Power Up Your Bench With Maximal Velocity on the Bench: Almost 2x Greater Strength Gains Compared to 50%

Bench press bros, listen up! You better push that weigh up fast, if you want to make maximal strength gains - O-lifting says "Hello" ;-)

Do you train deliberately slow? If so, you may be limiting your strength gains. A recently published paper in the European Journal of Sports Science shows: "Movement velocity can be considered a fundamental component of RT intensity, since, for a given %1RM, the velocity at which loads are lifted largely determines the resulting training effect" (Gonzalez-Badillo. 2014).

Before we take a closer look at how "large" the effect of training the training velocity actually is, I would like to invite you to take a closer look at the design of the corresponding experiment that was conducted at the Pablo de Olivade University in Seville, Spain.

Squatting will always remain the most versatile muscle builder & fat shredder

Optimizing Rest for Size and Strength Gains

Alternate Squats & BP for GAINS!

Farmer's Walk or Squat? Is Strong- men T. For You?

Full ROM ➯ Full Gains - Form Counts!

Battle the Rope to Get Ripped & Strong

Up Your Squat by 25% With Sodium Bicarbonate

The experiment was designed in an attempt to clarify the influence of repetition velocity on the gains in strength consequent to isoinertial resistance training. To this ends, the scientists conducted two separate studies:

• Study I compared the effect of two distinct RT interventions on strength gains using movement velocity as the independent variable. Two groups that only differed in actual repetition velocity (and consequently in time under tension, TUT): maximal intended velocity (MaxV) vs. half-maximal velocity (HalfV) trained three times per week for 6 weeks using the bench press (BP) exercise, while the remaining programme variables (number of sets and repetitions, inter-set rests and loading magnitude) were kept identical.
• Study II was a complementary study that aimed to analyze whether the acute metabolic (blood lactate and ammonia) and mechanical response (velocity loss) was different between the type of MaxV and HalfV protocols previously used in Study I

Of the 24 men who volunteered to participate in Study I, only 20 successfully completed the entire study (mean ± s: age 21.9 ± 2.9 years, height 1.77 ± 0.08 m, body mass 70.9 ± 8.0 kg). Therefore, the scientists recruited 10 additional participants (25.3 ± 3.4 years, 1.77 ± 0.08 m, body mass 75.2 ± 8.7 kg) for the follow up study (Study II).

High speed training works, as long as you maintain maximal velocities: F. Pareja-Blanco and his colleagues from the Pablo de Olavide University and the Instituto Navarro de Deporte y Juventud (INDJ) in Spain report in another recently published paper that doing squats with maximal velocity concentrics lead to significantly greater improvements in maximum strength and that "[m]ovement velocity seemed to be of greater importance than time under tension for inducing strength adaptations" (Pareja-Blanco. 2014). Similar results had been observed by biceps curls (9.7% with fast, no gains with slower concentric contractions | Ingebrigtsen. 2009). In studies with untrained subjects, on the other hand, similar benefits have not been observed (Pereira. 2007) - a difference that may be explained by the inability of someone who has never bench pressed or squatted before to actually push the bar at maximal velocity while, at the same time, keeping proper form. Another factor that may explain the existing differences between pertinent studies may be related to whether the exercise was performed to failure. In that case, the prescribed velocity cannot be maintained for all reps, so that the differences between the high speed and the regular / slow speed groups vanish.

The participants were physically active sport science students with 2–4 years of recreational RT experience in the bench press exercise - a fact that may be important if you take into consideration what I wrote about the Pereira study in the red box above.

Figure 1: Schematic timeline of study design (Gonzales-Badillo. 2014)

"Based upon pre-test 1RM strength performance, participants were allocated to one of the two groups following an ABBA counterbalancing sequence: MaxV (n = 9) or HalfV (n = 11) [the non-random allocation to the two groups ensured that there was no significant strength difference between the two groups at the beginning of the study].

The only difference in the RT programme between groups was the actual velocity at which loads were lifted: maximal intended concentric velocity for MaxV vs. an intentional half-maximal concentric velocity for HalfV [note the difference between doing each rep at maximal velocity and trying to do so!]."

