Accentuated Eccentric Loading Research Articles

Accentuated Eccentric Loading and Alternative Set Structures: A Narrative Review for Potential Synergies in Resistance Training.

Chae, S, McDowell, KW, Baur, ML, Long, SA, Tufano, JJ, and Stone, MH. Accentuated eccentric loading and alternative set structures: A narrative review for potential synergies in resistance training. J Strength Cond Res 38(11): 1987-2000, 2024-As athletes become adapted to training over time, it becomes more difficult to develop their strength and power. In a conventional resistance training strategy, volume or load may be increased to provide novel stimuli to break through a plateau. However, physiological stress markers increase with increased volume or load, which is an innate shortcoming. In that case, practitioners strive to develop unconventional strategies that could increase training stimuli while adjusting fatigue. Two programming tactics, accentuated eccentric loading (AEL) using eccentric overload and alternative set structures (AS) using intraset rests, have been reported to increase training stimuli and alleviate fatigue, respectively. Importantly, when merging AEL and AS in various contexts, the 2 benefits could be accomplished together. Because AEL and AS cause different outcomes, it is important to deal with when and how they may be integrated into periodization. Moreover, prescribing eccentric overload and intraset rests requires logistical considerations that need to be addressed. This review discusses the scientific and practical aspects of AEL and AS to further optimize strength and power adaptations. This review discusses (a) scientific evidence as to which tactic is effective for a certain block, (b) potential practical applications, and (c) related discussions and future research directions.

Increased force and elastic energy storage are not the mechanisms that improve jump performance with accentuated eccentric loading during a constrained vertical jump.

Accentuated eccentric loading (AEL) involves higher load applied during the eccentric phase of a stretch-shortening cycle movement, followed by a sudden removal of load before the concentric phase. Previous studies suggest that AEL enhances human countermovement jump performance, however the mechanism is not fully understood. Here we explore whether isolating additional load during the countermovement is sufficient to increase ground reaction force, and hence elastic energy stored, at the start of the upward movement and whether this leads to increased jump height or power generation. We conducted a trunk-constrained vertical jump test on a custom-built device to isolate the effect of additional load while controlling for effects of squat depth, arm swing, and coordination. Twelve healthy, recreationally active adults (7 males, 5 females) performed maximal jumps without AEL, followed by randomised AEL conditions prescribed as a percentage of body mass (10%, 20%, and 30%), before repeating jumps without AEL. No significant changes in vertical ground reaction force at the turning point were observed. High load AEL conditions (20% and 30% body weight) led to slight reductions in jump height, primarily due to decreased hip joint and centre of mass work. AEL conditions did not alter peak or integrated activation levels of the knee extensor muscles. The constrained movement task used here, which excluded potential contributions of trunk motion, arm swing, rate of descent, squat depth, and point of load application, allows the conclusion that increased elastic energy return is not the primary mechanism for potentiating effects of AEL on jump performance.

Combined Accentuated Eccentric Loading and Rest Redistribution in High-Volume Back Squat: Acute Stimulus and Fatigue.

Chae, S, Long, SA, Lis, RP, McDowell, KW, Wagle, JP, Carroll, KM, Mizuguchi, S, and Stone, MH. Combined accentuated eccentric loading and rest redistribution in high-volume back squat: Acute stimulus and fatigue. J Strength Cond Res 38(4): 648-655, 2024-The purpose of this study was to examine acute stimulus and fatigue responses to combined accentuated eccentric loading and rest redistribution (AEL + RR). Resistance-trained men ( n = 12, 25.6 ± 4.4 years, 1.77 ± 0.06 m, and 81.7 ± 11.4 kg) completed a back squat (BS) 1 repetition maximum (1RM) and weight releaser familiarization session. Three BS exercise conditions (sets × repetitions × eccentric-concentric loading) consisted of (a) 3 × (5 × 2) × 110/60% (AEL + RR 5), (b) 3 × (2 × 5) × 110/60% (AEL + RR 2), and (c) 3 × 10 × 60/60% 1RM (traditional sets [TS]). Weight releasers (50% 1RM) were attached to every first repetition of each cluster set (every first, third, fifth, seventh, and ninth repetition in AEL + RR 5 and every first and sixth repetition in AEL + RR 2). The AEL + RR 5 resulted in greater total volume load (sets × repetitions × eccentric + concentric loading) (6,630 ± 1,210 kg) when compared with AEL + RR 2 (5,944 ± 1,085 kg) and TS (5,487 ± 1,002 kg). In addition, AEL + RR 5 led to significantly ( p < 0.05) greater rating of perceived exertion (RPE) after set 2 and set 3 and lower blood lactate (BL) after set 3 and 5, 15, and 25 minutes postexercise than AEL + RR 2 and TS. There was a main effect of condition for BL between AEL + RR 5 (5.11 ± 2.90 mmol·L -1 ), AEL + RR 2 (6.23 ± 3.22 mmol·L -1 ), and TS (6.15 ± 3.17 mmol·L -1 ). In summary, AEL + RR 5 results in unique stimulus and fatigue responses. Although it may increase perceived exertion, coaches could use AEL + RR 5 to achieve greater back squat total volume load while reducing BL accumulation.

