The main goal of the present study was to evaluate the acute effects of blood flow restriction (BFR) at 70% of full arterial occlusion pressure on strength-endurance performance during the bench press exercise. The study included 14 strength-trained male subjects (age = 25.6 ± 4.1 years; body mass = 81.7 ± 10.8 kg; bench press 1 repetition maximum (1RM) = 130.0 ± 22.1 kg), experienced in resistance training (3.9 ± 2.4 years). During the experimental sessions in a randomized crossover design, the subjects performed three sets of the bench press at 80% 1RM performed to failure with two different conditions: without BFR (CON); and with BFR (BFR). Friedman’s test showed significant differences between BFR and CON conditions for the number of repetitions performed (p < 0.001); for peak bar velocity (p < 0.001) and for mean bar velocity (p < 0.001). The pairwise comparisons showed a significant decrease for peak bar velocity and mean bar velocity in individual Set 1 for BFR when compared to CON conditions (p = 0.01 for both). The two-way repeated measures ANOVA showed a significant main effect for the time under tension (p = 0.02). A post-hoc comparisons for the main effect showed a significant increase in time under tension for BFR when compared to CON (p = 0.02). The results of the presented study indicate that BFR used during strength-endurance exercise generally does not decrease the level of endurance performance, while it causes a drop in bar velocity.

The goal of the study was to determine the differences between volitional and maximal movement tempo during resistance exercise. Ten healthy men volunteered for the study (age = 26.4 ± 4.8 years; body mass = 93.8 ± 9.6 kg; barbell squat one-repetition maximum (1RM) = 175 ± 16.7 kg; bench press 1RM = 140.5 ± 26.8 kg). In a randomized order, the participants performed six sets of the barbell squat and the bench press exercise at progressive loads from 40% to 90%1RM (step by 10%) under two testing conditions: with volitional movement tempo or with maximal movement tempo. The three-way repeated measures ANOVA showed a statistically significant multi-interaction effect for time under tension (p < 0.001), peak bar velocity (p = 0.04) and for mean bar velocity (p < 0.001). There was also a statistically significant main effect of movement tempo for time under tension (p < 0.001), peak bar velocity (p < 0.001) and for mean bar velocity (p < 0.001). The post hoc analysis for main effect of tempo revealed that time under tension was significantly longer for volitional compared to maximal tempo (0.84 vs 0.67 s, respectively), peak bar velocity was significantly higher for maximal compared to volitional tempo (1.24 m/s vs 0.90 m/s, respectively), and mean bar velocity was significant higher for maximal compared to volitional tempo (0.84 m/s vs 0.67 m/s, respectively). The presented results indicate that there were significant differences between volitional and maximal movement tempos in time under tension and bar velocity (peak and mean), as well as significant differences in those variables between the two exercises. Therefore, the velocity of movement and time under tension is related to movement tempo, external load and type of exercise used.