Both groups trained three times per week, on non-consecutive days, for a period of 6 weeks using doing nothing but bench presses on each of the workout days. In that, Study I and II were performed 3 weeks apart using a different sample of participant.

Figure 2: Changes in bench press 1-RM over the course of Study I. The relative changes are 16% increase in the maximal 9% increase in the 50% velocity group (Gonzales-Badillo. 2014)

As you can see in Figure 2 the scientists are right, when they say that it seems as if "[m]ovement velocity can be considered a fundamental component of RT intensity, since, for a given %1RM, the velocity at which loads are lifted largely determines the resulting training effect" (Gonzalez-Badillo. 2014). A corresponding difference in lactate production during the workouts was yet detected only if the exercise was performed at low intensities and high speed, i.e. 3 × 8 with 0.79 m/s at ∼60% of the 1RM and with 3 × 6 with 0.62 m/s a ∼70% of the 1RM.

Figure 3: Root-mean-square amplitude (RMS amp.) before (initial) and after fatigue under varying speed-controlled conditions (slow, medium, and fast) and intensities (40–80% 1RM) for pectoralis major (a), anterior deltoid (b) and triceps medial head (c). Results show mean ± standard deviation for 13 subjects (Sakamoto. 2012).

Bottom line: It appears unlikely that the small changes in lactate production are what's responsible for the superiority of maximal (intended) velocity contractions as strength builders. Rather than that it would appear logical to assume that the muscle fiber recruitements between fast and slow contractions differ. An assumption that is in line with the results of a 2012 study by Sakamoto et al.

In said study, the Japanese researchers determined the muscle activations of the pectoralis major at varying lifting speeds and intensities during bench presses and found the maximal velocity to be highly superior during the initial phase of the training. When the fatigue set in and the subjects were no longer able to perform at a maximal velocity, the benefits vanished (see Figure 3) - an observation that is in line with my previous elaborations on the differences between the existing comparisons of the effectiveness of working out at different velocities in the red box. Accordingly, the results of the study at hand may not be applicable for those of you who like to peg out under the bar and/or crawl out of the gym after a workout that was long and intense enough to trigger a near-death experience | Comment on Facebook!

References:

• González-Badillo, Juan José, et al. "Maximal intended velocity training induces greater gains in bench press performance than deliberately slower half-velocity training." European journal of sport science ahead-of-print (2014): 1-10.
• Ingebrigtsen, Jørgen, Andreas Holtermann, and Karin Roeleveld. "Effects of load and contraction velocity during three-week biceps curls training on isometric and isokinetic performance." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 23.6 (2009): 1670-1676.
• Pareja-Blanco, F., et al. "Effect of Movement Velocity during Resistance Training on Neuromuscular Performance." International Journal of Sports Medicine EFirst (2014).
• Pereira, Marta Inez Rodrigues, and Paulo Sergio Chagas Gomes. "Effects of isotonic resistance training at two movement velocities on strength gains." Revista Brasileira de Medicina do Esporte 13.2 (2007): 91-96.
• Sakamoto, Akihiro, and Peter James Sinclair. "Muscle activations under varying lifting speeds and intensities during bench press." European journal of applied physiology 112.3 (2012): 1015-1025.

Power Up Your Body Composition: 6 Week Power-Based Complex Training Cuts 8% Body Fat in Female & 3% in Male Trained Football Players Without Restrictive Dieting

When plyometrics are involved, trainees usually lose more fat than on regular RT regimen.

"8% Body Fat in 6 Weeks!" It sounds like the headline of one of the hilarious articles in women's magazines, but it's the result of an experiment that was conducted by researchers from the Lamar University and the Baylor University in the US and the Hallym University in China (Miller. 2014). An experiment that revolved around a supervised 6-week training which consisted of a variety of Olympicstyle and traditional weightlifting movements and plyometrics (see Table 1) and involved 12 female and 9 male football players between the ages of 18 and 23 years.

Before we get too excited about the results, let's first take a closer look at what exactly the study participants did or didn't do. What they didn't do was dieting. There is no mention of either the overall energy intake or the intake of particular foods, food groups or macros being limited or controlled.

