scholarly journals The Effects of Asparagus Racemosus Supplementation Plus 8 Weeks of Resistance Training on Muscular Strength and Endurance

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 4
Author(s):  
John Paul V. Anders ◽  
Joshua L. Keller ◽  
Cory M. Smith ◽  
Ethan C. Hill ◽  
Terry J. Housh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Placebo Group ◽  
Muscular Strength ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Asparagus Racemosus ◽  
Regression Analyses ◽  
Repetition Maximum ◽  
Rate Of Increase ◽  
Dependent Variables ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Repetitions To Failure

Previous studies have demonstrated that ayurvedic ingredients exhibit ergogenic (performance enhancing) properties, however, no previous studies have examined the ergogenic potential of Asparagus racemosus. The purpose of the present study was to examine the ergogenic efficacy of supplementation with 500 mg·d−1 of A. racemosus during bench press training. Eighteen recreationally trained men (mean ± SD; age = 20.4 ± 0.5 yrs; height = 179.7 ± 1.5 cm; weight = 84.7 ± 5.7 kg) were randomly assigned either 500 mg·d−1 of A. racemosus (n = 10) or placebo (n = 8). An overlapping sample of 10 participants were used to determine test-retest reliability. Pre- and post-training testing included bench press with one repetition maximum (1RM) and repetitions to failure at 70% of pre-training 1RM. The participants performed two sets of bench press to failure three times a week for eight weeks. Independent t-tests, Analyses of covariance (ANCOVA), and regression analyses were used to analyze the dependent variables. The results demonstrated greater mean percentage (14.3 ± 7.7% vs. 7.8 ± 4.5%; p = 0.048) and individual (80% vs. 50%) increases in 1RM, mean (17.5 ± 2.2 repetitions vs. 15.2 ± 2.2 repetitions; p = 0.044) and individual (80% vs. 38%) increases in repetitions to failure, and a greater rate of increase in training loads for the Asparagus racemosus group than the placebo group. In conjunction with bench press training, supplementation with A. racemosus provided ergogenic benefits compared to placebo.

scholarly journals Effects of 4-Week Creatine Supplementation Combined with Complex Training on Muscle Damage and Sport Performance

Nutrients ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. 1640 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chia-Chi Wang ◽  
Chu-Chun Fang ◽  
Ying-Hsian Lee ◽  
Ming-Ta Yang ◽  
Kuei-Hui Chan
Keyword(s):  
Placebo Group ◽  
Muscle Damage ◽  
Muscular Strength ◽  
Creatine Supplementation ◽  
Training Programme ◽  
Sport Performance ◽  
Repetition Maximum ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Complex Training

Creatine supplementation has an ergogenic effect in an acute complex training bout, but the benefits of chronic creatine supplementation during long-term complex training remain unknown. The study aimed to evaluate the effects of 4-week complex training combined with creatine supplementation on sport performances and muscle damage biomarkers. Thirty explosive athletes were assigned to the creatine or placebo group, which consumed 20 g of creatine or carboxymethyl cellulose, respectively, per day for 6 days followed by 2 g of the supplements until the end of the study. After 6 days of supplementation, subjects performed tests of one repetition maximum (1-RM) strength of half squat and complex training bouts to determine the optimal individual post-activation potentiation time. Thereafter, all subjects performed a complex training programme consisting of six sets of 5-RM half squats and plyometric jumps 3 times per week for 4 weeks. Body composition, 30-m sprint and jump performances were assessed before and after the training period. Moreover, blood creatine kinase (CK) activity was analysed at the first and the last training bout. After the training, the 1-RM strength in the creatine group was significantly greater than in the placebo group (p < 0.05). CK activity after the complex training bout in the creatine group was significantly reduced compared with the placebo group (p < 0.05). No differences were noted for other variables. This study concluded that creatine supplementation combined with complex training improved maximal muscular strength and reduced muscle damage during training.

Loaded Inter-set Stretching for Muscular Adaptations in Trained Males: Is the Hype Real?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tanuj Wadhi ◽  
Christopher Barakat ◽  
Alexandre L. Evangelista ◽  
Jeremy R. Pearson ◽  
Ashmeet S. Anand ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bench Press ◽  
Rest Period ◽  
Muscle Thickness ◽  
Time Effect ◽  
Repetition Maximum ◽  
Volume Load ◽  
Rest Periods ◽  
Traditional Resistance Training ◽  
Muscular Adaptations ◽  
Repetitions To Failure

AbstractThe study examined the effects of adding a loaded stretch in the inter-set rest period (ISS) compared to traditional resistance training (TR) on muscular adaptations in resistance-trained males. Twenty-six subjects were randomly assigned into two groups (ISS: n=12; TR: n=14) and underwent an 8-week training regimen. Subjects in ISS underwent an additional loaded stretch for 30 s at 15% of their working load from the prior set during the inter-set rest periods. Muscle thickness of the pectoralis major at the belly (BMT) and lateral (LMT) portions, One-repetition maximum (1RM) and repetitions-to-failure (RTF) on the bench press exercise were measured at baseline and post 8 weeks of training. Additionally, volume load and perceptual parameters for exertion and recovery were measured. Both groups had similar total volume load and average perceptual parameters (p>0.05). There was a main time effect (p<0.01) for all but one dependent variable indicating that both groups responded similarly across time [(∆BMT: ISS=2.7±1.7 mm; TR = 3.0±2.2 mm), (∆LMT: ISS=3.2±1.6 mm; TR=2.8±1.7 mm, (∆1RM: ISS=6.6±3.8 kg; TR=7.5±5.7 kg). Repetitions-to-failure did not change in either group (∆RTF: ISS=0.0±2.1 repetitions; TR=0.0±2.3 repetitions, p>0.05). Our results suggest that addition of a loaded ISS does not affect muscular adaptations either positively or negatively in resistance-trained males.

scholarly journals Establishment of the Prediction Equations of 1RM Skeletal Muscle Strength in 60- to 75-Year-Old Chinese Men and Women

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 640-646 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sijie Tan ◽  
Jianxiong Wang ◽  
Shanshan Liu
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Skeletal Muscle ◽  
Muscle Strength ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Regression Analyses ◽  
Prediction Equations ◽  
Chinese Men ◽  
Repetition Maximum ◽  
The One ◽  
Skeletal Muscle Strength

The purpose of this study was to establish the one-repetition maximum (1RM) prediction equations of a biceps curl, bench press, and squat from the submaximal skeletal muscle strength of 4–10RM or 11–15RM in older adults. The first group of 109 participants aged 60–75 years was recruited to measure their 1RM, 4–10RM, and 11–15RM of the three exercises. The 1RM prediction equations were developed by multiple regression analyses. A second group of participants with similar physical characteristics to the first group was used to evaluate the equations. The actual measured 1RM of the second group correlated significantly to the predicted 1RM obtained from the equations (r values were from .633–.985), and standard error of estimate ranged from 1.08–5.88. Therefore, the equations can be used to predict 1RM from submaximal skeletal muscle strength accurately for older adults.

scholarly journals Strength and Power Characteristics in National Amateur Rugby Players

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (11) ◽  
pp. 5615
Author(s):  
Diego Alexandre Alonso-Aubin ◽  
Moisés Picón-Martínez ◽  
Iván Chulvi-Medrano
Keyword(s):  
Muscular Strength ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Maximal Strength ◽  
Maximal Power ◽  
Repetition Maximum ◽  
Power Characteristics ◽  
Linear Transducer ◽  
Maximal Speed ◽  
The One ◽  
Rugby Players

