The specificity of strength training: the effect of posture

Abstract

There is a paucity of research into the importance of performing strength training exercises in postures specific to the movements they are attempting to facilitate. In addressing this question, 27 previously trained subjects were randomly allocated into heavy weight training and control groups. The weight training group performed 4-6 sets of 6-10 repetitions of the squat and bench press lifts twice a week for 8 weeks. Prior to and after the training period the following tests were conducted: bench press throw at 30% of maximal load, vertical jump, maximal squat and bench press lifts, push-up test performed over a force platform, 40-m sprint, 6-s cycle, and isokinetic tests assessing upper and lower body musculature in varying actions. The results supported the concept that posture is important in training as those exercises conducted in similar postures to the training recorded the greatest improvement in performance. For example, after completion of the training the weight training subjects significantly increased by approximately 12% the maximal load lifted in the bench press exercise and the peak torque in the isokinetic bench press test. However, performance in the isokinetic horizontal arm adduction test was not significantly changed. We speculate that the phenomenon of posture specificity may, at least in part, be caused by the differing postures altering the neural input to the musculature. The results stress the importance of selecting exercises in which the posture closely resembles that of the movements they are attempting to facilitate.

Assessing Voluntary Muscle Activation with the Twitch Interpolation Technique

“…Secondly, when activation deficits have been observed, dynamic resistance training was employed whilst the tests of voluntary activation were isometric [71,98] . In these cases the lack of improvement may be indicative of the highly specific nature of the adaptation [10,100,101,102,103,104] and the known limitations of isometric tests [105] .…”

Changes in agonist neural drive, hypertrophy and pre-training strength all contribute to the individual strength gains after resistance training

“…Consequently, resistance training (RT) is frequently employed when aiming to: improve athletic performance (Wilson et al 1996;Comfort et al 2012); enhance mobility of middle-aged and older adults (Brochu et al 2002;Brandon et al 2003); reduce injury risk (Brooks et al 2006;Noyes and Barber Westin 2012); prevent or slow the progression of joint degeneration (Zhang and Jordan 2010). On a cohort level, neural (agonist activation, Komi et al 1978;Narici et al 1996;Tillin et al 2011Tillin et al , 2011antagonist co-activation, Carolan and Cafarelli 1992;Häkkinen et al 1998) andmorphological (hypertrophy, O'Hagan et al 1995;Tracy et al 1999;Erskine et al 2010a; muscle architecture, Aagaard et al 2001;Seynnes et al 2006;Blazevich et al 2007) adaptations have been widely documented to occur after RT and are presumed to explain the observed improvements in strength.…”

Enhancing the weight training experience: a comparison of limb kinematics and EMG activity on three machines

“…Although the human neuromuscular system can be changed by the amount and type of daily physical activity (Enoka 1997), the adaptations, including strength gains, are speciWc to the conditions that were used during training (Aagaard et al 1994;Behm and Sale 1993;Duchateau and Hainaut 1984;Hortobágyi et al 1996;Wilson et al 1996). The factors that can inXuence the speciWcity of training include the muscle group exercised, the type of muscle contraction, the speed of the contraction, the range of motion for the exercise, and the posture used during training (Barry et al 2005a, b;Bruhn et al 2004;Higbie et al 1996;Jones et al 1989;Kanehisa and Miyashita 1983).…”