A Comparison of Linear and Daily Undulating Periodized Programs with Equated Volume and Intensity for Strength

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare linear periodization (LP) and daily undulating periodization (DUP) for strength gains. Twenty men (age = 21 +/- 2.3 years) were randomly assigned to LP (n = 10) or DUP (n = 10) groups. One repetition maximum (1RM) was recorded for bench press and leg press as a pre-, mid-, and posttest. Training involved 3 sets (bench press and leg press), 3 days per week. The LP group performed sets of 8 RM during weeks 1-4, 6 RM during weeks 4-8, and 4 RM during weeks 9-12. The DUP group altered training on a daily basis (Monday, 8 RM; Wednesday, 6 RM; Friday, 4 RM). Analysis of variance with repeated measures revealed statistically significant differences favoring the DUP group between T1 to T2 and T1 to T3. Making program alterations on a daily basis was more effective in eliciting strength gains than doing so every 4 weeks.

Short-term Periodization Models: Effects on Strength and Speed-strength Performance

“…DUP demonstrated a statistically significant superiority in enhancing strength [9,14,16,20,21,[42][43][44] and vertical jump performance [14,42,44] vs. single-set programs [14,42,44], non-periodized multiple-set programs [9,16,43], and SPP models [16,20,21]. Other studies found equal gains between DUP and SPP in strength [8,10,13,15,18] and speed-strength performance [10,13] with subjects with a low to moderate performance level.…”

“…In DUP studies, common repetition zones for strength-power sessions ranged between 2-4 and 4-6 repetitions, for hypertrophy sessions between 8 and 12 [10,13,14,16,21,22,[42][43][44], and for strength endurance sessions between 12 and 15 [13,14,16,21,[42][43][44] and 20-25 [10]. Other studies alternated hypertrophy sessions with strength-power and speed-strength days [13] (30 % of onerepetition maximum = 1 RM) or with one or two strengthpower sessions [15,20,47], whereas Harris et al [9] alternated only between strength-power and speed-strength days (30-60 % 1 RM) and different exercises.…”

“…However, this wave-shaped load dynamic is structurally equivalent to the ''traditional periodization'' (TP) that was published by Matveyev in 1964 (compare Issurin [3]). In the scientific literature, the term 'linear periodization' is synonymous with SPP [7,8,13,15,16,20,21,69] and with TP [3, 19,69]. To further complicate this issue, Apel et al [6] and Souza et al [22] used the term ''traditional periodization,'' although the examined periodization model was an SPP.…”

“…To further complicate this issue, Apel et al [6] and Souza et al [22] used the term ''traditional periodization,'' although the examined periodization model was an SPP. Linear periodization (as is used for SPP and TP) [7,8,13,15,16,[19][20][21] and non-linear periodization (as is used for UP and DUP) [16,21,43,44,69] are terminologically incorrect [70]. In TP, the load dynamic is ''non-linear'' or undulatory rather than linear [3,69].…”

“…However, this session order has been confirmed only by Hartmann et al [10] and Monteiro et al [16]. The majority of DUP protocols used the highest intensities of the strength-power session in the last workout of the week [8,15,20,21,47] or on the second training day in the week, 48 h after the hypertrophy session [13] [upper body 18]. Therefore, the explanation of Fröhlich et al [72] seems to be questionable.…”