Traditional 3-to 5-Minute Interset Rest Periods May Not Be Necessary When Performing Fewer Repetitions Per Set: Using Clean Pulls as an Example

Result code in IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11510%2F22%3A10450126" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11510/22:10450126 - isvavai.cz</a>

Result on the web

<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=BqTIlv4DIx" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=BqTIlv4DIx</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000003908" target="_blank" >10.1519/JSC.0000000000003908</a>

Result language

angličtina

Original language name

Traditional 3-to 5-Minute Interset Rest Periods May Not Be Necessary When Performing Fewer Repetitions Per Set: Using Clean Pulls as an Example

Original language description

Jukic, I and Tufano, JJ. Traditional 3- to 5-minute interset rest periods may not be necessary when performing fewer repetitions per set: Using clean pulls as an example. J Strength Cond Res 36(11): 3015-3022, 2022-Three to 5 minutes of interset rest is often recommended for power-based exercises, but those recommendations are largely based on performing many repetitions per set, which can induce fatigue and require such lengthy rest periods. If the number of repetitions per set is reduced before fatigue ensues, interset rest periods may also be reduced without sacrificing performance. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of this notion on barbell velocity and power output over multiple sets of clean pulls using different loads in strength-trained men. Fifteen strength-trained men performed 3 extended sets of 6 clean pulls using 80% (EXT80), 100% (EXT100), and 120% (EXT120) of power clean 1 repetition maximum with 180 seconds of interset rest and 9 short sets of 2 using 80% (SHT80), 100% (SHT100), and 120% (SHT120) with 45 seconds of interset rest. Peak velocity was greater during short set protocol than extended set protocol (80%: 1.74 +/- 0.16 vs. 1.68 +/- 0.15 m/s; 100%: 1.47 +/- 0.15 vs. 1.41 +/- 0.12 m/s; 120%: 1.21 +/- 0.13 vs. 1.16 +/- 0.15 m/s; p &lt; 0.05). Furthermore, peak power was greater during SHT100 (1874.6 +/- 267.5 vs. 1732.3 +/- 250.4 W; p &lt; 0.05) and SHT120 (1777.8 +/- 226.1 vs. 1,650.4 +/- 249.1 W; p &lt; 0.05) than EXT100 and EXT120, respectively. Therefore, reducing the number of repetitions per set may allow for interset rest periods to also be reduced while better maintaining performance. However, the extent to which rest periods can be shortened warrants further investigation as total rest time was equal in this study.

Czech name

—

Czech description

—

Type

J_imp - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the Web of Science database

CEP classification

—

OECD FORD branch

30306 - Sport and fitness sciences

Project

—

Continuities

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Publication year

2022

Confidentiality

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Name of the periodical

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

ISSN

1064-8011

e-ISSN

1533-4287

Volume of the periodical

36

Issue of the periodical within the volume

11

Country of publishing house

US - UNITED STATES

Number of pages

8

Pages from-to

3015-3022

UT code for WoS article

000872673600006

EID of the result in the Scopus database

2-s2.0-85139417183