Effect of Traditional, Cluster, and Rest Redistribution Set Configurations on Neuromuscular and Perceptual Responses During Strength-Oriented Resistance Training

Impact of squat set configuration on mechanical performance in paired sets of upper-body exercises

BACKGROUND

Paired sets and alternative set configurations (e.g., cluster sets) are frequently employed by strength and conditioning practitioners; however, their synergistic impact remains underexplored in research. This study aimed to elucidate whether the set configuration used in a lower-body exercise affects mechanical performance during paired sets of upper-body exercises.

METHODS

Twenty-one resistance-trained individuals (14 men and 7 women) randomly completed three experimental sessions that involved four sets of five repetitions at 75%1RM during both the bench press and bench pull exercises. The three experimental sessions varied solely in the activity conducted during the inter-set rest periods of each upper-body exercise: (i) Traditional squat - six squat repetitions without intra-set rest at 65%1RM; (ii) Rest redistribution squat - two clusters of three repetitions of the squat exercise at 65%1RM with 30 s of intra-set rest; and (iii) Passive rest - no exercise.

RESULTS

The rest redistribution set configuration allowed the sets of the squat exercise to be performed at a faster velocity than the traditional set configuration (p = 0.037). However, none of the mechanical variables differed between the exercise protocols neither in the bench press (p ranged from 0.279 to 0.875) nor in the bench pull (p ranged from 0.166 to 0.478).

CONCLUSIONS

Although rest redistribution is an effective strategy to alleviate fatigue during the sets in which it is implemented, it does not allow subjects to perform better in subsequent sets of the training session.

Combined Accentuated Eccentric Loading and Rest Redistribution in High-Volume Back Squat: Acute Stimulus and Fatigue

ABSTRACT

Chae, S, Long, SA, Lis, RP, McDowell, KW, Wagle, JP, Carroll, KM, Mizuguchi, S, and Stone, MH. Combined accentuated eccentric loading and rest redistribution in high-volume back squat: Acute stimulus and fatigue. J Strength Cond Res 38(4): 648-655, 2024-The purpose of this study was to examine acute stimulus and fatigue responses to combined accentuated eccentric loading and rest redistribution (AEL + RR). Resistance-trained men ( n = 12, 25.6 ± 4.4 years, 1.77 ± 0.06 m, and 81.7 ± 11.4 kg) completed a back squat (BS) 1 repetition maximum (1RM) and weight releaser familiarization session. Three BS exercise conditions (sets × repetitions × eccentric-concentric loading) consisted of (a) 3 × (5 × 2) × 110/60% (AEL + RR 5), (b) 3 × (2 × 5) × 110/60% (AEL + RR 2), and (c) 3 × 10 × 60/60% 1RM (traditional sets [TS]). Weight releasers (50% 1RM) were attached to every first repetition of each cluster set (every first, third, fifth, seventh, and ninth repetition in AEL + RR 5 and every first and sixth repetition in AEL + RR 2). The AEL + RR 5 resulted in greater total volume load (sets × repetitions × eccentric + concentric loading) (6,630 ± 1,210 kg) when compared with AEL + RR 2 (5,944 ± 1,085 kg) and TS (5,487 ± 1,002 kg). In addition, AEL + RR 5 led to significantly ( p < 0.05) greater rating of perceived exertion (RPE) after set 2 and set 3 and lower blood lactate (BL) after set 3 and 5, 15, and 25 minutes postexercise than AEL + RR 2 and TS. There was a main effect of condition for BL between AEL + RR 5 (5.11 ± 2.90 mmol·L -1 ), AEL + RR 2 (6.23 ± 3.22 mmol·L -1 ), and TS (6.15 ± 3.17 mmol·L -1 ). In summary, AEL + RR 5 results in unique stimulus and fatigue responses. Although it may increase perceived exertion, coaches could use AEL + RR 5 to achieve greater back squat total volume load while reducing BL accumulation.