Want to get stronger, bigger, faster and leaner? Periodize appropriately!

30% More on the Big Three: Squat, DL, BP!

Block Periodization Done Right

Linear vs. Undulating Periodizationt

12% Body Fat in 12 Weeks W/ Periodizatoin

Detraining + Periodization - How to?

Tapering 101 - Learn How It's Done!

What was controlled, however, was the supervised power-oriented exercise regimen that included olympic-style weightlifting, traditional weightlifting, plyometrics, supplemental movements as they are done by many people in the gym and a cool down in form of proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PF).

Table 1: Power-based complex training (PCT) program - Note. RDL = Romanian deadlift; PNF = proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (Miller. 2014)

The three supervised workouts per week were arranged in a way that ensured that the overall load would change from week to week according to a linear undulating periodization scheme (week 1: 70%, 1RM; week 2: 80% 1RM; week 3; 75% 1RM; week 4: 90% 1RM; week 5: 80% 1RM; week 6: 95% 1RM - obviously a power workout ;-) and the pre and post body composition values were measured by the means of a comparatively accurate, yet compared to DEXA scans still inaccurate (spec. with respect to the absolute values) body impedance system.

Figure 1: Relative changes in body composition (left) and performance parameters (right) after 6 weeks of power-based complex training (Miller. 2014).

As the results in Figure 1 indicate both the increases in strength and body composition were significant - a bit more impressive, though, for the female participants. An observation that goes for the increases in clean, incline press, and squat performance, as well. 

"Both males and females significantly improved upper and lower body strength following the 6-week PCT program: 1) clean [males: +10.47% or +12.53 kg (from 119.70 ± 11.73 to 132.22 ± 10.88 kg, p = 0.001) and females: +19.98% or +8.94 kg (from 44.74 ± 7.34 to 53.67 ± 7.35 kg, p = 0.001)], 2) incline press [males: +8.81% or +9.85 kg (from 111.87 ± 14.36 to 121.72 ± 15.50 kg, p = 0.021) and females: +8.93% or +2.84 kg (from 31.82 ± 4.33 to 34.66 ± 5.75 kg, p = 0.002)], and 3) squat [males: +13.17% or +19.95 kg (from 151.51 ± 16.31 to 171.46 ± 21.92 kg, p = 0.002) and females: +17.44% or +11.1 kg (from 63.64 ± 7.63 to 74.74 ± 10.26 kg, p = 0.001)]. A post-training percent change in clean for females was significantly greater (19.98 vs. 10.47%, p = 0.009) than males, whereas the other post-training percent changes in incline press and squat were not significantly different between males and females." (Miller. 2014)

Impressed? Well, this is not the first study to show that women respond particularly well to any type resistance training.

Cutting W/ Combined Resistance + Specific Plyometric Exercises: 15.7% Less Fat in 7 Weeks | more

In 2009 and 2012 Prestes et al. and Lima et al. were able to show that both recreationally-trained and untrained young women significantly changed body composition following the 12- week resistance training. More specifically, the recreationally-trained women in the study by Lima et al. lost -2.39 kg of pure fat and reduced their body fat percentage by 3.82%, while they increased their total muscle mass by +3.07 kg. Similarly, a significant decrease in % BF (up to 12.73%) and fat mass (up to 9.32%) and an increase in muscle mass (up to 4.73%) were observed in the untrained women following a 12-week resistance training, which was composed of multiple sets of muscular endurance training in the study by Lima et al.

As a frequent SuppVersity reader (shame on you if you are not here every day ;-) you will also know that 10-weeks of a crossfit-based high-intensity helped the male and female participants of a study by Smith et al. (2013) shred 8% body fat - and that despite the fact that they were, unlike the ladies & gents in the study at hand, already at a mean body fat percentage of only 16% (read up on that study)!

Why didn't this work for men? If you look at the data in Figure 1 you will realize that the protocol did work, but due to the fact that most of the male football players have been participating in some forms of heavy resistance program for several years, the growth stimulus was comparatively low - a hypothesis that would be corroborated by the principles outlined in the latest position stand of the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM. 2009).

