Loading...
4 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
- Concurrent Training Followed by Detraining: Does the Resistance Training Intensity Matter?Publication . Sousa, António C.; Marinho, Daniel; Gil, Maria Helena; Izquierdo, Mikel; Rodríguez-Rosell, David; Neiva, Henrique; Marques, Mário C.The aim of this study was to analyze the training and detraining (DT) effects of concurrent aerobic training and resistance training against 3 different external loads on strength and aerobic variables. Thirty-two men were randomly assigned to 4 groups: low-load (LLG, n = 9), moderate-load (MLG, n = 9), high-load (HLG, n = 8), and control group (CG, n = 6). Resistance training consisted of full squat (FS) with a low load (40-55% 1 repetition maximum [1RM]), a moderate load (55-70% 1RM), or a high load (70-85% 1RM) combined with jump and sprint exercises. Aerobic training was performed at 75% of the maximal aerobic speed for 15-20 minutes. The training period lasted for 8-week, followed by 4-week DT. Pretraining, post-training, and post-DT evaluations included 20-m running sprints (0-10 m: T10; 0-20 m: T20), shuttle run test, countermovement vertical jump (CMJ) test, and loading test (1RM) in FS. All the experimental groups showed improvements (p ≤ 0.05) in all the parameters assessed, except the LLG for T10 and the HLG for T20. The LLG, MLG, and HLG showed great changes in 1RM and V[Combining Dot Above]O2max compared with the CG (p ≤ 0.05), whereas the HLG and MLG showed a greater percentage change than the CG in T10 (p < 0.001) and CMJ (p ≤ 0.05). The 4-week DT period resulted in detrimental effects in all variables analyzed for all 3 experimental groups. In conclusion, our results suggest that strength training programs with low, moderate, or high external loads combined with low-intensity aerobic training could be effective for producing significant gains in strength and aerobic capacities. Moreover, the higher loads used increased gains in explosive efforts.
- Current Approaches on Warming up for Sports PerformancePublication . Gil, Maria Helena; Neiva, Henrique; Sousa, António C.; Marques, MC; Marinho, DanielWarm-up procedures have become relevant for coaches, researchers, and sports professionals in recent years. Several studies have been conducted to verify the effects of different preactivities, regarding differing volume, intensity, rest, and specificity, and the warm-up is now widely accepted as an essential practice to improve performance. Research is now focusing on the effects of static and dynamic stretches, postactivation potentiation phenomenon, and optimization of waiting periods with passive warm-up approaches. in this brief review, we critically analyze the emerging methods and strategies of warm-up that have been investigated and used before competitive events.
- Concurrent Training and Detraining: The Influence of Different Aerobic IntensitiesPublication . Sousa, António C.; Neiva, Henrique; Gil, Maria Helena; Izquierdo, Mikel; Rodríguez-Rosell, David; Marques, Mário C.; Marinho, DanielSousa, AC, Neiva, HP, Gil, MH, Izquierdo, M, Rodríguez-Rosell, D, Marques, MC, and Marinho, DA. Concurrent training and detraining: the influence of different aerobic intensities. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2018-The aim of this study was to verify the effects of different aerobic intensities combined with the same resistance training on strength and aerobic performances. Thirty-nine men were randomly assigned to a low-intensity group (LIG), moderate-intensity group (MIG), high-intensity group (HIG), and a control group. The training program consisted of full squat, jumps, sprints, and running at 80% (LIG), 90% (MIG), or 100% (HIG) of the maximal aerobic speed for 16-20 minutes. The training period lasted for 8 weeks, followed by 4 weeks of detraining. Evaluations included 20-m sprints (0-10 m: T10; 0-20 m: T20), shuttle run, countermovement jump (CMJ), and strength (1RMest) in full squat. There were significant improvements from pre-training to post-training in T10 (LIG: 4%; MIG: 5%; HIG: 2%), T20 (3%; 4%; 2%), CMJ (9%; 10%; 7%), 1RMest (13%; 7%; 8%), and oxygen uptake (V[Combining Dot Above]O2max; 10%; 11%; 10%). Comparing the changes between the experimental groups, 1RMest gains were significantly higher in the LIG than HIG (5%) or MIG (6%). Furthermore, there was a tendency for higher gains in LIG and MIG compared with HIG, with "possibly" or "likely" positive effects in T10, T20, and CMJ. Detraining resulted in performance decrements, but minimal losses were found for V[Combining Dot Above]O2max in LIG (-1%). Concurrent training seems to be beneficial for strength and aerobic development regardless of the aerobic training intensity. However, choosing lower intensities can lead to increased strength and is recommended when the cardiorespiratory gains should be maintained for longer.
- Concurrent training and detraining: brief review on the effect of exercise intensitiesPublication . Sousa, António C.; Neiva, Henrique; Izquierdo, Mikel; Cadore, Eduardo; Alves, Ana Ruivo; Marinho, DanielConcurrent resistance and aerobic training (CT) has been applied to optimize both strength and aerobic performance. However, it should be carefully prescribed, as there are some factors, as the training intensity, which have strong influence on training adaptations. Thus, we conducted a systematic review to analyze the scientific evidence regarding aerobic and resistance exercise intensities during CT and their effect on performance outcomes. The effects of exercise intensity on a subsequent detraining period were also assessed. Nine studies met the inclusion criteria, the risk of bias was assessed, and the percentage of changes and effect sizes were quantified. CT improved running times (10 m, 30 m and 10 km) and strength performance (one-repetition maximum, countermovement jump) regardless of exercise intensity used (4-47%, ES=0.4-2.8). Nevertheless, higher aerobic training intensities (≥ lactate threshold intensity) resulted in higher aerobic gains (5-10%, ES=0.3-0.6), and greater neuromuscular adaptations were found when higher resistance loads (≥ 70% of maximal strength) were used (10-14%, ES=0.4-1.3). Most training-induced gains were reversed after 2-4 weeks of detraining. Although further research is needed, it seems that higher intensities of aerobic or resistance training induce greater aerobic or neuromuscular gains, respectively. Nevertheless, it seems that higher resistance training loads should be combined with lower aerobic training intensities for increased strength gains and minimal losses after detraining.