Velocity-Specific Adaptations to Three Widely Used Strength Training Methods

AIM: We examined bench press adaptations to three widely used strength training methods: maximal strength training (MST), hypertrophy training (HT), and explosive strength training (EST). To reflect how these methods are typically applied by practitioners, MST and EST were volume matched, whereas HT was performed at higher volume. METHODS: Sixty-three moderately trained subjects (32 males, 31 females) were assigned into 8 wk of MST, HT, EST, or control (CON), three sessions per week. MST performed 4 × 4 repetitions bench press at ≥85% of one-repetition maximum (1RM). HT performed 3 × 8-12 repetitions at ∼70%-80% of 1RM. EST performed 4 × 6-7 repetitions bench press throws at 40% of 1RM. Maximal, explosive, and endurance strength characteristics were assessed, as well as muscle hypertrophy. RESULTS: 1RM increased more after MST (+21.5%) and HT (+17.9%) compared with EST (+5.9%) and CON (all P ≤ 0.001). Rate of force development (RFD) at 50% of 1RM increased more after MST (+58.4%) and HT (+38.9%) compared with CON ( P ≤ 0.001 and P ≤ 0.05, respectively). Mean propulsive velocity (MPV) increased more after MST and HT compared with CON across all loads (20%-80% of 1RM), and more than EST at 80% and 60% (all P ≤ 0.05-0.001). MST increased MPV more than EST at 40% of 1RM ( P ≤ 0.05). Δ1RM correlated with ΔMPV at all loads of the load-velocity (L-v) profile ( r = 0.40-0.56, P ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSION: MST and HT were more effective than EST for improving maximal strength and concentric velocity against moderate and high loads. At low loads, EST was not more effective than MST and HT, despite high degree of velocity specificity. Changes in muscle strength appear to be more important than velocity specificity to increase performance across the L-v profile.