Monitoring Prescribed and Actual Resistance Training Loads in Professional Rugby League

Abstract

Redman, KJ, Connick, MJ, Beckman, EM, and Kelly, VG. Monitoring prescribed and actual resistance training loads in professional rugby league. J Strength Cond Res 35(6): 1604–1610, 2021—Coaches devote a considerable amount of time and effort prescribing and selecting exercises to elicit training adaptations. Adherence to the prescribed resistance training load may vary for a number of reasons. The aim of this study was to quantify the difference between prescribed and actual resistance training loads in a team of professional rugby league players. Training loads were quantified using volume load and training intensity throughout a season. The competition was categorized into preseason, early competition, mid-competition, and late competition. Twenty-seven players participated in this study. Four exercises were monitored: back squat, bench press, bench pull, and clean pull. A Friedman's test was used to assess differences between prescribed and actual training loads throughout different phases of the season, for different exercises, and during different weeks in a training block. There were significantly greater differences in prescribed and actual volume loads during the mid-competition in comparison to all other phases of the season (p < 0.01). Although players adherence to prescribed training intensity was significantly greater during the preseason compared with the remainder of the season (p < 0.05), they completed significantly less prescribed training load during week 1 in comparison to week 4 within a training block (p < 0.05). The results of this study demonstrate that regular monitoring of completed resistance training loads may be of greater importance to strength and conditioning coaches to assist in examining potential progress and fatigue or allow for more accurate prescription of load to enhance adaptation throughout a season.

“You can't shoot another bullet until you've reloaded the gun”: Coaches' perceptions, practices and experiences of deloading in strength and physique sports

“…The information presented by participants in this study is reflected in the current literature, where deloading is achieved through a multifaceted alteration in training demand, facilitated through a reduction in training volume ( 18 , 22 , 25 , 29 , 31 , 73 ) or training intensity of effort ( 29 , 30 , 32 ), as well as an alteration in exercise selection or order ( 25 , 30 ). Previous research indicates that short-term, very low volume training can lead to meaningful increases in both strength and hypertrophy without detraining.…”

“…Whilst the general concept of deloading seems to be well established, little is known about how the necessary reduction in training demand should be accomplished. According to the (albeit disparate) available literature, a reduction in training demand could be achieved by altering the number of weekly training sessions ( 29 ), movements/muscle groups trained ( 25 , 30 ), the number of weekly working sets per muscle group ( 18 , 22 ), repetitions performed within a set ( 31 ), percentage of one-repetition maximum (1-RM) ( 29 , 32 ), or proximity to muscular failure ( 30 ). However, it is currently unclear how these variables should be organised and manipulated for adequate recovery without inducing a loss of physiological adaptation and detraining effect.…”

Integrating Deloading into Strength and Physique Sports Training Programmes: An International Delphi Consensus Approach

“…The panel of coaches agreed that deloading could be integrated into the training programme through alterations in training volume, training intensity or exercise selection. This multifaceted approach to the design of deloading has also been observed in the available literature, where deloads have been implemented through a decrease in repetitions per set or sets per training session [ 20 , 21 , 62 – 65 ], a reduction in absolute or relative training intensity [ 15 , 62 , 66 ], or through alterations in exercise selection and configuration [ 15 , 64 ]. Overall, the variable approach to deloading reported by the expert panel of this research suggests that there is no standardized way to design and integrate deloading into the strength and physique athlete’s training programme.…”

The field and resistance training loads of academy rugby league players during a pre-season: Comparisons across playing positions

“…Resistance exercise however, is difficult to precisely quantify owing to its inherent complexity with numerous modifiable training variables contributing to the training dose [ 35 ]. Redman et al [ 46 ] recently proposed monitoring both prescribed and actual resistance load of key exercises, providing a quantification of volume load (sets x reps x load) and training intensity (volume load/total reps). This is especially pertinent given reports from Weakley et al [ 44 ] on the possible variation of adherence to prescribed practices in adolescent athletes.…”