getCITED   
  Home     Search     Add Content     Reports     Help  
Edit Publication | Edit Contributors | Delete Publication | Edit References | Edit Citations
Add to Bookstack | Show Bookstack | Change Bookstack

Investigation of an experimental weight-training programme

Post a Comment
CONTRIBUTORS:
  Author Trzaskoma, Z.
  Author Wit, A.
  Author Bartosiewicz, G.
  Author Danielewicz, E.
  Author Gajewski, J.
JOURNAL:
  Journal of Sports Sciences (JSS), 10(2), ?? - ??.
YEAR: 1992
PUB TYPE: Journal Article
SUBJECT(S): WEIGHT-TRAINING; MUSCLE; STRENGTH; FATIGUE; COMPARATIVE-STUDY
DISCIPLINE: No discipline assigned
HTTP:
LANGUAGE: English
PUB ID: 103-366-344 (Last edited on 2002/02/27 18:45:01 US/Mountain)
SPONSOR(S):
 
ABSTRACT:
The aim of this study was to compare the effects of conventional weight-training (control) with an experimental programme. The training programme consisted of 12 sessions, 3 a week for 4 weeks. The experimental group (n=12) performed sets of forearm flexion with a barbell until a 20 percent decline in maximal force was noted. The controls (n=11) trained according to established weight-training principles. Isometric tests were performed on both the right and left forearm flexors and during forearm flexion with a barbell: the tests were continued for a 3-week post-experimental period. The subjects were matched on all tests at the start of the experiment. Larger reductions in muscle torque within the training sessions were noted among the experimental subjects - 19.8 plus/minus 2.0, 16.9 plus/minus 1.9 and 18.0 plus/minus 1.8 percent for right, left and combined elbow flexion respectively, compared to 11.8 plus/minus 2.7, 14.9 plus/minus 4.1 and 13.4 plus/minus 3.1 percent for the controls. The volume of training (number of lifts) was 30.4 percent higher for the experimental subjects. Muscle strength increased in both groups. The controls improved by 12.7 plus/minus 6.9, 24.9 plus/minus 22.1, 18.3 plus/minus 12.3 and 30.3 plus/minus 11.1 percent for right, left, combined isometric strength and the barbell test respectively. These did not differ significantly from the corresponding results for the experimental groups - 7.6 plus/minus 8.8, 17.0 plus/minus 12.4, 11.8 plus/minus 9.3 and 29.1 plus/minus 10.6 percent. Neither the decrease in force during a single training session nor the volume of training were related to the training effect expressed as an increase in muscle force. The effectiveness of the conventional programme is producing similar improvements in muscle strength to the experimental programme suggests that a high volume of training is unnecessary for strength gains.
STATISTICS
Click on # to view
 Citations  
 References  
 Comments  
 Quality      0/0.00 
 Interest      0/0.00 
 View(er)s   1/337 
Quality
  N/A
High
  7
  6
  5
  4
  3
  2
  1
Low
Interest
  N/A
High
  7
  6
  5
  4
  3
  2
  1
Low
Prev | Next

    ABOUT getCITED   |    CONTACT US   |    USER INFO   |    PREFERENCES   |    PRIVACY   |    LOG IN   
Comments? Suggestions? Send them to feedback@getCITED.org.

Copyright © 2000-2006 getCITED Inc. All Rights Reserved.