Velocity-based Resistance Training Research Articles

Enhancing Training Precision: Unveiling the Barbell Velocity’s Role in Tailoring the Resistance Load for the China Badminton Team

Velocity-based resistance training is a fundamental component of sports science, offering a systematic approach to investigating the load variables of resistance exercises. This research focused on assessing the load across various resistance exercises by examining the barbell velocity during the concentric phase. The study involved 11 male athletes representing the China badminton team, who underwent 1RM testing for bench press, hip thrust, back squat, and single leg press exercises and the maximum repetition testing at load intensities of 60%, 70%, 80%, and 90% of 1RM. Simultaneously, measurements were taken of the barbell’s concentric phase velocity during each exercise. The findings revealed a robust negative correlation between barbell velocity and load intensity. Furthermore, exercises engaging greater muscle strength displayed smoother fitting curves. Analysis of velocity loss rates indicated that the hip thrust exhibited a higher completion percentage compared to the back squat and the bench press. Similarly, the non-dominant leg press showed a higher completion percentage than the dominant leg press. The study emphasizes the significance of delineating barbell velocity distributions in resistance training involving large muscle groups, as well as the accurate determination of load intensity. Precise load determination can be facilitated by employing fitting curves derived from distinct movement patterns and varying load intensities. The utilization of velocity data offers a quantifiable approach to achieving targeted training outcomes.

Acute Effect of Velocity-Based Resistance Training on Subsequent Endurance Running Performance: Volume and Intensity Relevance

This study aimed to compare the acute effect of four back squat velocity-based training (VBT) protocols in terms of intensity (60% vs. 80% of the one repetition maximum [1RM]) and volume (10% vs. 30% threshold for velocity loss in the set) on the maximal aerobic speed (MAS) estimated from a running track test (RTT) in recreationally trained young adult men and women. Twenty participants (eleven men and nine women) undertook five randomized protocols in separate occasions: (i) RTT alone (control condition); (ii) VBT with 60% 1RM and a 10% velocity loss followed by RTT (VBT60–10 + RTT); (iii) VBT with 60% 1RM and a 30% velocity loss followed by RTT (VBT60–30 + RTT); (iv) VBT with 80% 1RM and 10% velocity loss followed by RTT (VBT80–10 + RTT); (v) VBT with 80% 1RM and 30% velocity loss followed by RTT (VBT80–30 + RTT). All VBT protocols involved three sets with three minutes of rest. The MAS was higher for RTT (control) than VBT60–30 + RTT (p < 0.001; Δ = 3.8%), VBT60–10 + RTT (p = 0.006; Δ = 2.8%), VBT80–10 + RTT (p = 0.008; Δ = 2.7%), and VBT80–30 + RTT (p = 0.019; Δ = 1.9%). No protocol × sex interaction was noted (p = 0.422). Therefore, regardless of sex, MAS is acutely impaired after VBT, especially if the training sets are performed with a low relative load and a high velocity loss threshold.

The enhancement of explosive power contributes to the development of anaerobic capacity: A comparison of autoregulatory progressive resistance exercise and velocity-based resistance training

