Repetitions in reserve vs. maximum effort resistance training programs in youth female athletes

Arede, Jorge; Vaz, Rafael; Gonzalo-Skok, Óliver; Balsalobre-Fernández, Carlos; Varela-Olalla, Daniel; Madruga-Parera, Marc; Leite, Nuno

doi:10.23736/s0022-4707.20.10907-1

Cited by 17 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The present results from autoregulated TST are in line with those in a previously published study by Arede et al [25], which showed a significantly positive effect on SJ but no significant effect on 10 and 20 m sprint performance in female youth basketball players. However, in contrast to our findings, Arede et al [25] showed improvements in CMJ that could be explained by differences in the duration of interventions (8 weeks compared to 6 weeks) and in the inherent movement specificity in regular training (track and field training compared to basketball training) which was performed parallel to the interventions. Basketball involves explosive plyometric-specific training in a vertical direction, whereas most track and field training does not.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…A practical way to adjust the training intensity based on autoregulation is by using a subjective rating scale, such as a 1-10 rating of the perceived exertion after each set in a training session, set-rating of perceived exertion (set-RPE), and adjusting it directly before performing the next set. Autoregulation using a 1-10 rating scale after each set has been used successfully when regulating resistance during traditional free-weight resistance training in female youth athletes [25]. For FRT, autoregulation using a 1-10 set-RPE scale has been used during single training sessions to prescribe training intensity when measuring contractile function post exercise in adults [26] and with a 6-20 scale to prescribe intensity in youth soccer players during a training intervention [27].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Effect of Autoregulated Flywheel and Traditional Strength Training on Training Load Progression and Motor Skill Performance in Youth Athletes

Westblad

Petré

Kårström

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The effects of flywheel resistance training (FRT) on youth are relatively unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of autoregulated FRT with traditional strength training (TST) on jumping, running performance and resistance training load progression in youth athletes. Thirty youth athletes (11.8 ± 0.9 yr) were matched for peak height velocity (PHV) status and block-randomised into two groups: FRT (n = 15, PHV −0.8 ± 1.6) and TST (n = 15, PHV −0.8 ± 1.5). Twelve resistance training sessions over a six-week intervention with flywheel or barbell squats were performed using autoregulated load prescription. Squat jump (SJ); countermovement jump (CMJ); and 10 m, 20 m and 30 m sprints were assessed pre- and post-intervention. The external load increased similarly for FRT and TST (z = 3.8, p = 0.06). SJ increased for both groups (p < 0.05) but running performance was unaffected (p > 0.05). Conclusions: FRT resulted in similar load progression and motor skill development in youth athletes as TST, but the perceived exertion was less. Autoregulation is a practical method for adjusting training load during FRT and should be considered as an alternative to autoregulated TST.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Autoregulated Flywheel and Traditional Strength Training on Training Load Progression and Motor Skill Performance in Youth Athletes

Westblad

Petré

Kårström

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The autoregulation method may provide flexible training arrangements for athletes to finish their training goals. For instance, there is evidence showing that athletes who resorted to the autoregulation method for strength training had better performances in athletic performances, such as increased levels of agility and vertical jump (Styles et al, 2016;Arede et al, 2020;Zhihui, 2020). Considering that the included subjects were majored in various sports, including basketball (Dorrell et al, 2020), wrestling (Weber, 2015), and football (Mann et al, 2010;Mann, 2011), our findings further suggested the potential of the auto-regulation method in improving athletic performance for various sports.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Auto-Regulation Method vs. Fixed-Loading Method in Maximum Strength Training for Athletes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Zhang

et al. 2021

Front. Physiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The auto-regulation method is a rising training strategy to improve strength and motor performance, and the Autoregulatory Progressive Resistance Exercise (APRE), Rating of Perceived Exertion program (RPE), and Velocity-Based Training (VBT) are the three common auto-regulation programs. However, whether the auto-regulation method is more effective than the traditional strength training (the fixed-loading method) in maximum strength training is still unclear. The present study searched the Pubmed, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, Embase, EBSCO, Cochrane, CNKI, and CQVIP databases, and included eight related studies published between 2010 and 2020, with a total of 166 subjects including division 1 college players and athletes with at least 1-year training history, and interventions ranging from 5 to 10 weeks. A meta-analysis was performed to check the difference between the two training methods, and analyzed the differences in the existing auto-regulation programs' effectiveness. The overall results showed that the auto-regulation method was more effective than the fixed-loading method in maximum strength training (effect size = 0.64; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%). In specific, the pooled results in subgroup analysis indicated that the auto-regulation method may effectively improve the strength performance in squat (effect size = 4.64; P < 0.05; I2 = 54%) and bench press (effect size = 3.21; P < 0.05; I2 = 62%). Greater benefits of the auto-regulation method on strength improvement could be achieved in an 8-week or even shorter training (effect size = 0.87; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%) compared with those of 8–10 weeks (effect size = 0.32; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%). The APRE is the most effective training program among the three auto-regulation programs (effect size = 0.78; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%). In conclusion, the auto-regulation method could be more effective than the fixed-loading method in maximum strength training. The APRE is a convenient and effective training program that may be considered a practical training program to replace traditional training in athletes.

show abstract

“…While practitioners should ideally measure MCV in most of the main exercises, prescribing RT using RIR can be a suitable solution in those exercises where calculating the load-velocity profiles might be of less interest or not suitable, such as dumbbell, cable, kettlebell exercises, and the like. Moreover, it has been observed in youth basketball players that training using a RIR approach is more suitable than conducting traditional repetitions to failure when velocity is not used to monitor training load [60]. Table 4 presents a VBT training prescription where some exercises are prescribed using velocity, and others are based on RIR.…”

Section: Determination Of Individual Load-velocity Profiles In Team Smentioning

confidence: 99%

The Implementation of Velocity-Based Training Paradigm for Team Sports: Framework, Technologies, Practical Recommendations and Challenges

Balsalobre-Fernández

Torres-Ronda

2021

Sports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While velocity-based training is currently a very popular paradigm to designing and monitoring resistance training programs, its implementation remains a challenge in team sports, where there are still some confusion and misinterpretations of its applications. In addition, in contexts with large squads, it is paramount to understand how to best use movement velocity in different exercises in a useful and time-efficient way. This manuscript aims to provide clarifications on the velocity-based training paradigm, movement velocity tracking technologies, assessment procedures and practical recommendations for its application during resistance training sessions, with the purpose of increasing performance, managing fatigue and preventing injuries. Guidelines to combine velocity metrics with subjective scales to prescribe training loads are presented, as well as methods to estimate 1-Repetition Maximum (1RM) on a daily basis using individual load–velocity profiles. Additionally, monitoring strategies to detect and evaluate changes in performance over time are discussed. Finally, limitations regarding the use of velocity of execution tracking devices and metrics such as “muscle power” are commented upon.

show abstract

Repetitions in reserve vs. maximum effort resistance training programs in youth female athletes

Cited by 17 publications

References 30 publications

The Effect of Autoregulated Flywheel and Traditional Strength Training on Training Load Progression and Motor Skill Performance in Youth Athletes

The Effect of Autoregulated Flywheel and Traditional Strength Training on Training Load Progression and Motor Skill Performance in Youth Athletes

Auto-Regulation Method vs. Fixed-Loading Method in Maximum Strength Training for Athletes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The Implementation of Velocity-Based Training Paradigm for Team Sports: Framework, Technologies, Practical Recommendations and Challenges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About