Step off the treadmill, ladies! If the previously cited evidence is still not enough to have you reconsider your cardio excesses, the results of one of the few review studies that focus specifically on young female athletes. The study by Wilmore et al. (1982) indicates that even athletic women can increase their muscle mass up to 1.5 kg (average of 0.3 kg) and decrease % BF up to -2.1% (average of -0.4%), when they drop the running and pick up the weights.

Obviously, men can benefit as well. For them Wilmore et al. report a maximal gain of 1.4 kg (average of 0.8 kg) and a -3.0 % (average of -1.7%) reduction in body weight - and that despite the fact that the majority of studies Wilmore et al. reviewed back in the late 1980s did not use what we today would call "highly intense, high volume" resistance training protocols.

Don't get me wrong, I don't say "drop the cardio altogether", but a training regimen without resistance training component is not going to yield the results both male & female trainees aspire | Comment on FB.

References:

• American College of Sports Medicine. "American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults." Medicine and science in sports and exercise 41.3 (2009): 687.
• de Lima, C., et al. "Linear and Daily Undulating Resistance Training Periodizations Have Differential Beneficial Effects in Young Sedentary Women." International journal of sports medicine 33.9 (2012): 723. 
• Miller, Joshua, Yunsuk Koh, and Chan-Gil Park. "Effects of Power-based Complex Training on Body Composition and Muscular Strength in Collegiate Athletes." American Journal of Sports Science and Medicine 2.5 (2014): 202-207.
• Prestes, Jonato, et al. "Comparison of linear and reverse linear periodization effects on maximal strength and body composition." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 23.1 (2009): 266-274.
• Smith, Michael M., et al. "Crossfit-based high-intensity power training improves maximal aerobic fitness and body composition." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 27.11 (2013): 3159-3172.
• Wilmore, Jack H. "Body composition in sport and exercise: directions for future research." Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 15.1 (1982): 21-31.

From 16% to 8% Body Fat in 10 Weeks: Crossfit Workout Gets The Leanest Shredded - But Only the Fittest Survive

Crossfit doesn't fit well with everyone. In  fact you have to be pretty fit already if you intend to benefit - specifically if you don't have someone who tailors the workouts to your specific needs. If you don't or are still miles apart from being fit, don't be bamboozled by the results of people who have been training for years.

This certainly sounds a little sadistic, but I hope you've been missing the Science Round-Up last Thursday. If that's the case, you will be happy to hear that Carl and I are back on track, and ready to talk about topics ranging from magnesium supplementation over the potentially fatal combination of NSAIDs and exercise and what's that got to do with gut health / integrity, how light therapy won't make you lighter, but help you cut body fat, how intense workouts compromise your sleep, and how intense sweeteners make you fat - at least if you add them on top of a Western diet. If we will have time, we will also take a look at how much protein it actually takes to preserve lean mass on a diet and how protein supplementation is not necessary and in a recently published study not even conducive to building muscle. And while these were only 50% of the news I've on my list of potential topics, I won't give away more... just tune in live at 1PM EST on the Super Human Radio Network.

For the time that remains and for those of you who are just arriving here after having listened to the live-stream, I still have a special goodie... have you ever pondered over the following question:

How much can you achieve within 10 weeks of training?

Even if you have already decided on a certain type of training, for example HIIT, you will have to adjust your routine to "Make HIIT a HIT" read Part I and Part II of the eponymous series and learn how to turn a HIIT workout into your HIIT workout to avoid overtraining and maximize its efficacy (learn more)

There is obviously no definite answer to this question. I mean, it goes without saying that we would first have to define, whether we are talking about muscle growth, overall conditioning, fat loss, etc. - what people often overlook, however it also depends on where you are coming from. Sometimes I feel like I am the only one who dares telling someone who's been "running" - in most cases this is rather sitting and driving - around at 2x his/her normal weight for years, is past his early 20s and has a life beyond working out and dieting is very unlikely to ever achieve a cover model physique. On the other hand, we've got the average trainee, who's been training for years has a high degree of leanness and is just about to see his sixpack shine through, who will necessarily make much smaller improvements within a given time-frame than his obese colleague who's just about to start working out for the first time of his/her life.