Background/ObjectivesDue to the character of the taekwondo, the adenosine triphosphate–phosphocreatine system provides the energy for each kick, the glycolytic system supports the repeated execution of kicks, and the aerobic system promotes recovery between these movements and the bout. Therefore, taekwondo athletes require high explosive power and anaerobic capacity in order to carry out sustained and powerful attacks. So, the purpose of this study is to compare the effects of APRE and VBRT on lower-limb explosive power and anaerobic capacity in college taekwondo players. MethodsA total of 30 taekwondo players completed an 8-week training intervention with autoregulatory progressive resistance exercise (APRE; n = 15) and velocity-based resistance training (VBRT; n = 15). Testing included the one-repetition maximum squat, countermovement jump (CMJ), taekwondo anaerobic intermittent kick test (TAIKT), and 30-s Wingate anaerobic test (WAnT). Results(1) Intragroup comparisons revealed significant effects for one-repetition maximum squat, peak power of CMJ (CMJPP), relative peak power of CMJ (CMJRPP), and total number of TAIKT (TAIKTTN) in both the APRE and VBRT groups. The VBRT group exhibited small effect sizes for time at peak power of WAnT (WAnTPPT) and moderate effect sizes for peak power of WAnT (WAnTPP), relative peak power of WAnT (WAnTRPP), and fatigue index of TAIKT (TAIKTFI), whereas the APRE group exhibited small effect sizes for TAIKTFI. (2) Intergroup comparisons revealed no significant effects in any of the results. However, VBRT demonstrated a moderate advantage in WAnTPP and WAnTRPP, whereas APRE had a small advantage in CMJPP and CMJRPP. ConclusionsThese findings suggest that APRE improved explosive power (CMJPP and CMJRPP) more, whereas VBRT improved anaerobic power output (WAnTPP and WAnTRPP) more. Both methods were found to have similar effects in improving the anaerobic endurance (WAnTPPT and TAIKTTN) and fatigue index (power drop of WAnT and TAIKTFI).

Resistance Training With Different Velocity Loss Thresholds Induce Similar Changes in Strength and Hypertrophy.

Andersen, V, Paulsen, G, Stien, N, Baarholm, M, Seynnes, O, and Saeterbakken, AH. Resistance training with different velocity loss thresholds induce similar changes in strengh and hypertrophy. J Strength Cond Res 38(3): e135-e142, 2024-The aim of this study was to compare the effects of 2 velocity-based resistance training programs when performing resistance training with matched training volume. Ten resistance-trained adults volunteered (age, 23 ± 4.3 years; body mass, 68 ± 8.9 kg; and height, 171 ± 8 cm) with a mean resistance training experience of 4.5 years. A within person, between leg design was used. For each subject, the legs were randomly assigned to either low velocity loss (LVL) threshold at 15% or high velocity loss (HVL) threshold at 30% velocity loss. Leg press and leg extension were trained unilaterally twice per week over a period of 9 weeks. Before and after the intervention, both legs were tested in 1 repetition maximum (RM) (kg), maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) (N), rate of force development (N·s -1 ), average velocity (m·s -1 ), and power output (W) at 30, 45, 60, and 75% of 1 RM (all in unilateral leg press). Furthermore, muscle thickness (mm) of the vastus lateralis and rectus femoris, pennation angle (°) of the vastus lateralis, and the fascicle length (mm) of the vastus lateralis were measured using ultrasound imaging. The data were analyzed using mixed-design analysis of variance. No differences between the legs in any of the variables were found; however, both low and HVL were effective for increasing 1 RM (ES = 1.25-1.82), MVC (effect size [ES] = 0.42-0.64), power output (ES = 0.31-0.86), and muscle thickness (ES = 0.24-0.51). In conclusion, performing velocity-based resistance training with low and HVL with equal training volume resulted in similar effects in maximal and explosive strength in addition to muscular adaptations.

Acute Effect of Different Velocity-Based Training Protocols on 2000-meter Rowing Ergometer Performance

