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.

Periodization Techniques Revisited: Improved Strength & Size Gains W/ 12-Week Undulatory vs. Linear Periodization

There is going to be a point in everyone's training career, when 100 push-ups a day alone are no longer going to "cut" it and you got to to modify and later periodize your training to keep making progress.

Ah, that feels so good... No, not what you are thinking, now. I am sitting at my desk - alone, no female White House intern around ;-) Still, it's simply nice to see another study with real-world relevance for the average and not so average trainee.

The study comes from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro and was conducted by Juliano Spineti and colleagues. The Brazilian researchers compared two periodization models: Linear periodization, which probably what most of you will have been starting out with what the scientists consistently (mis-)label  as "ondulatory periodization", a training method of which you will soon realize that you may be more familiar with it's fundamental principles than it may seem initially.

"Ondulatory periodization?"

I have to admit I was confused at first. I mean, I am the last person to complain about typos, so I willingly accepted that the scientists must have made a mistake in the abstract. When I downloaded the full text to the study and found that they stuck to "ondulatory" instead of "undulatory" periodization, I did however begin to question, whether this may in fact be a new twist to the good old undulating periodization, which is based on the hypothesis that changing reps, volume and intensity from one workout to the other (Table 1, left + red) would yield more beneficial results than the classic 4-week cycles.

Table 1: Undulating (left) and linear (right) periodization prgram used in the study at hand (Spinetti. 2013)

Apropos classic. I guess this is what everyone of you will be thinking of, when they hear about periodization. It's also part of the so called HST (=Hypertrophy Specific Trainting) routines and has you change the set and rep-ranges, intensity, rest times etc. on a monthly basis. In that, the order is usually as follows: "Resistance" (usually this is called "strength endurance"), "hypertrophy", "maximal strength" → repeat...

Suggested Read: "Periodization, Yeah! But How? " | read more

Don't forget that there is more to periodization than changing up your set/rep/intensity... no idea what that could be? Well, what about detraining or tapering? Taking some time off is about as important as hitting it hard. Unfortunately this simple wisdom is ignored by the majority of trainees who love to hit it hard, but hate and/or refuse to take it easy for some time - no matter how beneficial that may be (learn more).

If you look at the left-hand side of table 1 you will realize that the "misnomer" of the "strength endurance phase" which is called "resistance" in the Spinetti study is the only thing that would point towards an innovative training protocol and away from a simple typo in "ondulatory"... a typo that is repeated 5+ times within the full-text though :-/

Typos, but intriguing results

If we still put some faith in the results the 32 men from the Brazilian Marine corps (26 years, 15% body fat),  who were advised to refrain from any additional physical activity during the trial achieved, we'd have to follow the researchers' very own conclusion that the undulatory training regimen would make a better choice - at least for the average, lean, physically active individual who is starting his or her first resistance training regimen in the gym.

Figure 1: Effect sizes of 12 weeks tranining with undulatory (OP; remember the typo ;-) and linear (LP) periodization on 1RM strength, maximal voluntary contraction force (MVC) and muscle thickness (Spinetti. 2013)

Both the effect sizes (left, 3D) and the absolute values (right; muscle size only; 2D) clearly speak in favor of the more versatile undulatory training regimen.

Intra-workout periodiziation inspired by Dr. Squat: Some of you will already know that I personally like to train in a way that is based on a concept by Hatfield (Dr. Squat) with different rep/rest/intensity patterns within one training sessions.

If you have no idea what this may look like, these two examples may help:

5x5 for squats w/ max. 2min rest (strength); 3x10 for leg presses w/90s rest (hypertrophy) 2x20 for leg extensions w/60s rest (strength endurance)

5x5 for decline bench press w/ max. 2min rest (strength); 3x10 for incline bench press w/90s rest (hypertrophy) 2x20 for cable cross (strength endurance)

The fundamental pattern is compound for strength, basic for hypertrophy, stretch / pump exercise for strength endurance.

Linear periodization no more?If you look at the study data it is obvious that undulatory training makes you stronger, allows for faster muscle growth and... well, that's not in the study, but once you try it you will realize it, it's much more fun, as well. So why bother with linear periodization any longer? Well, the reason should be obvious: This is a single study the result of which are

• supported by Rhea et al. (2002), Monteiro et al. (2009), Prestes (2009), Miranda et al (2011)  and Simao (2012), but
• refuted / questioned by Baker et al. (1994), Bufford et al. (2007) and Kok et al. (2009),

who report identical gains in strength and size in 22strength and power in experienced male athletes (Baker. 1994), 26 recreationally trained college-aged male and female (Bufford. 2007), and 20 untrained but fit women (20yr, normal weight) (Kok; 2009).