Combined Accentuated Eccentric Loading and Rest Redistribution in High-Volume Back Squat: Acute Kinetics and Kinematics.

Chae, S, Long, SA, Lis, RP, McDowell, KW, Wagle, JP, Carroll, KM, Mizuguchi, S, and Stone, MH. Combined accentuated eccentric loading and rest redistribution in high-volume back squat: Acute kinetics and kinematics. J Strength Cond Res 38(4): 640-647, 2024-The purpose of this study was to explore acute kinetic and kinematic responses to combined accentuated eccentric loading and rest redistribution (AEL + RR). Resistance-trained men ( n = 12, 25.6 ± 4.4 years, 1.77 ± 0.06 m, and 81.7 ± 11.4 kg) completed a back squat (BS) 1 repetition maximum (1RM) and weight releaser familiarization session. Three BS exercise conditions (sets × repetitions × eccentric/concentric loading) consisted of (a) 3 × (5 × 2) × 110/60% (AEL + RR 5), (b) 3 × (2 × 5) × 110/60% (AEL + RR 2), and (c) 3 × 10 × 60/60% 1RM (traditional sets [TS]). Weight releasers (50% 1RM) were attached to every first repetition of each cluster set (every first, third, fifth, seventh, and ninth repetition in AEL + RR 5 and every first and sixth repetition in AEL + RR 2). The AEL + RR 5 resulted in significantly ( p < 0.05) greater concentric peak velocity (PV) (1.18 ± 0.17 m·s -1 ) and peak power (PP) (2,304 ± 499 W) compared with AEL + RR 2 (1.11 ± 0.19 m·s -1 and 2,148 ± 512 W) and TS (1.10 ± 0.14 m·s -1 and 2,079 ± 388 W). Furthermore, AEL + RR 5 resulted in significantly greater PV and PP across all 10 repetitions compared with TS. Although AEL + RR 5 resulted in significantly greater concentric mean force (MF) (1,706 ± 224 N) compared with AEL + RR 2 (1,697 ± 209 N) and TS (1,685 ± 211 N), no condition by set or repetition interactions existed. In conclusion, AEL + RR 5 increases PV and PP but has little effect on MF. Coaches might consider prescribing AEL + RR 5 to increase especially peak aspects of velocity and power outcomes.

The Effects of Accentuated Eccentric Loading on Barbell and Trap Bar Countermovement Jumps

This study examined effects of accentuated eccentric loading (AEL) on barbell and trap bar loaded countermovement jumps (LCMJ). Twenty-one subjects (16 male, 5 female; Age: 23.5 ± 1.8 years; Body mass: 81.4 ± 10.6 kg; Height: 176.9 ± 7.2 cm; Training age: 7.1 ± 2.6 years) participated in this study. Upon establishing one repetition maximum and baseline jumping conditions, three experimental loading sessions were completed in random order. Barbell and trap bar LCMJ were performed with a spectrum of fixed loads from 20-50 kg during control conditions and with additional AEL loads of 10, 20, or 30 kg for experimental conditions. According to coefficients of variation (&lt;10%), jump height, modified reactive strength index (mRSI), force, impulse, and duration measures were considered reliable across conditions. Mixed effect models analyzed effects of AEL against fixed loading in trap bar and barbell LCMJ (p &lt; 0.05). Compared to the control condition, AEL produced negligible reductions in jump height during barbell LCMJ and small reductions during trap bar LCMJ. Modified reactive strength indexes were reduced by AEL during barbell LCMJ but not trap bar LCMJ. Average braking forces were greater in AEL conditions, while propulsive impulse was lower in the AEL conditions. The barbell LCMJ with AEL resulted in longer propulsive durations and unchanged braking durations, while propulsive and braking durations were lower during trap bar LCMJ with AEL compared to control conditions. This investigation revealed that use of AEL increases eccentric braking forces but decreases propulsive phase outputs, which subsequently may result in negligible to small acute decreases in LCMJ height. Implementing AEL during LCMJ may be an effective strategy to improve deceleration / eccentric abilities. Future research should explore longitudinal power and deceleration adaptations, while concomitantly improving acutely altered movement mechanics from AEL.