Abstract Leandro Quidel-Catrilelbún, ME, Ruiz-Alias, SA, García-Pinillos, F, Ramirez-Campillo, R, and Pérez-Castilla, A. Acute effect of different velocity-based training protocols on 2000-m rowing ergometer performance. J Strength Cond Res 38(1): e8–e15, 2024—This study aimed to explore the acute effect of 4 velocity-based resistance training (VBT) protocols on 2000-m rowing ergometer (RE2000) time trial, as well as the behavior of the maximal neuromuscular capacities when RE2000 is performed alone or preceded by VBT protocols in the same session. Fifteen male competitive rowers (15–22 years) undertook 5 randomized protocols in separate occasions: (a) RE2000 alone (control condition); (b) VBT against 60% of 1 repetition maximum (1RM) with a velocity loss in the set of 10% followed by RE2000 (VBT60-10 + RE2000); (c) VBT against 60% 1RM with a velocity loss in the set of 30% followed by RE2000 (VBT60-30 + RE2000); (d) VBT against 80% 1RM with a velocity loss in the set of 10% followed by RE2000 (VBT80-10 + RE2000); (e) VBT against 80% 1RM with a velocity loss in the set of 30% followed by RE2000 (VBT80-30 + RE2000). The load-velocity relationship (load-axis intercept [L 0 ], velocity-axis intercept [v 0 ], and area under the load-velocity relationship line [A line ]) was used to evaluate the maximal neuromuscular capacities during the prone bench pull exercise before and after each protocol. The time trial was significantly longer for VBT60-30 + RE2000 and VBT80-30 + RE2000 than for RE2000, VBT60-10 + RE2000 and VBT80-10 + RE2000 (all p < 0.001; ES = 0.10–0.15). L 0 and A line were significantly reduced after all protocols (p < 0.001; ES = 0.10–0.13), with A line reduction more accentuated for VBT60-10 + RE2000, VBT60-30 + RE2000, VBT80-30 + RE2000, and RE2000 (all p = 0.001; ES = 0.11–0.18) than for VBT80-10 + RE2000 (p = 0.065; ES = 0.05). Therefore, VBT protocols with greater velocity loss in the set (30% vs. 10%) negatively affected subsequent rowing ergometer performance, in line with impairment in A line pulling performance.

Comparing autoregulatory progressive resistance exercise and velocity-based resistance training on jump performance in college badminton athletes.

Jumping ability has been identified as a key factor that influences the performance of badminton athletes. Autoregulatory progressive resistance exercise (APRE) and velocity-based resistance training (VBRT) are commonly used approaches to enhance muscle strength and have been shown to accurately monitor the development of explosive power to improve jumping ability. This study aims to investigate the effects of APRE and VBRT on badminton athletes' jumping ability and to provide practical insights into improving their jumping performance during competitions. Upon completing familiarization and pretesting, 18 badminton athletes were included and completed the training intervention (age, 21.4 ± 1.4 years; stature, 170.1 ± 7.3 cm; body mass, 65.9 ± 12 kg); they were randomly divided into the APRE group (n = 9) and VBRT group (n = 9). Jumping performance was assessed during the countermovement jump (CMJ), squat jump (SJ), and drop jump (DJ) via SmartJump, with CMJ 's and SJ's jump height, eccentric utilization ratio (EUR), and reactive strength index (RSI). All participants then completed a 4-week in-season resistance training intervention. (1) The results of the within-group indicated that only the CMJ (pre: 41.56 ± 7.84 vs post: 43.57 ± 7.85, p < 0.05) of the APRE group had significant differences, whereas the SJ, EUR, and RSI were not significantly different (p > 0.05). (2) The results of the intergroups revealed that all indicators had no significant differences (p > 0.05), but APRE had a moderate effect size on the improvement of the CMJ (η2 = 0.244) and EUR (η2 = 0.068) when compared with VBRT. The results showed that, compared to VBRT, APRE can effectively improve the performance of the reactive athletes' lower limb explosive power in the CMJ in a shorter period of time. The findings indicate that APRE may be useful for coaches seeking to improve the CMJ performance of athletes in the short term.

SCS 5th Annual Conference. São Paulo, Brazil, 2022

On behalf of the Strength and Conditioning Society (SCS) and the Nucleus of High Performance in Sport (NAR), we are pleased to present the abstracts of the SCS 5th Annual Conference, which, for the first time, took place outside of Europe. The event was held at NAR's state-of-the-art facilities in São Paulo, Brazil, on 3-5 November 2022, and comprised several invited sessions from international and national speakers on a variety of topics related to strength and conditioning practices and their application to health, injury prevention and sports performance. These included strength training in high-performance sports and older adults, sleep and recovery in elite athletes, performance optimization of the female athlete, high-intensity interval training, velocity-based resistance training, and running and cycling biomechanics, among others. The Conference also included different practical workshops conducted by renowned academics and practitioners on post-competition recovery strategies, plyometric training, hamstring strain injuries in soccer, and resisted sprint training. Finally, the event disseminated up-to-date strength and conditioning research by providing practitioners and researchers with the opportunity to present their most recent findings. In this regard, all abstracts of the communications presented at the SCS 5th Annual Conference can be found in this Conference Report.