The previous paragraph should have made it quite clear, compared to the (overweight) beginner, an advanced trainee must invest much more thought into his/her diet and exercise regimen. That real intermittent fasting would probably be a better alternative for him/her than the "buffered every other day fat" has already been mentioned in yesterday's SuppVersity Article, but what about the exercise regimen?

Working out for fat loss and conditioning - Crossfit rules!

Fast paced high intensity workouts are gathering more and more momentum even outside of Crossfit gyms. Some of them may look somewhat "Jane Fonda", but as a previous review of the workout DVDs Insanity vs. TurboFire revealed, even hopping around in front of your TV set is more productive than the fat burning zone on the treadmill in next to your sofa (learn more)

Let's say he or she is working out primarily to increase his/her conditioning and drop a (if by any means possible) a significant amount of body fat? What would be the best way to train, then?

According to the results of a soon-to-be-published study from the  Ohio State University Health & Exercise Science in Columbus, Ohio (Smith. 2013), there is no question that this would be a Crossfit-esque workout - or, as the scientists refer to it, a crossfit-based high intensity power training (HIPT) program, they describe as follows:

"[...] a crossfit-based HIPT program using basic gymnastic skills (hand- stands, ring, and bar exercises) and traditional multiple-joint, functional, resistance exercises (squat, press, deadlift, Olympic lifts) performed as quickly as possible at a high intensity (low repetition, high percentage of 1-RM)." (Smith. 2013; my italics)

The 10-week program was varied so that some exercises were performed for a best time, and others were performed in the “as many rounds as possible” style (AMRAP; for a little more versatility check out Adelfo's EDT-CrossOver training) within anything from 10 to 20 minutes.

While there were no prescribe recovery times during the strength/skill portion of the exercise session, the WOD portion of the session did not allow for any real "rest" between the sets, as all the exercises were to be performed as quickly as possible.

Wow, who survived that? - Good question, indeed!

Only the fittest survive: Please do me a favor - If you are the aformentioned overweight person who's still carrying around another guy/gal's weight as body fat, don't even think of crossfitting, if you don't want to end up like 9 of the 11 dropouts (the study started with 54 participants), who retired willingly due to overuse or injuries, ok?

I guess you won't be surprised to hear that the 23 men and 20 women who survived and of whom the scientists state that they were "spanning all levels of aerobic fitness and body composition" were actually the typical already reaonably fit Crossfit clientele of whom Smith et al. somwhat awkwardly point out that they "had already been following a 'Paleolithic' type diet prior to and following completion of the training protocol." In other words the "levels of aerobic fitness" the participants spanned ranged from the untrained yet 100% healthy male with a VO2max of ~35 ml/kg/min to the hardcore crossfitter with a starting VOMax of >50ml/kg/min - the aforementioned heavily overweight and thus by now average (see "Obese is Going About to Become the New Normal") Westerner was yet not part of the study population.

Still, the presence of subject spanning the divide between "just healthy" and ripped and well-conditioned is in fact what attracts me as the author of a webpage that's dedicated to anyone ranging from those who just want to be / get / remain healthy and look not all-too shabby in front of the mirror to those who are looking to max out on their own physical performance and appearance. Long story short: The data you see in figure 1 is relevant for all of you. Even if you are still a couple of inches away from matching at least the initially criteria, you will sooner or later arrive at a point, where you'll find a representative counterpart of yours among the subjects of the study at hand.

Figure 1: Body fat percentage (left) and VO2Max (right) before and after the intervention (Smith. 2013)

I guess the data in figure 1 do actually speak for themselves: There is actually pretty much you can achieve within just 10-weeks of serious training: A significant (P<0.05) improvement of VO2max of 2.64% if you are a man and 11.78% if you are a women and (probably much sexier in the eyes of most of you) a 4% respectively 3% decreaes in body fat!