Inclusion of a connected adaptive resistance exercise machine in a 6-week training regimen with collegiate basketball players

In this study, we aimed to determine the effects of incorporating connected adaptive resistance exercise (CARE) into a training regimen with collegiate basketball players on lower body performance metrics. Thirty-two male participants (aged 18-26) with collegiate basketball experience trained thrice weekly for 6 weeks with a periodized training program that included CARE and were randomized 1:1 and blinded to an intervention group (n = 16; where the CARE used accentuated eccentric loading (AEL)) or an active control group (n = 16; where the CARE did not use accentuated eccentric loading (ACTL)). Standard anthropomorphic measures along with one repetition maximum (1-RM) back squat, vertical jump height, and peak power were assessed prior to and following completion of the training regimen. Both groups demonstrated significant increases in 1-RM back squat, jump height, and peak power (both p &lt; .001). However, AEL yielded significantly greater improvements compared to ACTL across these measures (p &lt;.001, g = 0.91; p &lt;.001, g = 0.89; p &lt;.001, g = 0.92, respectively). The findings of the present study demonstrate that the inclusion of CARE may be a superior strategy for improving performance variables of lower-body strength, peak power and jump height for male collegiate basketball players.

Musculoskeletal simulations to examine the effects of accentuated eccentric loading (AEL) on jump height.

During counter movement jumps, adding weight in the eccentric phase and then suddenly releasing this weight during the concentric phase, known as accentuated eccentric loading (AEL), has been suggested to immediately improve jumping performance. The level of evidence for the positive effects of AEL remains weak, with conflicting evidence over the effectiveness in enhancing performance. Therefore, we proposed to theoretically explore the influence of implementing AEL during constrained vertical jumping using computer modelling and simulation and examined whether the proposed mechanism of enhanced power, increased elastic energy storage and return, could enhance work and power. We used a simplified model, consisting of a ball-shaped body (head, arm, and trunk), two lower limb segments (thigh and shank), and four muscles, to simulate the mechanisms of AEL. We adjusted the key activation parameters of the muscles to influence the performance outcome of the model. Numerical optimization was applied to search the optimal solution for the model. We implemented AEL and non-AEL conditions in the model to compare the simulated data between conditions. Our model predicted that the optimal jumping performance was achieved when the model utilized the whole joint range. However, there was no difference in jumping performance in AEL and non-AEL conditions because the model began its push-off at the similar state (posture, fiber length, fiber velocity, fiber force, tendon length, and the same activation level). Therefore, the optimal solution predicted by the model was primarily driven by intrinsic muscle dynamics (force-length-velocity relationship), and this coupled with the similar model state at the start of the push-off, resulting in similar push-off performance across all conditions. There was also no evidence of additional tendon-loading effect in AEL conditions compared to non-AEL condition. Our simplified simulations did not show improved jump performance with AEL, contrasting with experimental studies. The reduced model demonstrates that increased energy storage from the additional mass alone is not sufficient to induce increased performance and that other factors like differences in activation strategies or movement paths are more likely to contribute to enhanced performance.

Effects of flywheel resistance training on the running economy of young male well-trained distance runners.

