Planned Load Reduction Versus Fixed Load: A Strategy to Reduce the Perception of Effort With Similar Improvements in Hypertrophy and Strength

in International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance
Restricted access

Purchase article

USD $24.95

Student 1 year subscription

USD $107.00

1 year subscription

USD $142.00

Student 2 year subscription

USD $203.00

2 year subscription

USD $265.00

Purpose: To compare muscle thickness and 10-repetition maximum (10RM) between no load reduction and load reductions during 16 wk of resistance training. Methods: A total of 21 moderately trained men (age 23.2 [4.2] y, body mass 75.1 [7.6] kg, height 175 [4] cm) were randomized into 1 of 3 exercise groups: control (CON, n = 7), all sets with 10RM load; 5% load reduction (RED 5, n = 7); and 10% load reduction (RED 10, n = 7) for set 2 and set 3. The resistance training program consisted of completing 3 sets each of biceps and Scott curls, performed to volitional fatigue 3 d·wk−1. Results: Volume load lifted over the 16 wk was similar among groups (CON, 38,495 [4397] kg; RED 5, 37,388 [3684] kg; RED 10, 42,634 [6733] kg; P = .094). Muscle thickness increased in all groups (P < .001), with no differences noted among groups (P = .976). Biceps-curl and Scott-curl 10RM increased in all groups (P < .001), with no differences noted among groups (Scott curl P = .238; biceps curl P = .401). Rating of perceived exertion (RPE) was significantly lower for RED 10 (6.8 [0.1]) than for CON (7.0 [0.1]; P < .001) or RED 5 (7.1 [0.1]; P = .001) for the Scott curl. RPE was significantly lower (P = .001) for the biceps curl in RED 10 (6.8 [0.3]) than in CON (7.3 [0.9]), with neither group different from RED 5 (7.0 [0.1]). Conclusions: Load reduction did not yield a difference in hypertrophy or 10RM as compared with CON. However, RED 10 induced a significantly lower RPE. Thus, load reduction may be a beneficial strategy to reduce the perception of effort during training while achieving similar improvements in hypertrophy and strength.

Lima, Amancio, Gonçalves, and Machado are with the Laboratory of Physiology and Biokinetics, Iguaçu University, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Koch is with Lenoir Rhyne University, Hickory, NC. Curty is with the Laboratory of Molecular and Cellular Physiology, Dept of Physiological Sciences, Federal University of Espírito Santo (UFES), Vitoria, Brazil, and the Dept of Physical Education, School of St Francis of Assisi, Santa Teresa, Brazil. Machado is with the Laboratory of Human Movement Studies, Universitary Foundation of Itaperuna (FUNITA), Itaperuna, Brazil.

Curty (victorcurty01@gmail.com) is corresponding author.
International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance

Article Sections

References

  • 1.

    Wernbom MAugustsson JThomeé R. The influence of frequency, intensity, volume and mode of strength training on whole muscle cross-sectional area in humans. Sports Med. 2007;37(3):225264. PubMed ID: 17326698 doi:10.2165/00007256-200737030-00004

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    ACSM. American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2009;41(3):687708. doi:10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181915670

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    NHLBI. Clinical guidelines on the identification, evaluation, and treatment of overweight and obesity in adults-the evidence report. National Institutes of Health. Obes Res. 1998;6(suppl 2):51S209S. doi:10.1002/j.1550-8528.1998.tb00690.x

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    de Souza TP JrFleck SJSimão Ret al. Comparison between constant and decreasing rest intervals: influence on maximal strength and hypertrophy. J Strength Cond Res. 2010;24(7):18431850. PubMed ID: 20543741 doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181ddae4a

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Campos GELuecke TJWendeln HKet al. Muscular adaptations in response to three different resistance-training regimens: specificity of repetition maximum training zones. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2002;88(1–2):5060. PubMed ID: 12436270 doi:10.1007/s00421-002-0681-6

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    NSCA. Basics of strength and conditioning manual. Natl Strength Cond Assoc. 2012;207(7):104. doi:10.1093/infdis/jis905

  • 7.