Effects of Velocity-Based versus Percentage-Based Resistance Training on Explosive Neuromuscular Adaptations and Anaerobic Power in Sport-College Female Basketball Players

The purpose of this study was to compare the impact of velocity-based resistance training (VBRT) and percentage-based resistance training (PBRT) on anaerobic ability, sprint performance, and jumping ability. Eighteen female basketball players from a Sport College were randomly divided into two groups: VBRT (n = 10) and PBRT (n = 8). The six-week intervention consisted of two sessions per week of free-weight back squats with linear periodization from 65% to 95%1RM. In PBRT, the weights lifted were fixed based on 1RM percentage, while in VBRT, the weights were adjusted based on individualized velocity profiles. The T-30m sprint time, relative power of countermovement jump (RP-CMJ), and Wingate test were evaluated. The Wingate test assessed peak power (PP), mean power (MP), fatigue index (FI), maximal velocity (Vmax), and total work (TW). Results showed that VBRT produced a very likely improvement in RP-CMJ, Vmax, PP, and FI (Hedges' g = 0.55, 0.93, 0.68, 0.53, respectively, p < 0.01). On the other hand, PBRT produced a very likely improvement in MP (Hedges' g = 0.38) and TW (Hedges' g = 0.45). Although VBRT showed likely favorable effects in RP-CMJ, PP, and Vmax compared to PBRT (p < 0.05 for interaction effect), PBRT produced greater improvements in MP and TW (p < 0.05 for interaction effect). In conclusion, PBRT may be more effective in maintaining high-power velocity endurance, while VBRT has a greater impact on explosive power adaptations.

The effects of velocity-based versus percentage-based resistance training on athletic performances in sport-collegiate female basketball players.

Introduction: The study compared the effects of 6-week (2 sessions/week) velocity-based resistance training (VBRT) and percentage-based resistance training (PBRT) on athletic performance in Sport-College female basketball players. Methods: Fifteen participants were assigned to the VBRT (n = 8) or PBRT (n = 7) groups. The load in VBRT group were determined through the sessional target velocity and velocity loss monitoring, whereas PBRT group used a fixed-load based on percentage of 1-repetition maximum (1RM). Both groups completed intervention that involved the free weight back squat and bench press using the same relative load (linear periodization from 65% to 95% 1RM). Training loads data was continuously recorded. Measurements at baseline (T0) and post-training (T2) included 1RM, countermovement-jump (CMJ), squat-jump (SJ), eccentric-utilization-ratio (EUR), drop-jump height and reactive-strength-index (DJ, DJ-RSI), plyometric-push-up (PPU), 505 change-of-direction (COD), 10-m、20-m sprint (T-10、T-20), 17 × 15m drill-lines (17-drill), Hexagon agility, and functional movement screen (FMS). A mid-term (T1) assessment was included to investigate the short-term effects of both methods and the fluctuation of personalized 1RM. Results: No between-group differences were observed at T0 for descriptive variables (p > 0.05). Both groups showed significant improvement in strength gains for back squat and bench press, but VBRT showed likely to very likely favorable improvements in CMJ, SJ, EUR, DJ-RSI, Hexagon and COD among athletic performance. The VBRT showed likely to very likely improvements in 17-drill and DJ, while PBRT showed unclear effects. The lifted weights adjusted by VBRT method were higher than prescribed by PBRT (p < 0.05) for the same subjects. Conclusion: Compared with fixed-load PBRT, VBRT enhanced power and athletic performance despite similar strength gains. VBRT can be regarded as a more functional resistance-training method under linear periodization.