The study aimed to investigate the effect of flywheel accentuated eccentric loading (AEL) training on the running economy (RE) of young male well-trained distance runners. Twenty-two runners participated and were randomly assigned to the flywheel (FG, n = 12) and the control group (CG, n = 10). Traditional endurance training was performed in both groups three times a week for 6-week, while traditional resistance and flywheel AEL training was added to the CG and FG respectively. Subjects performed the incremental exercise test, squat jump, and countermovement jump (CMJ) before and after training. The results showed that 1) the RE at 65% of peak oxygen consumption (VO2peak), 75% VO2peak, and 85% VO2peak improved significantly after 6weeks of training (p < 0.01, Effect size (ES) = 0.76; p < 0.01, ES = 1.04; p < 0.01, ES = 1.85) in FG, and the RE of 85% VO2peak in FG was significantly lower than CG (p < 0.05, ES = 0.30); 2) in post-training, both squat jump (p < 0.01, ES = 0.73) and CMJ (p < 0.01, ES = 1.15) performance, eccentric utilization ratio (p < 0.04, ES = 0.44), the rate of force development (RFD) of squat jump (p < 0.05, ES = 0.46), and CMJRFD (p < 0.01, ES = 0.66) were significantly improved in FG. And there are no significant differents in CG group because it was maintain training for our participants. Our findings showed that 1) flywheel AEL training improves the muscles' explosive strength and other neuromuscular functions, and improves the athlete's running economy under 65%, 75%, and 85% VO2peak, which potentially increases endurance performance. 2) Flywheel AEL training can improve the height, RFD, and the eccentric utilization ratio of squat jump and CMJ, and other lower limb elastic potential energy indicators of the young male, well-trained distance runners.

An investigation of movement dynamics and muscle activity during traditional and accentuated-eccentric squatting.

Accentuated-eccentric loading (AEL) takes advantage of the high force producing potential of eccentric muscle contractions, potentially maximising mechanical tension within the muscle. However, evidence is lacking on how AEL squatting may load the involved musculature, limiting scientifically justified programming recommendations. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of concentric and eccentric loads on joint loading and muscle activity of the lower limbs. Resistance trained males performed traditional squatting (20-100% of concentric one-repetition maximum [1RM]) and AEL squatting with eccentric loads (110-150% of 1RM) provided by a novel motorised isotonic resistance machine (Kineo). Kinetics and kinematics of the hip, knee, and ankle joints were collected, with electromyography from the gluteus maximus, vastus lateralis, biceps femoris, and gastrocnemius medialis. A secondary cohort underwent a kinematic and electromyography analysis of squatting technique to compare Kineo and back and front barbell squatting. Knee joint peak eccentric moments occurred at 120% 1RM (P = 0.045), with no further increase thereafter. As eccentric load increased, the time course of moment development occurred earlier in the eccentric phase. This resulted in a 37% increase in eccentric knee extensor work from the 80% 1RM trial to the 120% 1RM trial (P<0.001). Neither hip nor ankle joints displayed further change in kinetics as eccentric load increased above 100% 1RM. Electromyographic activity during traditional squatting was ~15-30% lower in all eccentric trials than in concentric trials for all muscles. EMG plateaued between a load of 80-100% 1RM during the eccentric trials and did not increase with AEL. No significant differences in kinematics were found between Kineo and barbell squatting. The knee extensors appear to be preferentially loaded during AEL squatting. The greater work performed during the eccentric phase of the squat as eccentric load increased suggests greater total mechanical tension could be the cause of adaptations from AEL. Our data suggest that AEL should be programmed with a load of 120% of 1RM. Further studies are needed to confirm the longer-term training effects of AEL.

Kinematic and Kinetic Characteristics of Repetitive Countermovement Jumps with Accentuated Eccentric Loading.

Two methods for challenging the musculoskeletal and nervous systems to better exploit the stretch-shortening cycle (SSC) mechanism during plyometric training are reactive strength exercises and accentuated eccentric loading (AEL). Combining repetitive, reactive jumping with AEL poses a novel approach, in which the effects of both methods may be combined to elicit a unique stimulus. This study compared kinematic, kinetic, and electromyographic variables between a control (CON1) and two AEL conditions (AEL2 and AEL3). Additionally, non-reactive and reactive jumps performed within these sets were compared. Participants performed two sets of six countermovement jumps (CMJ) under each loading condition. AEL3 had moderate to large positive effects (es) on peak and mean eccentric force (es = 1.1, 0.8, respectively; both p < 0.01), and eccentric loading rate (es = 0.8, p < 0.01), but no effect on concentric variables or muscle activation intensity. The effects of AEL2 were similar but smaller. With or without AEL, there were moderate to large positive effects associated with reactive CMJ (second jump in a set, compared to the first) on peak and mean eccentric velocity (es = 1.7, 0.8, respectively; both p < 0.01), peak and mean eccentric force (es = 1.3, 1.2, p < 0.01), eccentric loading rate (es = 1.3, p < 0.01) and muscle activity (es = 1.8–1.9, p < 0.01). Concentric variables did not differ. Thus, the flight phase and act of landing during reactive jumps elicited greater increases in eccentric forces, loading rates, and muscle activity than AEL. Nonetheless, kinetic variables were greatest when AEL was combined with reactive jumping. Considering the limitations or complexity associated with most AEL protocols, sets of repetitive (reactive) CMJ may be more pragmatic for augmenting eccentric kinetic variables and neuromuscular stimuli during training.

