Comparison of Linear and Daily Undulating Periodization in Resistance Training Using Simple Measures of Overreaching

Abstract

This study was conducted in an effort to determine if a linear or nonlinear periodized resistance training program had a greater tendency to contribute to a state of overreaching over 8 weeks. Simple outcome measures were used in an effort to determine the onset of overreaching. These measures included average sleeping heart rate, standing broad jump, 10yard dash, seated medicine ball throw, ratings of perceived exertion (RPE), one repetition maximum (1RM) back squat, and 1RM bench press. The participants were 25 (18 female and 7 male) college students in the Kinesiology major at Western Washington University. Subjects were separated into one of three groups: a control, linear periodized (LP), or nonlinear periodized (DUP) training group. After 8 weeks both training groups significantly increased their 1RM back squat and bench press (p<0.05). The DUP group increased their mean 1RM bench press and back squat from 46.30 ±18.47 kg to 50.83 ±19.26 kg and 67.15 ±20.54 kg to 79.34 ± 23.80 kg, respectively. The LP group increased their mean 1RM bench press and back squat from 46.82 ± 25.96 kg to 51.14 ± 25.87 kg and 74.77 ± 33.22 kg to 84.09 ± 30.10 kg, respectively. All groups significantly improved (p<0.05) their standing long jump performance over the course of the study. The control group improved from a mean of 1.86 ± 0.13 m to 2.04 ± 0.17 m, LP from 1.89 ± 0.40 m to 2.03 ± 0.41 m, and DUP from 1.87 ± 0.42 m to 1.99 ± 0.40 m. Only the DUP group significantly improved their seated medicine ball throw performance (p<0.05) from a mean of 4.09 ± 0.78 m to 4.46 ± 0.69 m. The LP and DUP groups significantly decreased (p<0.05) their 10-yard dash times from a mean of 1.85 sec ± 0.15 to 1.75 sec ± 0.18 and 1.84 sec ± 0.14 to 1.77 sec ±0.14, respectively. Average sleeping heart rate and RPE did not change significantly in any group. The lack of a significant decrease in performance measures or increase in average sleeping heart rate or RPE in either training group caused the null hypothesis to be accepted.