Effect of resistance training programs differing in set structure on muscular hypertrophy and performance in untrained young men

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the effects on muscle hypertrophy and muscular performance of two resistance training (RT) programs that differed only in set structure: traditional set structure (TS) vs. rest redistribution set structure (RR). Methods: Thirty untrained young men were pair-matched and randomly assigned to a TS (n = 15) or an RR (n = 15) protocol based on individual baseline measures. Participants trained for 8 weeks using the same total body RT routines performed twice weekly. The TS protocol comprised four sets of 10 repetitions per exercise with 120-s interset rest, and the RR involved eight sets of five repetitions per exercise with 51-s interset rest. Participants were tested pre- and post-intervention for body composition, regional muscle thickness, upper- and lower-body muscle maximal strength [1-repetition maximum (1RM)], mean power output and velocity at 75% 1RM and muscular endurance (repetitions to failure at 70% 1RM). Results: Compared to baseline, both groups exhibited equally significantly decreased body fat mass (p < 0.05), increased fat-free mass (p < 0.001), muscle thickness (p < 0.05), upper and lower-body muscular maximal strength (p < 0.001) and endurance performance (p < 0.001). However, both groups only increase the lower-body power output (p < 0.001) but not the upper-body (p > 0.05). No significant differences existed between groups for all measurements (p > 0.05). Conclusion: These results suggest that RR and TS groups have similar effects for improving muscle hypertrophy and performance in untrained young men.

Effect of 3 Different Set Configurations on Kinematic Variables and Internal Loads During a Power Snatch Session

ABSTRACT

Nagatani, T, Kendall, KL, Guppy, SN, Poon, WCK, and Haff, GG. Effect of 3 different set configurations on kinematic variables and internal loads during a power snatch session. J Strength Cond Res 37(10): 1929-1938, 2023-The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of 3 different set configurations on kinematic variables and internal loads during multiple sets performed with the power snatch. Ten strength-power athletes with at least 6 months of training experience performing the power snatch participated in this study, which consisted of 3 experimental protocols performed in a randomized repeated-measures design. The 3 protocols involved performing the power snatch for 3 sets of 5 repetitions at an average load of 75% 1 repetition maximum with a traditional (TRAD), cluster (CLU), or ascending cluster (A-CLU) protocol, where the training load was progressively increased across the set. Kinematic variables and internal loads (heart rate, blood lactate, and rate of perceived exertion) were measured during each protocol. The athletes maintained peak velocity (PV) and peak power (PP) and exhibited lower internal loads during CLU sets when compared with TRAD sets, whereas they displayed significant decreases in PV during TRAD sets. However, there were no statistically significant differences in PV and PP responses between the TRAD and CLU protocol. The athletes exhibited a significant decrease in PV, whereas PP was increased across each set in the A-CLU protocol, with lower internal loads observed compared with the TRAD protocol. Overall, the training loads used in this study do not appear to maximize the benefits of using CLU set during 3 sets of power snatches performed for 5 repetitions. In addition, A-CLU sets may potentially be useful as a means of maximizing the power output of the athlete.

Acute Mechanical and Skin Temperature Responses to Different Interrepetition Rest Intervals During Full-Squat Exercise

PURPOSE

This study aimed to (1) evaluate the acute effects of different interrepetition rest full-squat protocols on countermovement jump (CMJ) height, velocity loss (VL), and skin temperature (Tsk) and (2) determine whether the VL, the changes in Tsk, or the individual strength level is associated with the change in CMJ height.

METHODS

Sixteen resistance-trained men randomly performed 3 squat protocols at maximal intended velocity with 60% of the 1-repetition maximum (sets × repetitions [interrepetition rest]): traditional (2 × 6 [0 s]), cluster 2 (2 × 6 [30 s every 2 repetitions]), and cluster 1 (1 × 12; [36 s every repetition]), plus a control session. CMJ height was assessed before and 2, 4, and 8 minutes after the protocols.