Application of Accentuated Eccentric Loading to Elicit Acute and Chronic Velocity and Power Improvements: A Narrative Review

Accentuated eccentric loading (AEL) employs heavier load magnitudes in eccentric actions than concentric actions of complete stretch-shortening cycles. In doing so, unique neuromuscular and molecular responses are expected to result in acute post-activation performance enhancements, as evidenced by increased movement velocity or power. Improvements are dependent upon load selection, which varies across exercises, such as jumps and bench press throws (eccentric: 20-40 kg or 20-30% of body mass; concentric: body mass only), and squats and bench press (eccentric: 77.3-120% One-Repetition Maximum (1-RM); concentric: 30-90% 1-RM). The efficacy of AEL is dependent upon the concentric load used, which in turn is influenced by the magnitude of the eccentric load. Greater strength relative to body mass may enable the maintenance of technique and pacing during AEL, necessary for resultant performance enhancements, particularly when using eccentric loads exceeding the individual’s concentric 1-RM. Before prescribing AEL practitioners should consider: training experience, strength relative to body mass, the particular exercise, AEL application method, and the magnitude of both eccentric and concentric loads. Thus, the aims of this brief review are to describe: 1) neuromuscular and molecular constructs of AEL; 2) acute effects of AEL; 3) chronic effects of AEL; 4) loading considerations; 5) practical applications.

The Potentiating Response to Accentuated Eccentric Loading in Professional Football Players.

The purpose of this study was to assess the acute effect of Accentuated Eccentric Loading (AEL) on countermovement jump (CMJ) height, peak power output (PPO) and peak velocity in male professional footballers using loads of 20% or 40% of body mass (AEL20 or AEL40, respectively). Twenty-three male professional football players (age 24 ± 4.5 years, range 18–34 years; body mass 80.21 ± 8.4 kg; height 178.26 ± 7.62 cm) took part in a randomised, cross-over design to test the potentiating responses of two AEL conditions (AEL20 and AEL40) versus a body weight control group (CON). Mean loads for the two conditions were 15.84 ± 1.70 kg (AEL20) and 31.67 ± 3.40 kg (AEL40). There was no significant difference between the three conditions for jump height (p = 0.507, η2G = 0.022). There were significant differences in peak power between the groups (p = 0.001, η2G = 0.154). Post hoc analysis with Bonferroni adjustment showed significantly higher peak power for both AEL conditions compared to the control group, but no significant differences between AEL conditions (CON vs. AEL20, p = 0.029, 95% CI −1016.735, −41.815, Cohen’s d = −0.56; CON vs. AEL40, p = 0.001, 95% CI −1244.995, −270.075, Cohen’s d = −0.81; AEL20 vs. AEL40, p = 0.75, 95% CI −715.720, 259.201, Cohen’s d = −0.24). There was no significant difference between the three conditions for peak velocity (p = 0.269, η2G = 0.046). AEL using either 20% or 40% of body mass may be used to increase peak power in the countermovement jump in well-trained professional football players.

Ipsilateral Lower-to-Upper Limb Cross-Transfer Effect on Muscle Strength, Mechanical Power, and Lean Tissue Mass after Accentuated Eccentric Loading.