Acute neuromuscular and hormonal responses to 20 versus 40% velocity loss in males and females before and after 8 weeks of velocity‐loss resistance training

New Findings What is the central question of this study? Do males and females differ in fatiguability during dynamic loadings, and what are the acute neuromuscular and hormonal responses to 20 versus 40% velocity‐loss resistance loadings? How does an 8‐week velocity‐loss resistance training period modify acute neuromuscular and hormonal responses in males and females? What is the main finding and its importance? Using resistance training methods that regulated the within‐set fatigue limit, males appeared to be more susceptible to fatigue than females before the training period. This between‐sex difference was diminished after training. The predominant mechanisms of fatigue from 20 and 40% velocity‐based resistance training appear to be within the musculature. Scientific examination of velocity‐based resistance training (VBRT) has increased recently, but how males and females respond to different VBRT protocols or how these acute responses are modified after a period of training is unknown. Habitually resistance‐trained males and females followed either a 20 or 40% velocity‐loss programme for 8 weeks. Acute squat loading tests (five sets, 70% one‐repetition maximum load, 3 min rest) were performed before and after the training period. Tests of maximum neuromuscular performance and blood sampling were conducted before, within 10 min of completion (POST) and 24 h after each acute loading test. Testing included countermovement jump, resting femoral nerve electrical stimulation and bilateral isometric leg press. Blood samples were analysed for whole‐blood lactate, serum testosterone, cortisol, growth hormone and creatine kinase concentrations. Countermovement jump height, maximum isometric bilateral leg‐press force and the force from a 10 Hz doublet decreased in all groups at POST after 20 and 40% velocity loss. Only males showed reduced force from the 100 Hz doublet and voluntary force over 100 ms at POST before training. The 40% velocity loss led to increased blood lactate and growth hormone responses before training in both males and females. After training, more systematic and equivalent responses in force over 100 ms, force from a 100 Hz doublet and blood lactate were observed regardless of sex/VBRT protocol. Overall, acute responses were greater from 40% VBRT, and males were more susceptible to acute loss in force production capacity before the training period. These VBRT protocol‐ and sex‐related differences were diminished after training.

Acute Effect of Upper-Lower Body Super-Set vs. Traditional-Set Configurations on Bar Execution Velocity and Volume.

This study aimed to compare the effect on bar execution velocity and number of repetitions between two velocity-based resistance training protocols only differing in the set configuration of the full-squat (SQ) and bench-press (BP) exercises. Moderately strength-trained men were assigned to a traditional (TS, n = 9)- or an alternating-set (AS, n = 10) configuration group to perform four testing sessions against different relative loads (55–60–65–70% 1RM). Relative load, magnitude of intra-set velocity loss (%VL), number of sets, inter-set recovery time, and exercise order were matched for both groups in each session. Mean propulsive velocity of the first repetition (MPVfirst), average number of repetitions per set (NRS), total number of repetitions (TNR), and total training time per session (TT) were measured. No significant differences between training conditions were observed for any relative load in MPVfirst, NRS, and TNR in both exercises. The TS group completed a significantly higher number of repetitions (p < 0.05) at faster velocities (MPV > 0.9–1.1 m·s−1) in the SQ. In conclusion, training sessions performing AS between SQ and BP exercises with moderate relative loads and %VL result in similar bar execution velocity and volume, but in a more time-efficient manner, than the traditional approach.

Velocity-Based Resistance Training Monitoring: Influence of Lifting Straps, Reference Repetitions, and Variable Selection in Resistance-Trained Men.