Personally, I like to dabble with both undulating, but also with intra-workout "periodization" a la "Dr. Squat" (see box to the right) while I hate, and I mean "hate" as in totally detest, these lame 4-week cylces of doing the same stuff every workout. The "I hate ..." argument may not sound as if it would hardly qualify as being "SuppVersity Approved", but it in fact is. I am the last person to suggest you drag yourself to the gym and do something you hate. That's not going to be productive, trust me - no matter what science says, by the way.

References: .

• Baker D, Wilson G, Carlyon J. Periodization: the effect on strength of manipulation volume and intensity. J Strength Cond Res1994;8:235-42.
• Bufford TW, Rossi SJ, Smith DB, Warren AJ.A comparison of periodization models during nine weeks with equated volume and intensity for strength. J Strength Cond Res. 2007;21:1245-50.
• Kok LY, Hamer J, Bishop DJ. Enhancing muscular qualities in untrained women: linear versus undulating periodization. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2009;41:1797-807. 
• Miranda F, Simão R, Rhea M, Bunker D, Prestes J, Leite RD, et al. Effect of linear vs. ondulatory periodized resistance training on maximal and submaximal strength gains. J Strength Cond Res. 2011;25:1824-30.
• Monteiro AG, Aoki MS, Evangelista AL, Alveno DA, Monteiro GA, Piçarro IC, et al. Nonlinear periodization maximizes strength gains in split resistance training Stone routines. J Strength Cond Res 2009;23:1321-6
• Prestes J, Frollini AB, Lima C, Donatto FF, Foschini D, Marqueti R, et al. Comparison between linear and daily undulating periodized resistance training to increase strength. J Strength Cond Res. 2009;23:2437-42.
• Rhea MR, Ball SD, Phillips WT, Burkett LN. A comparison of linear and daily undulating periodized programs with equated volume and intensity for strength. J Strength Cond Res2002;16:250-5.
• Simão R, Spineti J, Salles BF, Oliveira L, Matta TT, Fleck SJ. Comparison between linear and nonlinear periodized resistance training: strength and muscle thickness effects. J Strength Cond Res. 2012;26:1389-95.
• Spinetti J, et al. Comparison Between Different Periodization Models On Muscular Strength And Thickness In A Muscle Group Increasing Sequence. Rev Bras Med Esporte. 2013; 19(4).

Want to Cut 12% Body Fat in 12 Weeks, Get Stronger, Bigger or Better Conditioned? Periodize Appropriately!

Image 1 (hitchfit.com): I know I am repeating myself, here, but 12% less body fat mass in 12 weeks without dieting should be a reason to pick up those dumbbells, ladies, right?

If you have read Adelfo's blogpost, yesterday, you will have noticed the versatility of his routine. The combination of volume, 5x5 and EDT training, which may appear somewhat chaotic at first, is yet well-planned, clearly structured and has little of the "cookie-cutter" approach to training people follow who will tell you in the locker room, whenever you meet them: "Ah, I better train biceps today, my legs don't feel right, bro" ;-) In the end, Adelfo's approach is just an unconventional twist on undulating periodization; in other words, a training split where you switch your rep and set numbers in relatively short (but regular!) intervals - often from one training to the next. But is this really the optimal way to train? I mean HST = hypertrophy specific training looks different and that is "hypertrophy specific", right? And in fact, if analyzed on its own, a recently published study from Brazil appears to suggest that what Adelfo feels is the best way to train could in fact be inferior to a less sophisticated linear periodization program  (de Lima. 2012). - and you know what? At least for his sedentary cousin that may in fact be right!

Lifting weights works! Regardless of how you periodize, but...

The 28 healthy, normal-weight, formerly sedentary women (age 20–35; body fat ~25%) from the de Lima study had been randomly assigned to follow 2-day body split routines which differed only with respect to the means of periodization, i.e. the sequence of lower vs. higher rep work (see illustration 1 for an outline of the training regimen) for 12 weeks (no dietary changes or other inventions).

Illustration 1: Outline of the workout (left) and periodization regimen (right) the 28 young women followed over the course of the 12-week intervention period (de Lima. 2012)

If we based our predictions on previous data in 28 recreationally trained college-aged men (Buford. 2007), 40 young men (21.5y) with a minimum 1-year strength training experience (Prestes. 2009a) and 20 resistance trained men (26y; 4-5 years of training experience; Miranda.. 2007) both conducted with linear vs. undulating periodization schemes in the strength-to-hypertrophy rep ranges of 4-8 and 4-14 reps, respectively, we would expect either no difference (Buford. 2007) or a slight advantage for the undulating periodization protocol with respect to its effects on maximal strength (Prestes. 2009 a,b).