    Kraemer WFry A. Strength testing: Development and evaluation of methodology. In: Mauch PJFoster C eds. Physiological Assessment of Human Fitness. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 1995:115138.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Carpinelli RN. The size principle and a critical analysis of the unsubstantiated heavier-is-better recommendation for resistance training. J Exerc Sci Fit. 2008;6(2):6786.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Willardson JMKattenbraker MSKhairallah MFontana FE. Research note: effect of load reductions over consecutive sets on repetition performance. J Strength Cond Res. 2010;24(3):879884. PubMed ID: 19816212 doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181aeb0ea

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Willardson JMSimão RFontana FE. The effect of load reductions on repetition performance for commonly performed multijoint resistance exercises. J Strength Cond Res. 2012;26(11):29392945. PubMed ID: 22130393 doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182430170

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Willardson JMBurkett LN. A comparison of 3 different rest intervals on the exercise volume completed during a workout. J Strength Cond Res. 2005;19(1):2326. PubMed ID: 15705039 doi:10.1519/R-13853.1

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Vingren JLKraemer DWJRatamess NAAnderson JMVolek JSMaresh CM. Testosterone physiology in resistance exercise and training. Sport Med. 2012;40(12):10371053. doi:10.2165/11536910-000000000-00000.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    West DWDPhillips SM. Associations of exercise-induced hormone profiles and gains in strength and hypertrophy in a large cohort after weight training. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2012;112(7):26932702. PubMed ID: 22105707 doi:10.1007/s00421-011-2246-z

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Burd NAWest DWDStaples AWet al. Low-load high volume resistance exercise stimulates muscle protein synthesis more than high-load low volume resistance exercise in young men. PLoS ONE. 2010;5(8):12033. PubMed ID: 20711498 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0012033

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Terzis GSpengos KMascher HGeorgiadis GManta PBlomstrand E. The degree of p70 S6k and S6 phosphorylation in human skeletal muscle in response to resistance exercise depends on the training volume. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2010;110(4):835843. PubMed ID: 20617335 doi:10.1007/s00421-010-1527-2

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Ahtiainen JPWalker SSilvennoinen Met al. Exercise type and volume alter signaling pathways regulating skeletal muscle glucose uptake and protein synthesis. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2015;115(9):18351845. PubMed ID: 25861013 doi:10.1007/s00421-015-3155-3

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Starkey DBPollock MLIshida Yet al. Effect of resistance training volume on strength and muscle thickness. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1996;28(10):13111320. PubMed ID: 8897390 doi:10.1097/00005768-199610000-00016

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Hass CJGarzarella Lde Hoyos DPollock ML. Single versus multiple sets in long-term recreational weightlifters. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000;32(1):235242. PubMed ID: 10647555 doi:10.1097/00005768-200001000-00035

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Rhea MRAlvar BABurkett LN. Single versus multiple sets for strength: a meta-analysis to address the controversy. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2002;73(4):485488. PubMed ID: 12495252 doi:10.1080/02701367.2002.10609050

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    Mitchell CJChurchward-Venne TAWest DWDet al. Resistance exercise load does not determine training-mediated hypertrophic gains in young men. J Appl Physiol. 2012;113(1):7177. PubMed ID: 22518835 doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00307.2012

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Radaelli RFleck SJLeite Tet al. Dose-response of 1, 3, and 5 sets of resistance exercise on strength, local muscular endurance, and hypertrophy. J Strength Cond Res. 2015;29(5):13491358. PubMed ID: 25546444 doi:10.1519/JSC.0000000000000758

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Article Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 40 40 13
Full Text Views 0 0 0
PDF Downloads 0 0 0

Altmetric Badge

PubMed

Google Scholar