Influence of a Cluster Set Configuration on the Adaptations to Short-Term Power Training – 2018

Morales-Artacho AJ1Padial PGarcía-Ramos APérez-Castilla AFeriche B.
-Investigated the effects of a traditional (TT) vs. cluster (CT) resistance training on the lower-body force, velocity, and power output
– 19 males; 3-week resistance training (2 weekly sessions)
– CT involved 6 sets of 3 × 2 repetitions (30 seconds rest every 2 repetitions and 4 minutes 30 seconds between sets)
– TT comprised 6 sets of 6 continuous repetitions (5 minutes rest between sets)
– Before and after the training period, force (F25, F50, F75), velocity (V25, V50, V75), and power (P25, P50, P75) were obtained during the countermovement jump (CMJ) at 3 external loading conditions (25, 50, and 75% of body mass)
– After CT, very-likely moderate increments in P25 were observed compared with TT because of a very-likely moderate rise in V25
– No significant differences were observed in any of the F-v profile variables between the TT and CT groups
– 3 weeks of muscle power training including cluster set configurations are more efficient at inducing velocity and power adaptations specific to the training load




Acute neuromuscular and fatigue responses to the rest-pause method

– To compare muscle recruitment, maximal force, and rate of force development changes following different resistance exercise protocols with a constant volume-load
– 14 resistance trained males completed 3 different resistance exercise protocols involving 20 squat reps, at 80% 1RM

– Protocol A consisted of 5 sets of 4 reps with 3 min inter-set rest intervals
– Protocol B was 5 sets of 4 reps with 20 sec inter-set rest intervals
– Protocol C: rest-pause method with an initial set to failure with subsequent sets performed with a 20 sec inter-set rest interval
– Maximal squat isometric force output and rate of force development (RFD) were measured before, immediately upon completion (IP), and 5 min (5P) following
– Muscle activity from 6 different thigh and hip muscles was measured with surface electromyography (EMG) at each time point, and during every squat repetition
– Participants completed the rest-pause method in 2.1 ± 0.4 sets, with a total protocol duration of 103 sec compared to 140 s and 780 s for protocols B and A, respectively
– All protocols elicited similar decreases in maximal force and RFD at IP, with full recovery at 5P
– Increased motor unit recruitment was observed during the rest-pause method compared to both protocols A and B for all muscles measured
– As a result of the increased EMG during exercise and no greater post-exercise fatigue, it was concluded that the rest-pause method may be an efficacious training method for resistance-trained individuals.


Comments are closed.