Cargando…
Time Course of Recovery Following Resistance Exercise with Different Loading Magnitudes and Velocity Loss in the Set
The aim of this study was to compare the time course of recovery following four different resistance exercise protocols in terms of loading magnitude (60% vs. 80% 1RM—one-repetition maximum) and velocity loss in the set (20% vs. 40%). Seventeen males performed four different protocols in full squat...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6473797/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30836680 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/sports7030059 |
_version_ | 1783412509979443200 |
---|---|
author | Pareja-Blanco, Fernando Villalba-Fernández, Antonio Cornejo-Daza, Pedro J. Sánchez-Valdepeñas, Juan González-Badillo, Juan José |
author_facet | Pareja-Blanco, Fernando Villalba-Fernández, Antonio Cornejo-Daza, Pedro J. Sánchez-Valdepeñas, Juan González-Badillo, Juan José |
author_sort | Pareja-Blanco, Fernando |
collection | PubMed |
description | The aim of this study was to compare the time course of recovery following four different resistance exercise protocols in terms of loading magnitude (60% vs. 80% 1RM—one-repetition maximum) and velocity loss in the set (20% vs. 40%). Seventeen males performed four different protocols in full squat exercise, which were as follows: (1) 60% 1RM with a velocity loss of 20% (60-20), (2) 60% 1RM with a velocity loss of 40% (60-40), (3) 80% 1RM with a velocity loss of 20% (80-20), and (4) 80% 1RM with a velocity loss of 40% (80-40). Movement velocity against the load that elicited a 1 m·s(−1) velocity at baseline measurements (V(1)-load), countermovement jump (CMJ) height, and sprint time at 20 m (T20) were assessed at Pre, Post, 6 h-Post, 24 h-Post, and 48 h-Post. Impairments in V(1)-load were significantly higher for 60-40 than other protocols at Post (p < 0.05). The 60-20 and 80-40 protocols exhibited significant performance impairments for V(1)-load at 6 h-Post and 24 h-Post, respectively (p < 0.05). CMJ height remained decreased for 60-20 and 60-40 until 24 h-Post (p < 0.001–0.05). Regarding T20, the 80-40 protocol resulted in higher performance than 60-40 at 24 h-Post and the 80-20 protocol induced a greater performance than 60-40 protocol at 48 h-Post (p < 0.05). A higher velocity loss during the set (40%) and a lower relative load (60% 1RM) resulted in greater fatigue and slower rate of recovery than lower velocity loss (20%) and higher relative load (80% 1RM). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6473797 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-64737972019-04-29 Time Course of Recovery Following Resistance Exercise with Different Loading Magnitudes and Velocity Loss in the Set Pareja-Blanco, Fernando Villalba-Fernández, Antonio Cornejo-Daza, Pedro J. Sánchez-Valdepeñas, Juan González-Badillo, Juan José Sports (Basel) Article The aim of this study was to compare the time course of recovery following four different resistance exercise protocols in terms of loading magnitude (60% vs. 80% 1RM—one-repetition maximum) and velocity loss in the set (20% vs. 40%). Seventeen males performed four different protocols in full squat exercise, which were as follows: (1) 60% 1RM with a velocity loss of 20% (60-20), (2) 60% 1RM with a velocity loss of 40% (60-40), (3) 80% 1RM with a velocity loss of 20% (80-20), and (4) 80% 1RM with a velocity loss of 40% (80-40). Movement velocity against the load that elicited a 1 m·s(−1) velocity at baseline measurements (V(1)-load), countermovement jump (CMJ) height, and sprint time at 20 m (T20) were assessed at Pre, Post, 6 h-Post, 24 h-Post, and 48 h-Post. Impairments in V(1)-load were significantly higher for 60-40 than other protocols at Post (p < 0.05). The 60-20 and 80-40 protocols exhibited significant performance impairments for V(1)-load at 6 h-Post and 24 h-Post, respectively (p < 0.05). CMJ height remained decreased for 60-20 and 60-40 until 24 h-Post (p < 0.001–0.05). Regarding T20, the 80-40 protocol resulted in higher performance than 60-40 at 24 h-Post and the 80-20 protocol induced a greater performance than 60-40 protocol at 48 h-Post (p < 0.05). A higher velocity loss during the set (40%) and a lower relative load (60% 1RM) resulted in greater fatigue and slower rate of recovery than lower velocity loss (20%) and higher relative load (80% 1RM). MDPI 2019-03-04 /pmc/articles/PMC6473797/ /pubmed/30836680 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/sports7030059 Text en © 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Pareja-Blanco, Fernando Villalba-Fernández, Antonio Cornejo-Daza, Pedro J. Sánchez-Valdepeñas, Juan González-Badillo, Juan José Time Course of Recovery Following Resistance Exercise with Different Loading Magnitudes and Velocity Loss in the Set |
title | Time Course of Recovery Following Resistance Exercise with Different Loading Magnitudes and Velocity Loss in the Set |
title_full | Time Course of Recovery Following Resistance Exercise with Different Loading Magnitudes and Velocity Loss in the Set |
title_fullStr | Time Course of Recovery Following Resistance Exercise with Different Loading Magnitudes and Velocity Loss in the Set |
title_full_unstemmed | Time Course of Recovery Following Resistance Exercise with Different Loading Magnitudes and Velocity Loss in the Set |
title_short | Time Course of Recovery Following Resistance Exercise with Different Loading Magnitudes and Velocity Loss in the Set |
title_sort | time course of recovery following resistance exercise with different loading magnitudes and velocity loss in the set |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6473797/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30836680 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/sports7030059 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT parejablancofernando timecourseofrecoveryfollowingresistanceexercisewithdifferentloadingmagnitudesandvelocitylossintheset AT villalbafernandezantonio timecourseofrecoveryfollowingresistanceexercisewithdifferentloadingmagnitudesandvelocitylossintheset AT cornejodazapedroj timecourseofrecoveryfollowingresistanceexercisewithdifferentloadingmagnitudesandvelocitylossintheset AT sanchezvaldepenasjuan timecourseofrecoveryfollowingresistanceexercisewithdifferentloadingmagnitudesandvelocitylossintheset AT gonzalezbadillojuanjose timecourseofrecoveryfollowingresistanceexercisewithdifferentloadingmagnitudesandvelocitylossintheset |