"To our knowledge no research on the aerobic benefits of HIPT has been conducted. HIPT focuses on high intensity resistance training usingmultiple joint exercises, with little to no focus on traditional aerobic activities. In spite of this, our results show that this type of training also provides aerobic and body composition benefits. Theincreased aerobic capacity of the subjects in our HIPT study were similar to those found in past research (Tremblay. 1994; Burgomaster. 2005). Based on the results presented here, individuals of all fitness levels and either gender can realize body composition and aerobic benefits from HIPT. Given that our subjects were following a Paleolithic diet, we cannot relate all of the observed weight loss to HIPT training. However, HIPT and Paleolithic diet in combination could be used to promote positive changes in body composition."

Now, all the scientists write is unquestionably true (also the part on the "paleo diet", as long as it is not very low carb paleo, cf. "Carbohydrate Shortage in Paleoland") and still, for me there are two things Smith et al. don't mention in the paragraph cited about and these are (A) the sex differences in terms of the VO2Max gains (maybe a result of the fact that women are not the ones who would otherwise do HIIT-esque workouts (=aerobic training at high intensities), so that the new stimulus will yield a greater results and (B) the fact that Crossfit is a workout regimen, from which even those benefit who are already fit and lean (keep in mind that the 16% in the lean group are for men and women, so that is lean!).

---

Bottom line: Crossfit appears to be the high intensity workout regimen which can help experienced trainees to make the transition from lean to ripped!

Want to do some more aerobics but also stick your classic weight lifting routine and just add cardio in? Now you are asking yourself, when this would make sense? Before, after or in between? Is that's you, go back in the SuppVersity archives and learn more.

As exciting as this may seem, a brief glance at the data in figure 1 will yet also tell you that those who are not up to the intensity and athletic demands of crossfitting don't just risk getting injured (please read the red box further up in the article, as well), they are also wasting their time with a workout that's not designed for their fitness level an will thus yield suboptimal results. This may not necessarily be the case in absolute terms - after all -4% body fat reduction certainly is not bad, but that's -4% from a pretty chubby baseline of 33% and actually could be achieved with basically any well-planned nutrition + exercise regimen. The latter obviously cannot be said of the -50% relative reduction in body fat percentage in the lean subjects on the other side of the "body fat divide". These men and women are most likely people who have been working out for all their lives in one way or another.

The "gifted ones" are in fact rather the ones who are often literally accused of being "genetically gifted" by accusers who simply don't take into consideration that it is above all the epigenetic priming of years of high school, college and other sports that renders them ostensibly resistant to the "obesity virus".

If you are still infected with the obsisty virus and have just found your way to physical culture you hardly qualify as one of those individuals by whom the original Crossfit workouts were created and are therefore certainly not among those people for whom these metabolically and technically demanding workouts were and still are designed. 

If you do "qualify", however (and that is nothing you have to be born wirth, I myself once believed that I just did not have the genes to see my abs), cross fitting could fit in particularly well in your "beach-ready" plan, of which I'd hope you are already thinking about... I mean, spring is less than 3 weeks away (click here to learn more about setting up a workout routine)!

Addendum: Since I got several people asking for the lean mass changes, I thought I'd mention that there was a +1kg increase in lean mass in men and women. Unfortunately the scientists don't provide differential information for lean and heavier subjects, but if your body fat percentage decreases you do at least have  to lose much more fat than lean mass and since there was no dieting involved, I bet the lean guys and girls did not lose any muscle..

References:

• Burgomaster KA, Hughes SC, Heigenhauser GJ, Bradwell SN, Gibala MJ. Six sessions of sprint interval training increases muscle oxidative potential and cycle endurance capacity in humans. J Appl Physiol. 2005 Jun;98(6):1985-90.
• Smith MM, Sommer AJ, Starkoff BE, Devor ST. Crossfit-based high intensity power training improves maximal aerobic fitness and body composition. J Strength Cond Res. 2013 Feb 22. 
• Tremblay A, Simoneau JA, Bouchard C. Impact of exercise intensity on body fatness and skeletal muscle metabolism. Metabolism. 1994 Jul;43(7):814-8.