Figure 1: Rel. changes in body composition, maximal strength and strength endurance (de Lima 2012)

As the data in figure 1 shows, neither of those predictions is accurate. Contrary to Buford et al. de Lima et al. did observe statistically significant differences between the study arms, yet other than Prestes et al. those changes were not in the maximal strength, but rather in the strength endurance domain. And while the latter showed significantly greater improvement in the women who trained according to the undulating periodization protocol, the classic, some people would probably say "boring", linear periodization protocol elicited a substantially more pronounced decreases in body fat and increases in strength.

Periodicize according to your training level & goals

As boring as those highly structured linear periodization protocols may be, the results from the de Lima study would suggest that there is a reason why Brian Haycock's HST (=Hypertrophy Specific Training) periodization prescriptions are downright anal. It is also reasonable to assume that for beginners and (early) advanced trainees, long(er) cycles will allow for optimal structural adaptations to the individual loading patterns, with the "growths" phases in the medium (8-12) rep ranges and facilitative strength gains and endurance gains in the lower-rep (4-6) respectively higher rep (15-20) weeks. It is also interesting to note that in these early days, when trainees makes the transition from undermuscled couch potato to "recreationally active" muscle gains and fat loss are coupled and can, as the data from the de Lima study shows, be influenced not just by modulating the total number of sets (volume) or the rep range, but also by changing the sequence of phases of training at the upper, medium and lower range of a given set x rep continuum (here 3x15-3x30) - that the latter was somewhat higher than normal (here "normal" indicates 6-15), may have exerted confounding effects, but it does not take away from the constantly overlooked, yet non-negligible effects different means of periodization exert on both your performance and your body composition!

Chest	Biceps	Back	Core	Legs	Triceps	Shoulders
Navigate the SuppVersity EMG Series and learn about the best exercises for a given body part (incl. example workouts).

The studies by Buford Miranda and Prestes on the other hand, suggest that those facilitative strength and strength endurance gains, without which no strength trainee, rookie, advanced or veteran will be able to generate the necessary overload to cause structural adaptations, or put simply, skeletal muscle hypertrophy, may require a slightly more creative, yet by no means chaotic workout organization, once you have a couple of years of weight lifting under your belt.

Daily vs. weekly undulation? I am with Dr. Hatfield and prefer the former!

Personally I prefer the intra-workout or as Miranda et al. call it "daily undulatory" periodization à la Dr. Squat (Hatfield): It makes training more fun and allows me to perform every exercise and train for every body part in a rep range of which I feel that it suits it best:

• lower rep work and a focus on continuously increasing the poundage on compound exercises, such as the squat, deadlift, bench press, military press, pull ups and bend over rows at the beginning of my workouts or as the first exercise for a given body part
• medium and sometimes high(er) rep work and a focus on maximal muscle tension on auxiliary exercises such as biceps curls, triceps extensions, flys, cable cross, pullovers, seated rows, dumbbell rows, reverse DB/cable flys, side laterals, upright rows and shrugs in the latter part of my workouts or as follow up exercises for a given body part

And though Miranda et al. may not have found statistically significant differences in any of the individual tests the 20 strength training veterans in their study had to perform, the greater effect sizes in the undulating periodization group (1.54 = large for daily undulating periodization vs. 1.04  = moderate for linear periodization) appear to prove my instincts and training experience right ... but to be honest, even if it didn't I would rather train "suboptimal" than bore myself to death during another HST (=linear periodization) cycle.

Ressources:

1. Buford TW, Rossi SJ, Smith DB, Warren AJ. A comparison of periodization models  during nine weeks with equated volume and intensity for strength. J Strength Cond Res. 2007 Nov;21(4):1245-50. 
2. de Lima C, Boullosa DA, Frollini AB, Donatto FF, Leite RD, Gonelli PR, Montebello MI, Prestes J, Cesar MC. Linear and Daily Undulating Resistance Training Periodizations Have Differential Beneficial Effects in Young Sedentary Women. Int J Sports Med. 2012 May 4
3. Miranda F, Simão R, Rhea M, Bunker D, Prestes J, Leite RD, Miranda H, de Salles BF, Novaes J. Effects of linear vs. daily undulatory periodized resistance training on maximal and submaximal strength gains. J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Jul;25(7):1824-30.
4. Prestes J, Frollini AB, de Lima C, Donatto FF, Foschini D, de Cássia Marqueti R, Figueira A Jr, Fleck SJ. Comparison between linear and daily undulating periodized resistance training to increase strength. J Strength Cond Res. 2009 Dec;23(9):2437-42.
5. Prestes J, De Lima C, Frollini AB, Donatto FF, Conte M. Comparison of linear and reverse linear periodization effects on maximal strength and body composition. J Strength Cond Res. 2009 Jan;23(1):266-74.