Center of Sports Sciences and Human Performances, School of Sciences, University of Greenwich, Greenwich, United Kingdom.
J Strength Cond Res. 2013 Jul;27(7):1832-40. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182736d10.
The aim of this study was to compare the effects of 3 different volume of resistance training (RT) on maximum strength and average power in college team sport athletes with no previous RT experience. Thirty-two subjects (20 men and 12 women, age = 23.1 ± 1.57 years) were randomly divided into 4 groups: low volume (LV; n = 8), 1 set per exercise and 3 sets per muscle group; moderate volume (MV; n = 8), 2 sets per exercise and 6 sets per muscle group; high volume (HV; n = 8), 3 sets per exercise and 9 sets per muscle group; and a non-RT control group (n = 8). The 3 intervention groups were trained for 6 weeks thrice weekly after a nonperiodized RT program differentiated only by the volume. Before (T1) and after training (T2), 1 repetition maximum (1RM) and maximal average power (AP) produced on the bench press (BP), upright row (UR), and squat (SQ) were assessed by progressive resistance tests. One repetition maximum-BP and 1RM-UR increased significantly in the 3 interventions groups (p < 0.05), whereas only the HV group significantly improved 1RM-SQ (p < 0.01). The MV and HV groups increased AP-BP (p < 0.05), whereas only the LV group improved AP-SQ (p < 0.01). Moderate effect sizes (ES; >0.20 < 0.60) were observed for the 1RM-BP and 1RM-UR in the 3 training groups. High-volume group showed the larger ES for 1RM-BP (0.45), 1RM-UR (0.60), and 1RM-SQ (0.47), whereas the LV produced the higher ES for SQ-AP (0.53). During the initial adaptation period, a HV RT program seems to be a better strategy for improving strength, whereas during the season, an LV RT could be a reasonable option for maintaining strength and enhancing lower-body AP in team sport athletes.
本研究旨在比较 3 种不同负荷量的抗阻训练（RT）对无 RT 经验的大学生团队运动运动员最大力量和平均功率的影响。32 名受试者（20 名男性和 12 名女性，年龄=23.1±1.57 岁）被随机分为 4 组：低负荷量组（LV；n=8），每组 1 次，每组肌肉群 3 次；中负荷量组（MV；n=8），每组 2 次，每组肌肉群 6 次；高负荷量组（HV；n=8），每组 3 次，每组肌肉群 9 次；非 RT 对照组（n=8）。3 个干预组在非周期化 RT 方案后每周进行 3 次、每次 6 周的训练，仅通过负荷量进行区分。在训练前（T1）和训练后（T2），通过渐进式抗阻测试评估卧推（BP）、直立划船（UR）和深蹲（SQ）的 1 次重复最大重量（1RM）和最大平均功率（AP）。3 个干预组的 BP-1RM 和 UR-1RM 显著增加（p<0.05），而只有 HV 组的 SQ-1RM 显著增加（p<0.01）。MV 和 HV 组的 BP-AP 增加（p<0.05），而只有 LV 组的 SQ-AP 增加（p<0.01）。3 个训练组的 BP-1RM 和 UR-1RM 具有中等的效应量（ES；>0.20<0.60）。HV 组的 BP-1RM 的 ES 最大（0.45），UR-1RM（0.60）和 SQ-1RM（0.47），而 LV 组的 SQ-AP 的 ES 最大（0.53）。在初始适应期，高负荷量 RT 方案似乎是提高力量的更好策略，而在赛季中，低负荷量 RT 可能是保持力量和提高团队运动运动员下肢 AP 的合理选择。
