Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Jan 16;6(1):3.
doi: 10.3390/sports6010003.

Resting Hormone Alterations and Injuries: Block vs. DUP Weight-Training among D-1 Track and Field Athletes

Keith B Painter  1 , G Gregory Haff  2 , N Travis Triplett  3 , Charles Stuart  4 , Guy Hornsby  5 , Mike W Ramsey  6 , Caleb D Bazyler  7 , Michael H Stone  8
Affiliations

Resting Hormone Alterations and Injuries: Block vs. DUP Weight-Training among D-1 Track and Field Athletes

Keith B Painter et al. Sports (Basel). .

Abstract

Daily undulating periodization (DUP), using daily alterations in repetitions, has been advocated as a superior method of resistance training, while traditional forms of programming for periodization (Block) have been questioned. Nineteen Division I track and field athletes were assigned to either a 10-week Block or DUP training group. Year and event were controlled. Over the course of the study, there were four testing sessions, which were used to evaluate a variety of strength characteristics, including maximum isometric strength, rate of force development, and one repetition maximum (1RM). Although, performance trends favored the Block group for strength and rate of force development, no statistical differences were found between the two groups. However, different (p ≤ 0.05) estimated volumes of work (VL) and amounts of improvement per VL were found between groups. Based upon calculated training efficiency scores, these data indicate that a Block training model is more efficient in producing strength gains than a DUP model. Additionally, alterations in testosterone (T), cortisol (C) and the T:C ratio were measured. Although there were no statistically (p ≤ 0.05) different hormone alterations between groups, relationships between training variables and hormone concentrations including the T:C ratio, indicate that Block may be more efficacious in terms of fatigue management.

Keywords: T:C ratio; cortisol; strength; testosterone; volume load.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
(A) Depicts repetitions completed each week in the daily undulating periodization (DUP) and Block groups; (B) depicts the mean repetitions completed by each group over the 10 weeks of training. Significant difference between groups: * p < 0.05, # p < 0.001. Daily undulating and block periodization repetitions.
Figure 2
Figure 2
(A) Depicts volume-load completed each week in the DUP and Block groups; (B) depicts the mean volume-load completed by each group over the 10 weeks of training. Significant difference between groups: * p < 0.05. Daily undulating and block periodization volume load.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Depicts weekly training monotony scores in the DUP and Block groups. “Overall” represents the mean training monotony scores for each group over the 10 weeks of training. Significant difference between groups: * p < 0.05. Daily undulating and block periodization monotony scores.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Depicts weekly training strain scores in the DUP and Block groups. “Overall” represents the mean training strain scores for each group over the 10 weeks of training. Significant difference between groups: * p < 0.05. Daily undulating and block periodization strain scores.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Outside work estimate. CR, coaches ranking of workload.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Hartmann H., Bob A., Wirth K., Schmidtbleicher D. Effects of different periodization models on rate of force development and power ability of the upper extremity. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2009;23:1921–1932. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181b73c69. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kok L.Y., Hamer P.W., Bishop D.J. Enhancing muscular qualities in untrained women: Linear versus undulating periodization. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2009;41:1797–1807. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181a154f3. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kraemer W., Fleck S. Optimizing Strength Training: Designing Nonlinear Periodization Workouts. Human Kinetics; Champaign, IL, USA: 2007.
    1. Rhea M.R., Ball S.D., Phillips W.T., Burkett L.N. A comparison of linear and daily undulating periodized programs with equated volume and intensity for strength. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2002;16:250–255. - PubMed
    1. DeWeese B.H., Hornsby G., Stone M., Stone M.H. The training process: Planning for strength-power training in track and field. Part 1: Theoretical aspects. J. Sport Health Sci. 2015;4:308–317. doi: 10.1016/j.jshs.2015.07.003. - DOI

LinkOut - more resources