Using lifting straps during pulling exercises (such as deadlift) may increase absolute velocity performance. However, it remains unclear whether lifting straps could also reduce the degree of relative fatigue measured by velocity decline and maintenance in a training set. There will be less mean velocity decline (MVD) and greater mean velocity maintenance (MVM) for deadlifts performed with (DLw) compared with without (DLn) lifting straps, and an underestimation of MVD and MVM when using the first compared with the fastest repetition as a reference repetition. Randomized cross over design. Level 3. A total of 16 resistance-trained men performed a familiarization session, 2 1-repetition maximum [1RM] sessions (1 with and 1 without lifting straps), and 3 randomly applied experimental sessions consisting of 4 sets of 4 repetitions: (1) DLw against the 80% of DLn 1RM (DLwn), (2) DLn against the 80% of the DLn 1RM (DLnn), and (3) DLw against the 80% of the DLw 1RM (DLww). MVD and MVM were calculated using the first and the fastest repetition as the reference repetition. MVD was significantly lower during DLwn and DLnn compared with DLww (P < 0.01), whereas MVM was greater during DLwn and DLnn compared with DLwn (P < 0.01) with no differences between DLwn and DLnn for both MVD and MVM (P > 0.05). The second repetition of the set was generally the fastest (54.1%) and lower MVD and higher MVM were observed when the first repetition was used as the reference repetition (P < 0.05). Lifting straps were not effective at reducing MVD and increasing MVM when the same absolute loads were lifted. Furthermore, using the first repetition as the reference repetition underestimated MVD, and overestimated MVM. The fastest repetition should be used as the reference repetition to avoid inducing excessive fatigue when the first repetition is not the fastest.

Comparison of Velocity and Percentage-based Training on Maximal Strength: Meta-analysis.

The purpose was to analyze the comparison of velocity-based resistance training and one-repetition maximum (%1RM) percentage-based training in maximal strength improvement by meta-analyzing and to find the reasons for the controversial findings of different studies. Ten studies were included in the systematic review and seven were subjected to meta-analysis. A total of 139 subjects were selected from the included articles after exclusion, including athletes of different specialties (N=93) and non-athletes mainly from fitness groups (N=46). The overall effect size was SMD=0.26 (95%CL 0.03 to 0.49, P=0.03, I²=0). As for the comparison of the analysis of different intervention objects as subgroups, the effect size of athletes as the subgroup was 0.35 (95%CI 0.06 to 0.64, p=0.02, I²=0), indicating that in the RCT with athletes as the intervention target, the effect of VBRT in improving the maximal strength was significantly different from that of PBT. Velocity-based resistance training might be more effective than percentage-based training in maximal strength improvement, in which velocity-based resistance training is more suitable for athletes in season, while percentage-based training is more suitable for the general sports population. More high-quality researches should deal with the effect of other athletic performance with velocity-based resistance training in the future.

Velocity-based resistance training: do women need greater velocity loss to maximize adaptations?

PurposeMen and women typically display different neuromuscular characteristics, force–velocity relationships, and differing strength deficit (upper vs. lower body). Thus, it is not clear how previous recommendations for training with velocity-loss resistance training based on data in men will apply to women. This study examined the inter-sex differences in neuromuscular adaptations using 20% and 40% velocity-loss protocols in back squat and bench press exercises.MethodsThe present study employed an 8-week intervention (2 × week) comparing 20% vs. 40% velocity-loss resistance training in the back squat and bench press exercises in young men and women (~ 26 years). Maximum strength (1-RM) and submaximal-load mean propulsive velocity (MPV) for low- and high-velocity lifts in squat and bench press, countermovement jump and vastus lateralis cross-sectional area were measured at pre-, mid-, and post-training. Surface EMG of quadriceps measured muscle activity during performance tests.ResultsAll groups increased 1-RM strength in squat and bench press exercises, as well as MPV using submaximal loads and countermovement jump height (P < 0.05). No statistically significant between-group differences were observed, but higher magnitudes following 40% velocity loss in 1-RM (g = 0.60) and in low- (g = 1.42) and high-velocity (g = 0.98) lifts occurred in women. Training-induced improvements were accompanied by increases in surface EMG amplitude and vastus lateralis cross-sectional area.ConclusionSimilar increases in strength and power performance were observed in men and women over 8 weeks of velocity-based resistance training. However, some results suggest that strength and power gains favor using 40% rather than 20% velocity loss in women.