RESULTS

There was a significant main effect of protocol for the VL (F = 20.54, P < .001) and loss in mean power (F = 12.85, P < .001; traditional > cluster 2 > cluster 1). However, we found a comparable reduction of CMJ height after 8 minutes: traditional (-3.4% [4.2%]), cluster 2 (-5.3% [4.9%]), cluster 1 (-5.4% [2.9%]), and control (-4.2% [3.6%]). Overall, mean Tsk acutely decreased after all the protocols. Higher individual strength level (but not VL or the changes in Tsk) was associated with lower CMJ-height loss (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Although different interrepetition rest full-squat protocols may alter the loss in velocity and power, they result in a similar decrease in Tsk and CMJ height, which could be more influenced by individual strength level than VL or changes in Tsk.

Caffeine ingestion attenuates diurnal variation of lower-body ballistic performance in resistance-trained women

ABSTRACTThe present study investigates the effect of an acute intake of caffeine on the diurnal variation of neuromuscular performance in resistance-trained women. A total of 15 resistance-trained women participated in the current triple-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover experimental study. We assessed neuromuscular performance (i.e. ballistic (countermovement jump [CMJ] height and bench press throw [BPT] peak velocity), maximal strength (squat and bench press [BP] one-repetition maximum [1RM]), and strength-endurance [average velocity of the set during squat and number of repetitions-to-failure in BP]) four times at within 7 days. The participants ingested an acute dose of caffeine (3 mg/kg) or a placebo at 9-11 am and/or 17-19 pm. CMJ height (P = .016) and BP peak velocity (P = .012) were higher in the afternoon than in the morning. Compared to placebo, caffeine intake increased CMJ height by 3.1% in the morning and 1.6% in the afternoon (P = .035), but it had no effect on BPT peak velocity (P = .381). Maximal strength and strength-endurance performances were not affected by the time-of-day or caffeine intake (all P > .3). No significant interaction (time-of-day x substance) was observed in any of the above-mentioned outcomes (all P > .1). In conclusion, an acute dose of caffeine in the morning was effective to restore CMJ performance to levels found in the afternoon, while this effect was not observed neither in BPTpeak velocity nor in lower- and upper-body maximal strength and strength-endurance performance. Moreover, lower- and upper-body ballistic performance were greater in the afternoon than in the morning in resistance-trained women, while the acute intake of caffeine was only effective to increase CMJ height.HighlightsBallistic performance is probably higher in the afternoon than in the morning in resistance-trained women.An acute intake of caffeine is effective to increase countermovement jump performance.The ingestion of an acute dose of caffeine in the morning restored countermovement jump performance to levels found in the afternoon.

Influence of Cluster Sets on Mechanical and Perceptual Variables in Adolescent Athletes

