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
. 2021 Sep 24:9:e12189.
doi: 10.7717/peerj.12189. eCollection 2021.

Bilateral back squat strength is increased during a 3-week undulating resistance training program with and without variable resistance in DIII collegiate football players

Affiliations

Bilateral back squat strength is increased during a 3-week undulating resistance training program with and without variable resistance in DIII collegiate football players

Jason Sawyer et al. PeerJ. .

Abstract

Background: Optimizing training adaptations is of the utmost importance for the strength and conditioning professional. The pre-season of any sport is particularly important to ensure preparedness of the athletes. In DIII Collegiate Football pre-season consists of approximately 3 weeks. The abbreviated time of the pre-season increases the importance of optimizing training using safe methods, including alternative loading strategies. The purpose of the current study was to determine if a 3-week variable resistance training VRT during an undulating (UL) resistance training program elicited a greater increase in back squat strength compared to traditional loading methods.

Methods and materials: Forty DIII Football players (age range: 18-25 years) participated in a 3-week UL bilateral back squat (BBS) program. Both groups performed the BBS 3 times per week with a minimum of 24 hours between exercise sessions. The control group (C) (n = 20) (height = 182.3 + 5.1 cm, body mass: pre = 102.8 ± 17.7 kg, post = 104.1 ± 17.8 kg) used traditional loading methods (i.e., Olympic weights only) and the experimental group (E) (n = 20) (height = 180.7 ± 8.0 cm, body mass: pre = 100.3 ± 27.1 kg, post = 101.0 ± 27.7 kg) used traditional loading methods and variable resistance (i.e., resistance bands). The variable resistance accounted for approximately 20% of the total resistance while 80% of the resistance was supplied by traditional loading methods.

Results: When all data was pooled, subjects had a significant increase (p < 0.05) in 1-RM BBS from pre (154.2 + 26.1 kg) to post (166.8 + 26.2 kg), with a percent increase of 8.13% at the completion of the 3-week training program. There was no significant difference (p > 0.05) between the C and E groups for muscular strength, muscular power, or vertical jump. Volume-loads were not significantly (p > 0.05) different between groups for any of the weeks (C: Week 1 = 858.1 + 101.3, Week 2 = 588.6 + 69.2, Week 3 = 332.5 + 38.9, Total = 1179.2 + 209.4 vs. E: Week 1 = 835.2 + 179.7, Week 2 = 572.2 + 123.4, Week 3 = 323.5 + 68.8, Total = 1730.9 + 371.8) or for the pre-season as a whole.

Conclusion: A traditional UL resistance training program and training program with variable resistance are both effective methods at increasing back squat strength during 3 weeks of training. Resistance band variable resistance (VR) does not enhance training effects within a 3-week mesocycle greater than traditional resistance.

Keywords: Accommodating resistance; Undulating periodization; Variable resistance training.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare there are no competing interests.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Andersen V, Fimland M, Kolnes M, Jensen S, Laume M, Saeterbakken A. Electromyographic comparison of squats using constant or variable resistance. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2016;30(12):3456–3463. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001451. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Anderson CE, Sforzo GA, Sigg JA. The effects of combining elastic and free weight resistance on strength and power in athletes. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2008;22(2):567–574. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181634d1. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Argus CK, Gill N, Keogh J, Hopkins WG, Beaven CM. Effects of a short-term pre-season training programme on the body composition and anaerobic performance of professional rugby union players. Journal of Sports Sciences. 2010;28(6):679–686. doi: 10.1080/02640411003645695. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Fry A, Kraemer W. Physical performance characteristics of American collegiate football players. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 1991;5(3):126–138.
    1. Gabbett T, Kelly J, Ralph S, Driscoll D. Physiological and anthropometric characteristics of junior elite and sub-elite rugby league players, with special reference to starters and non-starters. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport. 2009;12(1):215–222. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2007.06.008. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources