Purpose: To compare the effects of 2 upper-body strength-training programs differing in set configuration on bench press 1-repetition maximum (BP1RM), bench press throw peak velocity against 30 kg (BPT30), and handball throwing velocity. Methods: Thirty-five men were randomly assigned to a traditional group (TRG; n = 12), rest redistribution group (RRG; n = 13), or control group (n = 10). The training program was conducted with the bench press exercise and lasted 6 weeks (2 sessions per week): TRG—6 sets × 5 repetitions with 3 minutes of interset rest; RRG—1 set × 30 repetitions with 31 seconds of interrepetition rest. The total rest period (15 min) and load intensity (75% 1RM) were the same for both experimental groups. Subjects performed all repetitions at maximal intended velocity, and the load was adjusted on a daily basis from velocity recordings. Results: A significant time × group interaction was observed for both BP1RM and BPT30 (P < .01) due to the higher values observed at posttest compared with pretest for TRG (effect size [ES] = 0.77) and RRG (ES = 0.56–0.59) but not for the control group (ES ≤ 0.08). The changes in BP1RM and BPT30 did not differ between TRG and RRG (ES = 0.04 and 0.05, respectively). No significant differences in handball throwing velocity were observed between the pretest and posttest (ES = 0.16, 0.22, and 0.02 for TRG, RRG, and control group, respectively). Conclusions: Resistance-training programs based on not-to-failure traditional and rest redistribution set configurations induce similar changes in BP1RM, BPT30, and handball throwing velocity.
Jesualdo Cuevas-Aburto, Ivan Jukic, Jorge Miguel González-Hernández, Danica Janicijevic, Paola Barboza-González, Luis Javier Chirosa-Ríos and Amador García-Ramos
Eliseo Iglesias-Soler, Eduardo Carballeira, Tania Sánchez-Otero, Xian Mayo and Miguel Fernández-del-Olmo
To analyze performance during the execution of a maximum number of repetitions (MNR) in a cluster-set configuration.
Nine judokas performed 2 sessions of parallel squats with a load corresponding to 4-repetition maximum (4RM) with a traditional-training (TT) and cluster-training (CT) set configuration. The TT consisted of 3 sets of repetitions leading to failure and 3 min of rest between sets. In the CT the MNR was performed with a rest interval between repetitions (45.44 ± 11.89 s). The work-to-rest ratio was similar for CT and TT.
MNR in CT was 45.5 ± 32 repetitions and was 9.33 ± 1.87 times the volume in TT. There was a tendency for the average mean propulsive velocity (MPV) to be higher in CT (0.39 ± 0.04 vs 0.36 ± 0.04 m/s for CT and TT, respectively, P = .054, standardized mean difference [d] = 0.57). The average MPV was higher in CT for a similar number of repetitions (0.44 ± 0.08 vs 0.36 ± 0.04 m/s for CT and TT, respectively, P = .006, d = 1.33). The number of repetitions in TT was correlated with absolute 4RM load (r = –.719, P = .031) but not in CT (r = –.273, P = .477).
A cluster-set configuration allows for a higher number of repetitions and improved sustainability of mechanical performance. CT, unlike TT, was not affected by absolute load, suggesting an improvement of training volume with high absolute loads.
Justin J. Merrigan, James J. Tufano, Jonathan M. Oliver, Jason B. White, Jennifer B. Fields and Margaret T. Jones
MH . Cluster training: a novel method for introducing training program variation . Strength Cond J . 2008 ; 30 ( 1 ): 67 – 76 . doi:10.1519/SSC.0b013e31816383e1 10.1519/SSC.0b013e31816383e1 12. Tufano JJ , Conlon JA , Nimphius S , et al . Maintenance of velocity and power with cluster