Background and Objectives: To investigate the effects of unilateral accentuated eccentric loading (AEL) on changes in lean mass and function of leg trained (TL) and ipsilateral non-trained arm (NTA) in young men and women. Materials and Methods: In a prospective trial, 69 Physically active university students (20.2 ± 2.2 years) were randomly placed into a training group (n = 46; 27 men, 19 women) or a control group without training (n = 23; 13 men, 10 women). Participants in the training group performed unilateral AEL in the leg press exercise of the dominant leg twice a week for 10 weeks. An electric motor device-generated isotonic resistance at different intensities for both concentric (30% of 1-RM) and eccentric contractions (105% of 1-RM). Changes in thigh and arm lean tissue mass, unilateral leg press and unilateral elbow flexion maximal concentric (1-RM) and isometric strength (MVIC), and unilateral muscle power at 40, 60, and 80% 1-RM for both leg press and elbow flexion exercises before and after intervention were compared between groups, between sexes and between TL and NTA. Results: Both men and women in the training group showed increases (p < 0.05) in lean tissue mass, 1-RM, MVIC, and muscle power for TL. In NTA, 1-RM, MVIC, and muscle power increased without significant differences between sexes, but neither in men nor women changes in lean tissue mass were observed. In addition, men showed greater changes in TL, but changes in NTA were similar between sexes. No gains in any variable were found for the control group. Conclusions: AEL protocol produced similar neuromuscular changes in TL and ipsilateral NTA, which suggests that strong ipsilateral lower-to-upper limb cross-transfer effects were induced by the eccentric-overload training. However, early ipsilateral increases in muscle force and power were not associated with lean mass gains. Both men and women experienced similar changes in NTA; however, men showed greater changes in TL.

Accentuated Eccentric Loading in the Bench Press: Considerations for Eccentric and Concentric Loading.

This study examined the effects of accentuated eccentric loading (AEL) on bench press velocities across a spectrum of concentric and eccentric loads. Ten strength trained men (bench press one-repetition maximum (1-RM): 124.3 ± 19.4 kg; relative strength ratio: 1.5 ± 0.2 kg∙body mass−1) participated. Subjects completed bench press repetitions using concentric loads from 30% to 80% 1-RM in 10% increments in each experimental session. The AEL protocols were implemented using 100% (AEL100) and 110% 1-RM (AEL110) loads during the eccentric action, while the eccentric load remained the same as the concentric for traditional loading (TRAD). Multilevel models analyzed the effects of each AEL protocol on concentric velocities across concentric loads (p < 0.05). Faster concentric velocities were observed at 30% 1-RM and 80% 1-RM with AEL100 compared to TRAD (p ≤ 0.05) but this effect was reduced for individuals moving the barbell through a greater displacement. Additionally, AEL110 presented a greater change in velocity from 30% to 80% 1-RM than TRAD (p ≤ 0.05). The AEL100 protocol resulted in faster concentric velocities throughout concentric loads of 30–80% 1-RM, but AEL110 may have been too great to elicit consistent performance enhancements. Thus, the efficacy of AEL at various concentric loads is dependent on the eccentric loading and barbell displacement.

Accentuated Eccentric Loading is Superior to Traditional Loading for Improving Acute Countermovement Jump Performance in Adult, Resistance-Trained Males.

Clinical Scenario: Traditional loading (TL) is a common technique to employ when engaging in countermovement jumps (CMJ). Accentuated eccentric loading (AEL) is a newer modality that is being explored for acute CMJ performance. Focused Clinical Question: In adult, resistance-trained males, will AEL have a superior impact on acute CMJ performance compared to TL? Summary of Key Findings: The literature was searched for studies that examined the influence of AEL on acute CMJ performance compared to a TL protocol. TL was defined as any loading condition that utilized an equivalent resistance during both the eccentric and concentric contractions. Three studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and were identified and included in the critically appraised topic. Each of the 3 studies found that various AEL conditions were either equal to or better than TL when examining subsequent CMJ performance. In no specific CMJ outcome measure was TL deemed to have a greater impact than AEL. Clinical Bottom Line: AEL provides more favorable acute CMJ performance than TL in adult, resistance-trained males. Strength of Recommendation: Consistent findings from 2 randomized crossover studies and one repeated-measured design investigation suggest level 2b evidence to support AEL as an ideal protocol for acute CMJ performance.

Potentiating Effects of Accentuated Eccentric Loading Are Dependent Upon Relative Strength.