Velocity-Based Resistance Training in Soccer: Practical Applications and Technical Considerations

ABSTRACT Since 2010, the velocity-based approach (VBT) has been established as a reliable method to be used during resistance training (RT) interventions. VBT lies in the monitoring of the barbell velocity during the concentric phase of an exercise, which is a direct consequence of the force applied by the athlete to the external load. VBT offers coaches and physical trainers of soccer teams a wide spectrum of practical applications. Considering the close association between the barbell velocity and the relative intensity (i.e., load-velocity relationship), practitioners could ensure “on the go” that players train very close to the programmed load in each training set. Methodologies derived from the VBT, such as the velocity loss or the “level of effort,” allow to plan and control the intraset fatigue to be incurred by the soccer players during RT. Incorporating the barbell velocity monitoring into the testing routine would permit the determination of the changes in strength across the entire spectrum of loads and offer a valid and practical proposal to evaluate the neuromuscular recovery status. The current article aimed to review in-depth the above-mentioned practical applications and some technological and technical aspects to consider when implementing the VBT in soccer.

Velocity-Based Resistance Training on 1-RM, Jump and Sprint Performance: A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials

Weight resistance training (RT) has been shown to positively influence physical performance. Within the last two decades, a methodology based on monitoring RT through movement velocity (also called velocity-based resistance training, VBRT) has emerged. The aim of this PRISMA-based systematic review was to evaluate the effect of VBRT programs on variables related to muscle strength (one-repetition maximum, 1-RM), and high-speed actions (vertical jump, and sprint performance) in trained subjects. The search for published articles was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, SPORT Discus/EBSCO, OVID, Web of Science, Scopus, and EMBASE databases using Boolean algorithms independently. A total of 22 studies met the inclusion criteria of this systematic review (a low-to-moderate overall risk of bias of the analyzed studies was detected). VBRT is an effective method to improve 1-RM, vertical jump and sprint. According to the results of the analyzed studies, it is not necessary to reach high muscle failure in order to achieve the best training results. These findings reinforce the fact that it is possible to optimize exercise adaptations with less fatigue. Future studies should corroborate these findings in female population.

Effects of Velocity-Based Training on Strength and Power in Elite Athletes-A Systematic Review.

Due to drawbacks of the percentage-based approach, velocity-based training was proposed as a method to better and more accurately prescribe training loads to increase general and specific performance. The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review of the studies that show effects of velocity-based resistance training on strength and power performance in elite athletes. Electronic searches of computerized databases were performed according to a protocol that was agreed by all co-authors. Four databases—SportDiscus with Full Text and MEDLINE via EBSCO, SCOPUS, and Web of Science—were searched. Seven studies were found which researched the effects of velocity-based resistance training on athletes after a given training period. The analyzed studies suggest that applying velocity losses of 10–20% can help induce neuromuscular adaptations and reduce neuromuscular fatigue. Using velocity zones as part of a separate or combined (e.g., plyometric) training program can elicit adaptations in body composition and performance parameters. Moreover, velocity zones can be programmed using a periodized or non-periodized fixed velocity zones protocol. Lastly, obtaining instantaneous feedback during training is a more effective tool for increasing performance in sport-specific parameters, and should be used by sport practitioners to help keep athletes accountable for their performance.

Traditional Versus Velocity-Based Resistance Training in Competitive Female Cyclists: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