Cluster sets (CS) are effective in maintaining performance and reducing perceived effort compared to traditional sets (TRD). However, little is known about these effects on adolescent athletes. The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of CS on the performance of mechanical and perceptual variables in young athletes. Eleven subjects [4 boys (age = 15.5 ± 0.8 years; body mass = 54.3 ± 7.0 kg; body height = 1.67 ± 0.04 m; Back Squat 1RM/body mass: 1.62 ± 0.19 kg; years from peak height velocity [PHV]: 0.94 ± 0.50) and 7 girls (age = 17.2 ± 1.4 years; body mass = 54.7 ± 6.3 kg; body height = 1.63 ± 0.08 m; Back Squat 1RM/body mass: 1.22 ± 0.16 kg; years from PHV: 3.33 ± 1.00)] participated in a randomized crossover design with one traditional (TRD: 3 × 8, no intra-set and 225 s interest rest) and two clusters (CS1: 3 × 2 × 4, one 30 s intra-set and 180 s inter-set rest; and CS2: 3 × 4 × 2, three 30 s intra-set and 90 s inter-set rest) protocols. The subjects were assessed for a Back Squat 1RM for the first meet, then performed the three protocols on three different days, with at least 48 h between them. During experimental sessions, a back squat exercise was performed, and mean propulsive velocity (MPV), power (MPP), and force (MPF) were collected to analyze performance between protocols, together with measures of countermovement jump (CMJ) and perceptual responses through Rating of Perceived Exertion for each set (RPE-Set) and the overall session (S-RPE), and Muscle Soreness (DOMS). The results showed that velocity and power decline (MVD and MPD) were favorable for CS2 (MVD: -5.61 ± 14.84%; MPD: -5.63 ± 14.91%) against TRD (MVD: -21.10 ± 11.88%; MPD: -20.98 ± 11.85%) (p < 0.01) and CS1 (MVD: -21.44 ± 12.13%; MPD: -21.50 ± 12.20%) (p < 0.05). For RPE-Set, the scores were smaller for CS2 (RPE8: 3.23 ± 0.61; RPE16: 4.32 ± 1.42; RPE24: 4.46 ± 1.51) compared to TRD (RPE8: 4.73 ± 1.33; RPE16: 5.46 ± 1.62; RPE24: 6.23 ± 1.97) (p = 0.008), as well as for Session RPE (CS2: 4.32 ± 1.59; TRD: 5.68 ± 1.75) (p = 0.015). There were no changes for jump height (CMJ: p = 0.985), and the difference between time points in CMJ (ΔCMJ: p = 0.213) and muscle soreness (DOMS: p = 0.437) were identified. Our findings suggest that using CS with a greater number of intra-set rests is more efficient even with the total rest interval equalized, presenting lower decreases in mechanical performance and lower perceptual effort responses.

Acute Physiological and Perceptual Responses to Rest Redistribution With Heavier Loads in Resistance-Trained Men

ABSTRACT

Chae, S, Hill, DW, Bailey, CA, Moses, SA, McMullen, SM, and Vingren, JL. Acute physiological and perceptual responses to rest redistribution with heavier loads in resistance-trained men. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2022-The purpose of this study was to explore the effect of rest redistribution with heavier loads (RR + L) on physiological and perceptual responses in resistance-trained men. Eight men who had back squat (BS) 1 repetition maximum (1RM) to body mass ratio; 1.8 ± 0.2 completed 2 BS exercise sessions in a counterbalanced and a randomized order; RR + L: 4 sets of (2 × 5) repetitions with 90-second interset rest and 30-second intraset rest using 75% BS 1RM and traditional sets (TS): 4 sets of 10 repetitions with 120-second interset rest using 70% BS 1RM. Blood samples were collected before exercise, immediately post exercise, and 5, 15, and 30 minutes post exercise for the analysis of growth hormone (GH), total testosterone (TT), cortisol (C), and blood lactate (BL), whereas rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and heart rate (HR) were measured immediately after each set of the BS exercise. While neither main effect of condition nor interaction existed, there was a significant (p < 0.05) main effect of time point (and set) for GH, TT, C, BL, RPE, and HR. Volume load was greater for RR + L compared with TS (4,074.9 ± 786.7 kg vs. 3,796.3 ± 714.8 kg). In conclusion, RR + L increases volume load by approximately 7% but does not seem to influence GH (g = -0.15), TT (g = -0.09), BL (g = -0.22), RPE (g = 0.14), and HR (g = -0.08) responses. Practitioners may consider using RR + L to increase volume load without increasing acute fatigue responses.