Merrigan, JJ, Tufano, JJ, and Jones, MT. Potentiating effects of accentuated eccentric loading are dependent upon relative strength. J Strength Cond Res 35(5): 1208-1216, 2021-The purpose was to evaluate the acute effects of accentuated eccentric loading (AEL) on bench press velocity and subsequent perceived effort (ratings of perceived exertion [RPE]) and soreness. Resistance-trained men (n = 8) and women (n = 2) completed 4 sets of 5 bench press repetitions with AEL and traditional loading (TL) using concentric loads of 50% (AEL50, TL50) and 65% (AEL65, TL65) 1-repetition maximum (1RM). Throughout each TL set, the eccentric load remained identical to the concentric. Variable resistance during the first repetition of AEL equaled 120% 1RM. Hierarchical Linear Modeling was used to evaluate differences between AEL and TL (p < 0.05). For the first repetition, AEL50 and AEL65 resulted in slower eccentric and concentric velocities. The increasing slope of eccentric and concentric velocity across repetitions was greater during AEL50 and AEL65 compared with TL50 and TL65, respectively (p < 0.05). As an individual's strength increased, AEL50 resulted in slower eccentric velocity and faster concentric velocity than TL50. The AEL65 resulted in faster concentric velocity than TL65 (p < 0.05). Mean protocol comparisons revealed trivial to small effects between AEL and TL. There were no differences in RPE or soreness between protocols with soreness ratings remaining unchanged from baseline (1.80 ± 0.20 AU; p < 0.05). Overall, AEL was not effective for increasing concentric velocity during the bench press with current loading protocols. Yet, stronger individuals may exhibit increases in concentric velocity from AEL, which may be a result of different pacing strategies employed during the eccentric phase. Furthermore, when using the current AEL protocols, eccentric intensities were increased with no greater RPE or soreness.

The Acute Effects of Accentuated Eccentric Loading on Drop Jump Kinetics in Adolescent Athletes.

Lloyd, RS, Howard, SW, Pedley, JS, Read, PJ, Gould, ZI, and Oliver, JL. The acute effects of accentuated eccentric loading on drop jump kinetics in adolescent athletes. J Strength Cond Res 36(9): 2381-2386, 2022-The purpose of the study was to determine the acute effects of accentuated eccentric loading (AEL) on drop jump kinetics in adolescent athletes. Fifteen male rugby players (mean ± SD: age = 16.2 ± 1.01, body mass = 73.38 ± 9.94, and height = 178.91 ± 6.74) completed 3 trials of a drop jump with and without an accentuated eccentric load using a dumbbell release technique that equated to 15% body mass. The addition of the AEL stimulus resulted in significant, moderate increases in jump height (p < 0.05; Wilcoxon r = 0.47) and braking and propulsive impulse (p < 0.05, Hedges' g = 0.43; p < 0.05, g = 0.61, respectively) but did not significantly influence reactive strength index. Concurrently, there were significant, moderate increases in ground contact times (p < 0.05; r = 0.45) and reductions in spring-like correlations (p < 0.05; g = 0.94). Neither the magnitude nor timing of peak landing force were significantly altered in the AEL protocol (p < 0.05, g = 0.38; p < 0.05, r = 0.10, respectively). Cumulatively, these data indicate that implementation of AEL resulted in meaningful improvements in jump height, driven by significant increases in braking and propulsive impulse. Despite extensions in ground contact times and reductions in spring-like behavior, neither peak landing force nor time to peak force were negatively altered by the AEL. These results indicate that adolescent athletes can realize superior vertical jump heights during drop jumps using AEL, without displaying marked changes in the magnitude or timing of peak landing force.

Effectiveness of Accentuated Eccentric Loading: Contingent on Concentric Load.

To identify acute effects of a single accentuated eccentric loading (AEL) repetition on subsequent back-squat kinetics and kinematics with different concentric loads. Resistance-trained men (N = 21) participated in a counterbalanced crossover design and completed 4 protocols (sets × repetitions at eccentric/concentric) as follows: AEL65, 3 × 5 at 120%/65% 1-repetition maximum (1-RM); AEL80, 3 × 3 at 120%/80% 1-RM; TRA65, 3 × 5 at 65%/65% 1-RM; and TRA80, 3 × 3 at 80%/80% 1-RM. During AEL, weight releasers disengaged from the barbell after the eccentric phase of the first repetition and remained off for the remaining repetitions. All repetitions were performed on a force plate with linear position transducers attached to the barbell, from which eccentric and concentric peak and mean velocity, force, and power were derived. Eccentric peak velocity (-0.076 [0.124]m·s-1; P = .01), concentric peak force (187.8 [284.4]N; P = .01), eccentric mean power (-145.2 [62.0]W; P = .03), and eccentric peak power (-328.6 [93.7]W; P < .01) during AEL65 were significantly greater than TRA65. When collapsed across repetitions, AEL65 resulted in slower eccentric velocity and power during repetition 1 but faster eccentric and concentric velocity and power in subsequent repetitions (P ≤ .04). When comparing AEL80 with TRA80, concentric peak force (133.8 [56.9]N; P = .03), eccentric mean power (-83.57 [38.0]W; P = .04), and eccentric peak power (-242.84 [67.3]W; P < .01) were enhanced. Including a single supramaximal eccentric phase of 120% 1-RM increased subsequent velocity and power with concentric loads of 65% 1-RM, but not 80% 1-RM. Therefore, AEL is sensitive to the magnitude of concentric loads, which requires a large relative difference to the eccentric load, and weight releasers may not need to be reloaded to induce performance enhancement.