Rugby players need muscular strength and power to meet the demands of the sport; therefore, a proper assessment of the performance in rugby players should include both variables. The purpose of this study was to examine the strength and power characteristics (SPC) during the squat (SQ) and bench press (BP) in national amateur rugby players and to analyze gender- and position-related differences. A total of 47 players (30 males and 17 females; age: 25.56 ± 1.14 and 23.16 ± 1.38 years, respectively) participated in the study. The one repetition-maximum (1-RM) and SPC in SQ and BP were obtained using a Smith Machine. Then, subjects performed one set of five repetitions on the SQ and BP against six relative loads (30–40–50–60–70–80% 1-RM) using a linear transducer. Differences between genders were found in 1-RM for maximal power, kilograms lifted at maximal power, maximal power, maximal strength and maximal speed in BP (p < 0.00) and 1-RM, kilograms lifted at maximal power, maximal power, maximal strength and maximal speed in SQ (p < 0.00). Comparisons between variables in SQ and BP present a significant relationship (p < 0.01) in SQ and BP 1-RM with kilograms lifted at maximal power (r = 0.86 and r = 0.84), maximal strength (r = 0.53 and r = 0.92) and maximal power (r = 0.76 and r = 0.93). This study confirms the importance of the SPC assessment for training prescription in rugby amateur players.

scholarly journals The effects of a caffeine-like supplement, TeaCrine®, on muscular strength, endurance and power performance in resistance-trained men

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyle R. Cesareo ◽  
Justin R. Mason ◽  
Patrick G. Saracino ◽  
Margaret C. Morrissey ◽  
Michael J. Ormsbee
Keyword(s):  
Muscular Strength ◽  
Perceived Exertion ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Time Trial ◽  
Endurance Performance ◽  
Rating Of Perceived Exertion ◽  
Power Performance ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Tea Plants ◽  
Repetitions To Failure

Abstract Background TeaCrine® is the synthetic version to naturally occurring theacrine (1, 3, 7, 9-tetramethyluric acid) found in the leaves of Camellia kucha tea plants. A few studies have examined the effects of TeaCrine® on cognitive perception, but no research exists examining its effects on resistance exercise performance. The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of TeaCrine®, a caffeine-like compound, on maximal muscular strength, endurance, and power performance in resistance-trained men. Methods Twelve resistance-trained men participated in a randomized, double-blind, cross-over designed study. Each participant performed one-repetition maximum (1RM) bench press, 1RM squat, bench press repetitions to failure (RTF) at 70% 1RM, squat RTF at 70% 1RM, and 2-km rowing time trial 90 min after consumption of: (1) Caffeine 300 mg (CAFF300); (2) TeaCrine® 300 mg (TEA300); (3) TeaCrine® + Caffeine (COMBO; 150 mg/150 mg); (4) Placebo 300 mg (PLA). Power and velocity were measured using a TENDO Power Analyzer. Visual analogue scales for energy, focus, motivation to exercise, and fatigue were administered at baseline and 90 min post-treatment ingestion (pre-workout). Rating of perceived exertion was assessed after bench press RTF and squat RTF. Results There were no differences between groups for 1RM, RTF, and power in the bench press and squat exercises. Only CAFF300 resulted in significant increases in perceived energy and motivation to exercise vs. TEA300 and PLA (Energy: + 9.8%, 95% confidence interval [3.3–16.4%], p < 0.01; + 15.3%, 95% CI [2.2–28.5%], p < 0.02; Motivation to exercise: + 8.9%, 95% CI [0.2–17.6%], p = 0.04, + 14.8%, 95% CI [4.7–24.8%], p < 0.01, respectively) and increased focus (+ 9.6%, 95% CI [2.1–17.1%], p = 0.01) vs. TEA300, but there were no significant differences between CAFF300 and COMBO (Energy + 3.9% [− 6.9–14.7%], Focus + 2.5% [− 6.3–11.3%], Motivation to exercise + 0.5% [− 11.6–12.6%]; p > 0.05). Conclusion Neither TEA300, CAFF300, COMBO, or PLA (when consumed 90 min pre-exercise) improved muscular strength, power, or endurance performance in resistance-trained men. Only CAFF300 improved measures of focus, energy, and motivation to exercise.

scholarly journals An analysis of the perceived causes leading to task-failure in resistance-exercises

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aviv Emanuel ◽  
Itzhak Rozen Smukas ◽  
Israel Halperin
Keyword(s):  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Muscular Strength ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Limiting Factors ◽  
Trained Subjects ◽  
Repetition Maximum ◽  
Task Failure ◽  
Reaching Task ◽  
Resistance Exercises ◽  
Cardiovascular Strain

