (p < 0.05) was reported from each study. Results: Twenty-two studies comprising a total of 761 participants (585 males and 176 females) were found to meet the inclusion criteria. 12 studies were returned for % 1RM, with 10 for RM. All studies showed statistically significant improvements in maximal strength in the training groups (31.3 ± 21.9%; 95% CI 33.1–29.5%). The mean quality rating for all studies was 17.7 ± 2.3. Four studies achieved a good methodological rating, with the remainder classified as moderate. Conclusions: Both % 1RM and RM are effective tools for improving maximal strength. % 1RM appears to be a better prescriptive method than RM potentially due to a more sophisticated management of residual fatigue. However, large heterogeneity was present within this data. Lower body and multi-joint exercises appear to be more appropriate for developing maximal strength. Greater consensus is required in defining optimal training prescriptions, physiological adaptations, and training status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]