Acute responses of muscle oxygen saturation during different cluster training configurations in resistance-trained individuals

This study compared the perceptual responses, physiological indicators and technical parameters between different training protocols focused on upper body exercises. A randomized crossover design was performed, and 12 trained individuals (age: 27.1 ± 5.7 years; height: 173.7 ± 10.7 cm; BMI: 23.9 ± 2.3) completed three resistance training sessions under different protocols separated by at least 72 h: traditional training (TT) (4 x 6 repetitions at 85% of 1RM with 120 s of rest between sets), cluster 1 (CL1) (4 x 2+2+2 repetitions at 85% of 1RM with 15 s of intra-rep rest and 80 s between sets), and cluster 2 (CL2) (24 repetitions at 85% of 1RM with 15 s of inter-set recovery). Before training, arterial blood pressure (BP) and repetitions to failure of pull-up and push-up (FT) were collected. Muscle oxygen saturation (SmO₂) in the chest and movement velocity were evaluated in barbell bench press during the training session. After finishing, lactate, BP, rate of perceived exertion and FT were assessed. The percentage of velocity loss (TT: 19.24%; CL1: 5.02% and CL2: 7.30%) in the bench press and lactate concentration (TT: 8.90 mmol·l^-1; CL1: 6.13 mmol·l^-1 and CL2: 5.48 mmol·l^-1) were significantly higher (p < 0.05) for TT compared to both CLs. RPE values were higher (p < 0.05) in TT compared to CL1 (7.95 a.u. vs. 6.91 a.u., respectively). No differences (p > 0.05) were found between protocols for SmO₂, BP, FT, pain or heart rate between set configurations. Cluster configurations allow one to maintain higher movement velocity and lower lactate and RPE values compared to a traditional configuration, but with similar concentrations of SmO₂.

Efficacy of Rest Redistribution During Squats: Considerations for Strength and Sex

ABSTRACT

Boffey, D, Clark, NW, and Fukuda, DH. Efficacy of rest redistribution during squats: Considerations for strength and sex. J Strength Cond Res 35(3): 586-595, 2021-This study examined the kinematic, perceptual, and heart rate responses to rest redistribution (RR) and traditional sets (TS) during the barbell back squat for men and women possessing a wide range of strength levels. Forty-five resistance-trained subjects (30 men and 15 women) performed 40 repetitions of the barbell squat with 65% 1RM load with TS (4 × 10 repetitions, 3-minute rest) or RR (10 × 4 repetitions, 1-minute rest), in a randomized order on days separated by ≥72 hours. The significance was set at p ≤ 0.05 for all statistical analyses. The mean velocity (MV) maintenance was significantly higher for RR compared with TS (87.70 ± 4.50% vs. 84.07 ± 4.48%, respectively; p < 0.01, d = 0.35). Rating of perceived exertion (active muscles) was significantly lower for RR compared with TS (5.38 ± 1.42 vs. 6.08 ± 1.43, respectively; p = 0.02, d = -0.35). Rating of perceived exertion (overall) was also significantly lower for RR compared with TS (5.60 ± 1.40 vs. 6.48 ± 1.49, respectively; p = 0.02, d = -0.37). The relative strength ratio (relative strength ratio; squat 1RM: body mass) was significantly correlated with the difference in MV maintenance between RR and TS (r = -0.34, p = 0.02). No sex-based differences (p > 0.05) were found for any dependent variables. Rest redistribution produced significantly higher mean HR (143.25 ± 21.11 vs. 135.05 ± 20.74, p < 0.01) and minimum HR (102.77 ± 19.58 vs. 95.97 ± 22.17, p < 0.01). Subjects were better able to maintain velocity with RR compared with TS, while experiencing less perceived effort. Rest redistribution can be recommended for both men and women, but very strong individuals may not improve their velocity maintenance with RR to the same extent as less strong individuals.

Chronic Effects of Altering Resistance Training Set Configurations Using Cluster Sets: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The acute responses to cluster set resistance training (RT) have been demonstrated. However, as compared to traditional sets, the effect of cluster sets on muscular and neuromuscular adaptations remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of RT programs implementing cluster and traditional set configurations on muscular and neuromuscular adaptations.