Background: While reaching task-failure in resistance-exercises is a topic that attracts scientific and applied interest, the underlying reasons leading to task-failure remain underexplored. Here, we examined the reasons subjects attribute to task-failure as they performed resistance-exercises using different loads.Methods: First, twenty-two resistance-trained subjects (11-females) completed one Repetition-Maximum (RM) tests in the barbell squat and bench-press. In the next two sessions, subjects performed two sets to task-failure in both exercises, using either 70% or 83% of 1RM. Immediately after set-completion, subjects verbally reported the reasons they perceived to cause task-failure. Their answers were recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed. The differences between the frequencies of the identified categories were then tested using a mixed logistic regression model.Results: The most commonly reported reason was muscle fatigue (54%, p&lt;.001), mostly of the target muscles involved in each exercise. However, remote muscles involved to a lesser extent in each exercise were also reported. Approximately half of the remaining reasons included general fatigue (26%), pain (12%), cardiovascular strain (11%), and negative affect (10%), with the latter reported more often in the squat (p=.022).Conclusions: In contrast to our expectations, task-failure was perceived to be caused by a range of limiting factors other than fatigue of the target muscles. It now remains to be established whether different perceived limiting factors of resistance-exercises lead to different adaptations, such as muscular strength and hypertrophy.

scholarly journals Concentric-Only Versus Touch-and-Go Bench Press One-Repetition Maximum in Men and Women

2021 ◽  
pp. 194173812097786
Author(s):  
Amador García-Ramos ◽  
Danica Janicijevic ◽  
Ivan Jukic
Keyword(s):  
Resistance Training ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Training Experience ◽  
Loading Test ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Repetition Maximum ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Repetitions To Failure

Background: One-repetition maximum (1RM) tests are time-consuming, and they might not always be logistically possible or warranted due to increased risk of injury when performed incorrectly or by novice athletes. Repetitions-to-failure tests are a widespread method of predicting the 1RM, but its accuracy may be compromised by several factors such as the type of exercise, sex, training history, and the number of repetitions completed in the test. Hypothesis: The touch-and-go bench press would provide a higher 1RM than the concentric-only bench press for both genders regardless of whether the 1RM was obtained by the direct or repetitions-to-failure method and the error in the 1RM prediction would be positively correlated with the number of repetitions performed to failure and negatively correlated with the 1RM strength and resistance training experience. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Level of Evidence: Level 3. Methods: A total of 113 adults (87 men and 26 women) were tested on 2 sessions during the concentric-only and touch-and-go bench press. Each session consisted of an incremental loading test until reaching the 1RM load, followed by a repetitions-to-failure test. Results: The 1RM was higher for the touch-and-go bench press using both the direct (men, 7.80%; women, 7.62%) and repetitions-to-failure method (men, 8.29%; women, 7.49%). A significant, although small, correlation was observed between the error in the estimation of the 1RM and the number of repetitions performed ( r = 0.222; P < 0.01), 1RM strength ( r = −0.169; P = 0.01), and resistance training experience ( r = −0.136; P = 0.05). Conclusion: The repetitions-to-failure test is a valid method of predicting the 1RM during the concentric-only and touch-and-go bench press variants. However, the accuracy of the prediction could be compromised with weaker and less experienced individuals and if more than 10 repetitions are completed during the repetitions-to-failure test. Clinical Relevance: The repetitions-to-failure test does not require any sophisticated equipment and enables a widespread use in different training environments.

scholarly journals Reliability of the velocity achieved during the last repetition of sets to failure and its association with the velocity of the 1-repetition maximum

PeerJ ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. e8760 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amador García-Ramos ◽  
Danica Janicijevic ◽  
Jorge M. González-Hernández ◽  
Justin W.L. Keogh ◽  
Jonathon Weakley
Keyword(s):  
Bench Press ◽  
Loading Test ◽  
Repetition Maximum ◽  
Healthy Men ◽  
Velocity Threshold ◽  
Velocity Relationship ◽  
Minimal Velocity ◽  
Repetitions To Failure ◽  
Incremental Loading