We assessed the effects of a short-term velocity-based resistance training (VBRT, where exercise intensity is individualized based on the loads and repetitions that maximize power output) program compared with traditional resistance training (TRT, where the same number of repetitions and relative load are used for every individual) on body composition, muscle strength/power, and endurance performance in competitive female cyclists. Seventeen participants were randomly assigned to 6 weeks (two sessions/week) of TRT (n = 8) or VBRT (n = 9), during which they maintained their usual endurance program. Both interventions included squat, hip thrust, and split squat exercises. Training loads were continuously registered, and outcomes were measures of muscle strength/power, body composition, and endurance performance (incremental test and 8-min time trial). No differences between TRT and VBRT groups were found for overall internal training loads during resistance training or cycling sessions (p > 0.05). Both interventions led to significant improvements in all strength/power-related outcomes, but VBRT induced greater improvements than TRT in maximum muscle strength and power as assessed with the hip thrust exercise (p < 0.05 for the group by time interaction effect). However, no significant group by time interaction effect was found for body composition or endurance performance-related outcomes. In conclusion, the addition of a short-term intervention of VBRT or TRT to the usual training regimen of competitive female cyclists improves muscle strength/power, albeit VBRT might induce superior gains on maximum strength/power for the hip thrust exercise.

Linear programming produces greater, earlier and uninterrupted neuromuscular and functional adaptations than daily-undulating programming after velocity-based resistance training

This study aimed to compare the effect of linear (LP) and daily-undulating (DUP) programming models on neuromuscular and functional performance using the velocity-based resistance training (VBRT) approach. Thirty-two resistance trained men were randomly assigned into 2 groups: LP (n = 16) or DUP (n = 16). Both training groups completed an 8-week VBRT intervention using the full squat exercise, only differing in the relative intensity (% 1RM) distribution during the training program. Changes produced by each periodization model were evaluated using the following variables: estimated 1RM; average mean propulsive velocity (MPV) attained for all absolute loads common to Pre-test and Post-test; average MPV attained against absolute loads lifted faster than 1 m•s−1; average MPV attained against absolute loads lifted slower than 1 m•s − 1; countermovement jump (CMJ) and fatigue test. Moreover, CMJ and 1RM parameters were evaluated weekly to analyze their evolution along the training program. LP and DUP strategies significantly improved all performance variables analyzed (p<0.001), except the fatigue test in the DUP group. Significant "time x group" interactions were observed in all strength variables and fatigue test in favour of the LP group. In addition, pre-post effect size (ES), percentages of change and weekly comparisons showed higher improvements in the LP group (ES=0.54–2.49, ∆=9.5–60.4%) compared to DUP (ES=0.40–1.65, ∆=5.5–27.2%). Based on these findings, the LP appears to stand as a more effective strategy than DUP to achieve greater, earlier and uninterrupted neuromuscular and functional adaptations in VBRT interventions.

Role of CaMKII and sarcolipin in muscle adaptations to strength training with different levels of fatigue in the set.

Strength training promotes a IIX-to-IIA shift in myosin heavy chain (MHC) composition, likely due to changes in sarcoplasmic [Ca2+ ] which are sensed by CaMKII. Sarcoplasmic [Ca2+ ] is in part regulated by sarcolipin (SLN), a small protein that when overexpressed in rodents stimulates mitochondrial biogenesis and a fast-to-slow fiber type shift. The purpose of this study was to determine whether CaMKII and SLN are involved in muscle phenotype and performance changes elicited by strength training. Twenty-two men followed an 8-week velocity-based resistance training program using the full squat exercise while monitoring repetition velocity. Subjects were randomly assigned to two resistance training programs differing in the repetition velocity loss allowed in each set: 20% (VL20) vs 40% (VL40). Strength training caused muscle hypertrophy, improved 1RM and increased total CaMKII protein expression, particularly of the δD isoform. Phospho-Thr287 -CaMKII δD expression increased only in VL40 (+89%), which experienced greater muscle hypertrophy, and a reduction in MHC-IIX percentage. SLN expression was increased in VL20 (+33%) remaining unaltered in VL40. The changes in phospho-Thr287 -CaMKII δD were positively associated with muscle hypertrophy and the number of repetitions during training, and negatively with the changes in MHC-IIX and SLN. Most OXPHOS proteins remained unchanged, except for NDUFB8 (Complex I), which was reduced after training (-22%) in both groups. The amount of fatigue allowed in each set critically influences muscle CaMKII and SLN responses and determines muscle phenotype changes. With lower intra-set fatigue, the IIX-to-IIA MHC shift is attenuated.