par Stragier, Séverine ;Baudry, Stéphane ;Carpentier, Alain ;Duchateau, Jacques
Référence CP-PM02 Strength and power(5th-8th july 2017: Metropolis Ruhr - Germany), 22nd Αnnual Congress of the European College of Sport Science, Ferrauti A., Platen P., Grimminger-Seidensticker E., Jaitner T., Bartmus U., Becher L., De Marées M., Mühlbauer T., Schauerte A., Wiewelhove T., Tsolakidis E., page (539)
Publication Publié, 2017-07-05
Publication dans des actes
Résumé : Introduction:A recent study (Laurent et al., 2016) indicated that a strength training method (3/7 method) which consists of 5 sets of an incremental number of repetitions during successive sets (from 3 to 7 repetitions), a moderate load (70% of one repetition maximal (1RM)), and very brief rest interval between sets (≤15 s), induced similar increase in maximal strength than a more classical method (8 sets of 6 repetitions with 150s rest interval between sets and identical load; 8x6 method). The present study investigated whether reversing the organisation of the repetitions within sets (decremental; 7/3 method) of the 3/7 method was as efficient as the 8x6 method in strength and muscle mass gains. Methods: Thirty adults performed either the 7/3 method (n=16) repeated two times within the session or the 8x6 method (n=14), 2 times a week during 12 weeks. The training exercise consisted of lifting and lowering a load (70% 1RM) with the elbow flexor muscles. Maximal strength was assessed as the 1RM and the torque measured during maximal isometric voluntary contraction (MVC). Muscle thickness of the long head of the biceps brachii was recorded by ultrasonography. Neuromuscular fatigability was tested by measuring the maximal number of repetitions performed at a same relative load (70% 1RM). All these variables were measured before and after training. Results:The MVC torque increased (p<0.001) similarly for both training methods (8x6: +11.3%; 7/3: +9.8%). The 1RM increased (p<0.001) by 12.9% and 12.5% for the 8x6 and 7/3 method, respectively. The thickness of the biceps brachii increased (p<0.001) to a similar extent for both training methods (8x6: +6.1%; 7/3: +7.1%). Regardless of the method, subjects performed less repetitions (p <0.001) after than before training (10.4 ± 1.4 vs. 12.4 ± 2.1). Discussion:The present study indicates that for a similar training volume and intensity, the 7/3 method produced a similar strength gains than a classical method. Surprisingly, the 7/3 method did not reduce neuromuscular fatigability, although such adaptation could be expected as metabolic changes during the training session is likely greater for the 7/3 than the 8x6 method (Penzer et al., 2016). Nonetheless, the main advantage of the 7/3 method is its efficacy as, compared with a conventional method, a similar gain in maximal strength is obtained with a much briefer time to complete the training session. References:Laurent et al. (2016). Science and Sports, 31, e115-e121. Penzer et al. (2016). Eur J Appl Physiol, 116(9), 1795-806.