Background This study aimed to determine the reliability of the velocity achieved during the last repetition of sets to failure (Vlast) and the association of Vlast with the velocity of the 1-repetition maximum (V1RM) during the paused and touch-and-go bench press (BP) exercises performed in a Smith machine. Methods A total of 96 healthy men participated in this study that consisted of two testing sessions. A single BP variant (paused BP or touch-and-go BP) was evaluated on each session in a randomized order. Each session consisted of an incremental loading test until reaching the 1RM, followed by two sets of repetitions to failure against a load ranging from 75% to 90% of 1RM. Results The reliability of Vlast was unacceptable for both BP variants (CV > 18.3%, ICC < 0.60). The correlations between V1RM and Vlast were small for the paused BP (r = 0.18) and moderate for the touch-and-go BP (r = 0.37). Conclusions Although these results suggest that Vlast could be a better indicator of the minimal velocity threshold than V1RM, the low reliability of Vlast and the similar values of Vlast for both BP variants suggest that a standard V1RM should be used to estimate the 1RM from the individualized load-velocity relationship.

Bench press and pushup repetitions to failure with equated load

2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 647-652
Author(s):  
Taran L Eckel ◽  
Casey M Watkins ◽  
David C Archer ◽  
Megan A Wong ◽  
Jose A Arevalo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sex Differences ◽  
Body Mass ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Body Position ◽  
Force Plate ◽  
Strong Relationship ◽  
Upper Body ◽  
Repetition Maximum ◽  
Mass Load ◽  
Repetitions To Failure

The bench press and pushup are commonly used for training upper body muscular strength and endurance. Although they are often used interchangeably, differences between the two relative to body mass load are unknown. Furthermore, sex differences may exist due to anthropometric body mass specificity. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between the pushup and bench press when performing repetitions to failure with an equated load. On day 1, 25 recreationally trained subjects (16 men, age = 23.00 ± 2.36 years, height = 178.19 ± 9.61 cm, mass = 74.80 ± 13.44 kg; 9 women, age = 23.11 ± 2.71 years, height = 160.78 ± 5.95 cm, mass = 53.63 ± 5.60 kg), performed a one repetition maximum bench press and an isometric pushup on a force plate to determine bodyweight load supported in both the up and down positions. Grip width on the bench press was measured as the distance between middle fingers and was used for hand placement during pushups. For the down position, a safety squat device was placed on the right triceps to signal that the upper arms were parallel to the ground, while for the up position, triceps were perpendicular to the floor. Days 2 and 3 consisted of performing repetitions to failure for either the bench press or pushup exercise with a load that was equal to the average relative bodyweight force of the up and down pushup positions. For the pushup, subjects followed a 60 beats per minute tempo and the test was terminated if they failed to complete a full repetition; they could not maintain cadence or there were three faults in form. For the bench press, they followed the same 60 s tempo and the test was terminated if they failed to complete a full repetition or could not maintain cadence. A 2 (exercise: bench press, pushup) × 2 (sex: men, women) mixed factor ANOVA demonstrated no interaction, but there were significant (P < 0.05) main effects for exercise and sex where more repetitions were performed in the pushup (19.36 ± 11.68 reps) than the bench press (11.40 ± 8.38 reps) exercise. Also, men performed significantly more repetitions to failure (men =20.22 ± 8.20 reps, women = 6.78 ± 5.69 reps). For combined sexes, there was a significant (P < 0.05), strong relationship (r = 0.82) between bench press and pushup repetitions to failure. For men, there was a significant (P < 0.05), strong relationship (r = 0.81), while for women, there was a moderate relationship (r = 0.76). Men had significantly (P < 0.05) greater bench press one repetition maximum (men = 99.29 ± 23.98 kg, women = 42.17 ± 8.88 kg), percentage of body mass supported as an average of the up and down positions (men = 74.33 ± 2.57%, women = 69.70 ± 2.63%) and bench press one repetition maximum relative to their body mass (men = 1.32 ± 0.22%, women = 0.79 ± 0.13%). The bench press and pushup are two distinct upper body exercises for repetitions to failure due to upper body musculature and body position sex differences. Choice of the pushup or bench press exercise should be based on training goal and sex.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document