Increased fascicle length but not patellar tendon stiffness after accentuated eccentric-load strength training in already-trained men

PurposeThis study examined whether additional external load during the eccentric phase of lower limb strength training exercises led to greater adaptations in knee extensor strength, muscle architecture, and patellar tendon properties than traditional concentric–eccentric training in already-trained men.MethodsTwenty-eight men accustomed to strength training were randomized to undertake 10 weeks of supervised traditional (TRAD) or accentuated eccentric loading (AEL) or continue their habitual unsupervised (CON) strength training. TRAD and AEL trained 2∙week−1 with a six-repetition maximum (RM) session and a ten-RM session. TRAD used the same external load in both concentric and eccentric phases, while AEL used 40% greater load during the eccentric than concentric phase. Tests were performed at pre- and post-training, including: maximum unilateral isokinetic (30°·s−1) concentric, eccentric and isometric torques by isokinetic dynamometry, unilateral isometric ramp contractions with muscle–tendon ultrasound imaging to measure tendon stiffness and hysteresis, and resting vastus lateralis and medialis fascicle angle and length measured by extended-field-of-view ultrasound.ResultsAfter training, both TRAD and AEL significantly increased maximum concentric and isometric torque (p < 0.05), but only AEL increased eccentric torque (AEL: + 10 ± 9%, TRAD: + 4 ± 9%) and vastus lateralis (AEL: + 14 ± 14%, TRAD: + 1 ± 10%) and medialis (AEL: + 19 ± 8%, TRAD: + 5 ± 11%) fascicle length.ConclusionBoth TRAD and AEL increased maximum knee extensor strength but only AEL increased VL and VM fascicle length. Neither training program promoted changes in fascicle angle or changes in patellar tendon properties in our already-trained men.

Accentuated Eccentric Loading and Cluster Set Configurations in the Bench Press.

Lates, AD, Greer, BK, Wagle, JP, and Taber, CB. Accentuated eccentric loading and cluster set configurations in the bench press. J Strength Cond Res 36(6): 1485-1489, 2022-This study was designed to examine the kinetic and kinematic differences between an Accentuated eccentric loading (AEL), traditional loading, and cluster sets in trained male subjects (age: 23.7 ± 4.0 years, height: 176.4 ± 2.8 cm, mass: 93.6 ± 7.0 kg) with lifting experience (training age: 7.2 ± 2.4 years, 1-repetition maximum (1RM) bench press: 125.0 ± 14.8 kg, relative strength ratio: 1.3 ± 0.1) in the bench press. Subjects reported for a total of 5 sessions which consisted of a 1RM testing session and 4 experimental trials. The 4 experimental conditions consisted of a traditional load (TRAD), traditional load with inter-repetition rest (TRDC), accentuated eccentric loading with inter-repetition rest (AELC), and Accentuated eccentric loading for the first repetition only (AEL1). Concentric load was 80% of subjects' 1RM for all conditions. An eccentric overload of 105% of 1RM was applied using weight-releasing hooks during the AEL conditions. TRDC demonstrated superior concentric outputs for mean velocity and mean power compared with TRAD, AELC, and AEL1 (p < 0.001). In addition, AEL1 produced significantly greater effects for rate of force development compared with TRDC (p < 0.001). These findings suggest that inter-repetition rest had an influence on concentric performance, specifically mean power and mean velocity, and may be favorable when using higher loads and when sustained power outputs are desired. In addition, AEL1 may provide a unique eccentric stimulus that alters loading parameters compared with traditional loading conditions.