Study Shows How to Maximize Strength Gains in Weight Training

Despite the large body of scientific and anecdotal evidence pertaining to exercise programs aimed at building muscular size and strength, there is relatively little agreement on which methods are best. What seems like it should be a fairly simple formula - add equal parts enthusiasm and heavy weights and voila, muscular hypertrophy and strength - is actually quite complicated, as evidenced by the constant debate over the advantages and disadvantages of various programs. One large point of contention involves the question of whether it is better to use full-body workouts or a body-part split, in which one or two muscle groups are the focus of each session. And between those two extremes, there are plenty of other exercise methodologies that are vying for superiority, such as push-pull splits and upper body-lower body splits. Of course, these are just a few of the many debates that rage across the fitness world with no end in sight.

There is one thing that cannot be argued, though. If one wants to increase muscle size and strength, training must feature an overload, in which muscles are subjected to more weight than they are accustomed to. This forces the muscles to work hard and prevents adaptation and atrophy. But while that basic idea is agreed upon, it wouldn't be characteristic of the fitness world to let the fact stand with absolutely no debate. The uncertainty lies within how, exactly, that overload should be applied and organized. A popular approach features periodization, in which loads and number of repetitions are varied between set periods to prevent adaptation. When there is no fluctuation during the periods (ie, one heavy day and one lighter day in a given week), this is called linear periodization. However, when those changes are made during the periods, this is referred to as non-linear periodization. Any routine that does not have set progressions in volume and load is called non-periodized. And while the pros and cons of each can be debated in the court of opinion eternally, recent research has shown exactly what one can expect from any of these routines.

A study featured in the latest edition of the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research compared a non-periodized routine, a linear periodized routine and a non-liner periodized routine over the course of 12 weeks. Each group had an equal number of participants, all of whom had previous resistance training experience. The only difference between the groups was the workout protocol given to each.

The non-periodized group performed three sets of lifting with a load that could be lifted eight to ten times for the entire duration of the study. The linear periodized group progressed from three sets at 12-15 reps to three sets at 8-10 reps and finally three sets at four to five reps. Lastly, the non-linear periodized group alternated volume within the periods - the first used both three sets of 12-15 reps and three sets of 8-10 reps during the first period; four sets of four to five reps and three sets of 12-15 reps during the second period; and three sets of 8-10 reps and four sets of four to five reps during the third period.

As one might expect, the differences between the routines produced significant differences in results. The non-linear periodized group was the only group to show strength gains throughout the entire exercise program, although the linear periodized group improved strength for the first eight weeks. The non-periodized group though, did not show any significant improvements in strength. In terms of body composition, though, the linear periodized group had the most impressive increases in lean mass and decreases in fat mass, though they were very close to the changes produced by the non-linear periodized routine (1).

Based upon this data, those looking to maximize strength gains should pursue use a non-linear periodized routine, which should also provide improvement in body composition. A second choice in terms of strength that provides better body composition changes would be a linear peroidized routine. Perhaps now that science has established these conclusions, the debate may rest.

SOURCE:

1. Monteiro, Artur G., et al. Nonlinear Periodization Maximizes Strength Gains in Split Resistance Training Routines. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 2009; 23(4): 1321-1326