Mechanical Characteristics of Heavy vs. Light Load Ballistic Resistance Training in Older Adults

ABSTRACTRodriguez-Lopez, C, Alcazar, J, Sánchez-Martín, C, Ara, I, Csapo, R, and Alegre, LM. Mechanical characteristics in heavy vs. light load ballistic resistance training in older adults. J Strength Cond Res XX(X)000–000, 2020—Although power-oriented resistance training (RT) is strongly recommend...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of strength and conditioning research 2022-08, Vol.36 (8), p.2094-2101
Hauptverfasser: Rodriguez-Lopez, Carlos, Alcazar, Julian, Sánchez-Martín, Coral, Ara, Ignacio, Csapo, Robert, Alegre, Luis M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:ABSTRACTRodriguez-Lopez, C, Alcazar, J, Sánchez-Martín, C, Ara, I, Csapo, R, and Alegre, LM. Mechanical characteristics in heavy vs. light load ballistic resistance training in older adults. J Strength Cond Res XX(X)000–000, 2020—Although power-oriented resistance training (RT) is strongly recommended to counter age-related neuromuscular function declines, there is still controversy about which intensities of load should be used to elicit optimal training adaptations. Knowledge of the mechanical characteristics of power-oriented RT performed at different intensities might help to better understand the training stimulus that triggers load-dependent adaptations in older adults. Using a cross-over design, 15 well-functioning older volunteers (9 men and 6 women; 73.6 ± 3.8 years) completed 2 volume × load-matched ballistic RT sessions with heavy (HL6 × 6 × 80% 1-repetition maximum [1RM]) and light-load (LL6 × 12 × 40% 1RM) on a horizontal leg press exercise. Electromyographic (EMG) and mechanical variables (work, force, velocity, and power) as well as intraset neuromuscular fatigue (i.e., relative losses in force, velocity, and power) were analyzed. More concentric mechanical work was performed in the LL training session, compared with HL (36.2 ± 11.2%; p < 0.001). Despite the higher mean EMG activity of the quadriceps femoris muscle (13.2 ± 21.1%; p = 0.038) and greater concentric force (35.2 ± 7.6%; p < 0.001) during HL, higher concentric velocity (41.0 ± 12.7%, p < 0.001) and a trend toward higher concentric power (7.2 ± 18.9%, p = 0.075) were found for LL. Relative velocity losses were similar in both sessions (≈10%); however, relative force losses were only found in LL (7.4 ± 6.5%, p = 0.003). Considering the greater mechanical work performed and concentric power generated, ballistic RT using LL may, therefore, represent a stronger stimulus driving training adaptations as compared with volume × load-matched heavy-load training. Relative losses in force and power should be monitored in addition to velocity losses during ballistic RT.
ISSN:1064-8011
1533-4287
DOI:10.1519/JSC.0000000000003826