Faculty of Sports Science, Ningbo University, Ningbo, ZJ, China.
Research Academy of Human Biomechanics, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School of Ningbo University, Ningbo University, Ningbo, ZJ, China.
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2023 Sep 4;18(11):1345-1351. doi: 10.1123/ijspp.2023-0210. Print 2023 Nov 1.
To evaluate the interference effects of various resistance-training (RT) protocols on rowing ergometer performance.
Fourteen semiprofessional male rowers randomly completed 5 protocols in separate sessions: (1) control-no RT session was performed, (2) upper-body high-fatigue-4 sets to failure during the bench pull exercise, (3) upper-body low-fatigue-4 sets of 6 repetitions during the bench pull exercise, (4) lower-body high-fatigue-4 sets to failure during the leg-press exercise, and (5) lower-body low-fatigue-4 sets of 6 repetitions during the leg-press exercise. All sets were performed against the 12-repetition-maximum load with 2 minutes of interset rest. Following the completion of the protocols, subjects performed an all-out 1000-m rowing ergometer test.
Compared with the control condition, rowing ergometer performance was not significantly affected after the low-fatigue RT protocols (upper body: P ≥ .487; Δ = 0.0%-0.2%; lower body: P ≥ .200; Δ = -0.2%-0.5%), while it significantly declined following high-fatigue RT protocols (upper body: P ≤ .001; Δ = 1.0%-2.0%; lower body: P ≤ .002; Δ = 2.1%-2.5%). The average heart rate was significantly lower for the control condition compared with all RT protocols (P ≤ .043; Δ = 1.0%-1.5%).
To minimize interference on rowing performance, coaches should prioritize the level of effort in RT protocols over specific exercises, specifically avoiding high-fatigue protocols that lead to failure before rowing practice.
评估各种抗阻训练（RT）方案对划船测功仪表现的干扰效应。
14 名半职业男性赛艇运动员在 5 个不同方案中随机进行测试，每个方案在单独的时间进行：（1）对照组，不进行 RT 训练；（2）上半身高疲劳组，在卧拉练习中进行 4 组至力竭；（3）上半身低疲劳组，在卧拉练习中进行 4 组 6 次重复；（4）下半身高疲劳组，在腿举练习中进行 4 组至力竭；（5）下半身低疲劳组，在腿举练习中进行 4 组 6 次重复。所有组均使用 12 次最大重复负荷进行，组间休息 2 分钟。完成方案后，受测者进行全力 1000 米划船测功仪测试。
与对照组相比，低疲劳 RT 方案对划船测功仪表现没有显著影响（上半身：P≥.487；Δ=0.0%-0.2%；下半身：P≥.200；Δ=-0.2%-0.5%），而高疲劳 RT 方案则显著降低了划船测功仪表现（上半身：P≤.001；Δ=1.0%-2.0%；下半身：P≤.002；Δ=2.1%-2.5%）。与所有 RT 方案相比，对照组的平均心率显著较低（P≤.043；Δ=1.0%-1.5%）。
为了将 RT 方案对划船表现的干扰最小化，教练应优先考虑 RT 方案的努力程度，而不是特定的练习，特别是要避免在划船练习前导致疲劳的高疲劳方案。
