1Physical Education Postgraduation Program, Rio de Janeiro Federal University, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; 2Laboratory of Exercise Physiology and Morphofunctional Assessment, Granbery Methodist College, and Morphofunctional Assessmen Juiz de Fora, Brazil; and 3Health, Exercise Science, and Sport Management, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Kenosha, Wisconsin.
J Strength Cond Res. 2013 Dec;27(12):3310-21. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31828de8c3.
The aim of this study was to compare 2 models of resistance training (RT) programs, nonperiodized (NP) training and daily nonlinear periodized (DNLP) training, on strength, power, and flexibility in untrained adolescents. Thirty-eight untrained male adolescents were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: a control group, NP RT program, and DNLP program. The subjects were tested pretraining and after 4, 8, and 12 weeks for 1 repetition maximum (1RM) resistances in the bench press and 45° leg press, sit and reach test, countermovement vertical jump (CMVJ), and standing long jump (SLJ). Both training groups performed the same sequence of exercises 3 times a week for a total of 36 sessions. The NP RT consisted of 3 sets of 10-12RM throughout the training period. The DNLP training consisted of 3 sets using different training intensities for each of the 3 training sessions per week. The total volume of the training programs was not significantly different. Both the NP and DNLP groups exhibited a significant increase in the 1RM for the bench press and 45° leg press posttraining compared with that pretraining, but there were no significant differences between groups (p ≤ 0.05). The DNLP group's 1RM changes showed greater percentage improvements and effect sizes. Training intensity for the bench press and 45° leg press did not significantly change during the training. In the CMVJ and SLJ tests, NP and DNLP training showed no significant change. The DNLP group showed a significant increase in the sit and reach test after 8 and 12 weeks of training compared with pretraining; this did not occur with NP training. In summary, in untrained adolescents during a 12-week training period, a DNLP program can be used to elicit similar and possible superior maximal strength and flexibility gains compared with an NP multiset training model.
本研究旨在比较 2 种抗阻训练（RT）模式，即非周期性（NP）训练和每日非线性周期性（DNLP）训练，对未经训练的青少年的力量、爆发力和柔韧性的影响。38 名未经训练的男性青少年被随机分配到 3 个组之一：对照组、NP RT 组和 DNLP 组。受试者在训练前和 4、8 和 12 周后分别进行 1 次重复最大（1RM）阻力测试，包括卧推和 45°腿举、坐立前伸测试、下蹲垂直跳（CMVJ）和立定跳远（SLJ）。两组训练者每周进行 3 次相同的练习序列，共进行 36 次训练。NP RT 组在整个训练期间进行 3 组 10-12RM 的训练。DNLP 训练组在每周的 3 次训练中使用不同的训练强度进行 3 组训练。两个训练计划的总训练量没有显著差异。NP 和 DNLP 组在训练后卧推和 45°腿举的 1RM 均显著增加，与训练前相比，但组间无显著差异（p≤0.05）。DNLP 组的 1RM 变化显示出更大的百分比提高和效果大小。训练强度在训练过程中对卧推和 45°腿举没有显著变化。在 CMVJ 和 SLJ 测试中，NP 和 DNLP 训练均未显示出显著变化。DNLP 组在经过 8 周和 12 周的训练后，坐立前伸测试的成绩显著提高，而 NP 训练组则没有。综上所述，在未经训练的青少年中，在 12 周的训练期间，DNLP 方案可以用来引起与 NP 多组训练模型相似甚至可能更好的最大力量和柔韧性收益。