METHODS

Systematic searches of Embase, Scopus, Medline and SPORTDiscus were conducted. Inclusion criteria were: (1) randomized or non-randomized comparative studies; (2) publication in English; (3) participants of all age groups; (4) participants free of any medical condition or injury; (5) cluster set intervention; (6) comparison intervention utilizing a traditional set configuration; (7) intervention length ≥ three weeks and (8) at least one measure of changes in strength/force/torque, power, velocity, hypertrophy or muscular endurance. Raw data (mean ± SD or range) were extracted from included studies. Hedges' g effect sizes (ES) ± standard error of the mean (SEM) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies were included in the meta-analysis. No differences between cluster and traditional set configurations were found for strength (ES = - 0.05 ± 0.10, 95% CI - 0.21 to 0.11, p = 0.56), power output (ES = 0.02 ± 0.10, 95% CI - 0.17 to 0.20, p = 0.86), velocity (ES = 0.15 ± 0.13, 95% CI - 0.10 to 0.41, p = 0.24), hypertrophy (ES = - 0.05 ± 0.14, 95% CI - 0.32 to 0.23, p = 0.73) or endurance (ES = - 0.07 ± 0.18, 95% CI - 0.43 to 0.29, p = 0.70) adaptations. Moreover, no differences were observed when training volume, cluster set model, training status, body parts trained or exercise type were considered.

CONCLUSION

Collectively, both cluster and traditional set configurations demonstrate equal effectiveness to positively induce muscular and neuromuscular adaptation(s). However, cluster set configurations may achieve such adaptations with less fatigue development during RT which may be an important consideration across various exercise settings and stages of periodized RT programs.

The Effects of Set Structure Manipulation on Chronic Adaptations to Resistance Training: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The acute effects of resistance training (RT) set structure alteration are well established; however, less is known about their effects on chronic training adaptations.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to synthesise the available evidence on the effectiveness of traditional (TS), cluster (CS) and rest redistribution (RR) set structures in promoting chronic RT adaptations, and provide an overview of the factors which might differentially influence the magnitude of specific training adaptations between set structure types.

METHODS

This review was performed using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines encompassing the literature search of five databases. Studies in English that compared muscular strength, endurance, and/or hypertrophy adaptations, as well as vertical jump performance, velocity and power at submaximal loads and shifts in the slopes of force-velocity profiles between TS and CS or RR set structures (i.e., alternative set structures) were included. Risk of bias assessment was performed using a modified Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. Random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regressions were performed where possible.

RESULTS

17 studies met the inclusion criteria, none had more than one risk of bias item assessed as high risk. Pooled results revealed that none of the set structures were more effective at inducing strength (standardised mean difference (SMD) = - 0.06) or hypertrophy (SMD = - 0.03). TS were more effective at improving muscular endurance compared to alternative set structures (SMD = - 0.38), whereas alternative set structures tended to be more effective for vertical jump performance gains (SMD = 0.13), but this effect was not statistically significant (p = 0.190). Greater velocity and power outputs at submaximal loads (SMD = 0.18) were observed when using alternative set structures compared to TS. In addition, alternative set structures promoted greater shifts of the slope of force-velocity profiles towards more velocity dominant profiles compared to TS (SMD = 0.28). Sub-group analyses controlling for each alternative set structure independently showed mixed results likely caused by the relatively small number of studies available for some outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Modifying TS to an alternative set structure (CS or RR) has a negligible impact on strength and hypertrophy. Using CS and RR can lead to greater vertical jump performance, velocity and power at submaximal loads and shifts to more velocity dominant force-velocity profiles compared to training using TS. However, TS may provide more favourable effects on muscle endurance when compared to CS and RR. These findings demonstrate that altering TS to alternative set structures may influence the magnitude of specific muscular adaptations indicating set structure manipulation is an important consideration for RT program design.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

The original protocol was prospectively registered (CRD42019138954) with the PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews).