Progression and Resistance Training

Progression in a resistance training program has both anecdotal and scientific support and can provide the variation needed to

keep the workouts fun as well as effective over the long haul. In 1998, the American College of Sports Medicine published a

position stand entitled “The recommended quantity and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory

and muscular fitness, and flexibility in healthy adults.” In this document, an initial starting point consisting of performance of

1 set per exercise (8-10 exercises) for 8-12 repetitions (10-15 for older adults) 2-3 days per week was recommended. This

initial recommendation has been shown to be effective for progression during the first few months of training, but then benefits

can plateau during subsequent months when variation in the program design is minimal. To move beyond the plateaus in

strength fitness further progression in program stress is needed. There are numerous ways to progress as long as one adheres

to basic tenets regarding the proper manipulation of the acute program variables. How much one can progress depends on the

individual’s genetic makeup, program design and implementation, and training status or level of fitness (i.e., slower rates of

improvement are observed as one advances). In this paper, we will discuss the critical elements to progression during

resistance training and the current recommendations for manipulating the acute program variables. It is important to note that

the amount of progression sought is individual-specific, as moderate improvements have been shown to elicit significant health

benefits. Once the desired fitness level is achieved, maintenance programs can be used to maintain that current level of

fitness. 

Introduction

The popularity of resistance training has increased in recent times. Not only is

resistance training used to increase muscular strength, power, endurance, and

hypertrophy in athletes, but the adaptations to resistance training have been shown

to benefit the general population as well as clinical (i.e., those individuals with

cardiovascular ailments, neuromuscular disease, etc.) populations (Kraemer et al.,

2002) (see Table 1). Both scientific and anecdotal evidence points to the concept

that progression is needed in order to create a more effective stimulus to promote

higher levels of fitness. In fact, a threshold of activity/effort is necessary beyond

the initial few months (which is characterized by enhanced motor coordination

and technique) in order for the body to produce further substantial improvements

in fitness. This threshold continually changes as one’s conditioning level improves

and is specific to the targeted goals of the exercise program. It is also bounded by

each individual’s genetic ceiling for improvement. Resistance training at or

beyond this threshold level leads to progression. 

The 1998 American College of Sports Medicine position stand has been shown to

be effective for progression during the first few months of training (Silvester et

Series 6, No. 3 Sept. 2005

Published quarterly by the

President’s Council on

Physical Fitness and Sports

Washington, D.C.

★

Guest Authors:

William J. Kraemer, Ph.D., FACSM, CSCS

Department of Kinesiology,

Human Performance Laboratory

University of Connecticut,

Storrs, CT

Nicholas A. Ratamess, Ph.D., CSCS

Department of Health and Exercise

Science

The College of New Jersey, Ewing, NJ

★

Co-edited by:

Dr. Deborah Young, University of

Maryland, Dr. Robert P. Pangrazi,

Arizona State University, and

Dr. Barbara Ainsworth,

San Diego State University

President’s Council on Physical Fitness and Sports

ResearchDi est

PCPFS Distinguished Service Award

The President’s Council on Physical Fitness and Sports is pleased to announce

the Distinguished Service Award. This award recognizes individuals for their

efforts and contributions to the field of physical activity and fitness for all Americans. For further information or to nominate a potential candidate for the award,

please visit the website at www.fitness.gov or www.presidentschallenge.org.
al., 1982; Starkey et al., 1996), but then benefits tended to

plateau during subsequent months when variation in the

program design was minimal (Marx et al., 2001).

However, the question then arose, “what type of programs

would be recommended for those individuals who desire a

higher level of fitness?” Because it is important to make

exercise a lifetime commitment, recommendations based

on scientific research were needed to provide specific

directives for those who desire to make further goalspecific improvements via resistance training. In response

to this need, the American College of Sports Medicine

later published a position stand providing basic

recommendations for progression during resistance

training (2002). In this document, recommendations were

given to novice, intermediate, and advanced individuals

who sought to improve muscle strength, power,

endurance, hypertrophy, and motor performance. The

general conclusion was that there were numerous ways to

progress as long as one adhered to basic tenets regarding

the proper manipulation of the acute program variables.

How much one can progress depends on the individual’s

genetic makeup, program design and implementation,

and training status or level of fitness (i.e., slower

rates of improvement are observed as one advances)

(Kraemer & Ratamess, 2004). In this paper, we will

discuss the critical elements to progression during

resistance training and the current recommendations

for manipulating the acute program variables. It is

important to note that the amount of progression

sought is individual-specific, as moderate

improvements have been shown to elicit significant

health benefits (Feigenbaum & Pollock, 1999). Once

the desired fitness level is achieved, programs can be

used to maintain that current level of fitness.

Basic Components of Resistance

Training Programs

Maximal benefits of resistance training may be

gained via adherence to three basic principles:

1) progressive overload, 2) specificity, and

3) variation.

Progressive overload necessitates a gradual increase

in the stress placed on the body during training.

Without these additional demands, the human body

has no reason to adapt any further than the current

level of fitness.

Specificity refers to the body’s adaptations to

training. The physiological adaptations to resistance

training are specific to the muscle actions involved,

velocity of movement, exercise range of motion, muscle

groups trained, energy systems involved, and the intensity

and volume of training (Kraemer & Ratamess, 2004). The

most effective resistance training programs are designed

individually to bring about specific adaptations.

Variation is the systematic alteration of the resistance

training program over time to allow for the training

stimulus to remain optimal. It has been shown that

systematic program variation is very effective for longterm progression (Marx et al., 2001).

Progression and Resistance Training

Program Design 

The resistance training program is a composite of acute

variables. These variables include: 1) muscle actions used,

2) resistance used, 3) volume (total number of sets and

repetitions), 4) exercises selected and workout structure

(e.g., the number of muscle groups trained), 5) the

2

TABLE 1

GENERAL BENEFITS OF

RESISTANCE TRAINING

• Increased muscular strength

• Increased muscular power

• Increased muscular endurance

• Increased muscle size

• Reduced body fat

• Increased balance, coordination, and flexibility

• Enhanced speed and jumping ability

• Enhanced motor performance and ability to 

perform activities of everyday living

• Increased bone mineral density

• Increased basal metabolic rate

• Lower blood pressure

• Reduced cardiovascular demands to exercise

• Greater insulin sensitivity and glucose tolerance

• Improved blood lipid profiles

• Reduced risk for injury and disease (i.e.,

osteoporosis, sarcopenia, low back pain, etc.)

• Enhanced well-being and self-esteem
data examining consistent resistance training with heavier

loading. There appears to be specific motor unit

recruitment patterns during the lifting of very heavy or

maximal loads which may not be reproducible with light

to moderate loading. In addition, muscle hypertrophy

reduces the motor unit activity necessary to lift a desired

load (Ploutz et al., 1994). In order to continually recruit

these higher threshold motor units, progressively heavier

loads are needed to advance at a faster rate. 

There is an inverse relationship between the amount of

weight lifted and the number of repetitions performed.

Several studies have indicated that training with loads

corresponding to 1-6 RM (i.e., the maximal amount of

weight that can be lifted 1 to 6 times) were most

conducive to increasing maximal dynamic strength

(Campos et al., 2002; Weiss et al., 1999). This loading

range appears most specific to increasing dynamic 1 RM

strength. Although significant strength increases have

been reported using loads corresponding to 7-12 RM

(Staron et al., 1994), it is believed that this range may not

be as specific to increasing maximal strength in advanced

resistance-trained individuals compared to 1-6 RM

(although it is very effective for strength training in novice

and intermediate trainees). The 7-12 RM loading zone is

commonly used in programs targeting muscular

hypertrophy at all levels of training. Although heavy

loading (1-6 RM) is effective for increasing muscle

hypertrophy, it has been suggested that the 7-12 RM range

may provide the best combination of load and volume in

direct comparison (Kraemer & Ratamess, 2000). Loads

lighter than this (13-15 RM and lighter) have only had

small effects on maximal strength and hypertrophy

(Campos et al., 2002), but have been very effective for

enhancing local muscular endurance (Campos et al.,

2002). Each “training zone” on this continuum has its

advantages and, in order to avoid encountering training

plateaus or overtraining, one should not devote 100% of

the training time to one general RM zone. It appears that

optimal strength, hypertrophy, and endurance training

requires the systematic use of various loading strategies

(ACSM, 2002). Therefore, the American College of

Sports Medicine (2002) recommends 60-70% of 1 RM

loading for novice, 70-80% of 1 RM for intermediate, and

70-100% of 1 RM (periodized) for advanced strength

training.

Training Volume 

Training volume consists of the total number of sets and

repetitions performed during a training session. Altering

training volume can be accomplished by changing the

sequence of exercise performance, 6) rest intervals

between sets, 7) repetition velocity, and 8) training

frequency. Altering one or several of these variables will

affect the training stimuli, thus creating a favorable

condition by which numerous ways exist to vary

resistance training programs and maintain/increase

participant motivation. Therefore, proper resistance

exercise prescription involves manipulation of the

variables to the specificity of the targeted goals.

Muscle Actions 

The selection of muscle actions revolve around concentric

(CON), eccentric (ECC), and isometric (ISOM) muscle

actions. Most resistance training programs include mostly

dynamic repetitions with both CON and ECC muscle

actions, whereas ISOM muscle actions play a secondary

role. Eccentric muscle actions result in larger forces

generated and less motor unit activation per tension level

(Komi et al., 1987), require less energy per tension level

(Evans et al., 1983), are very conducive to muscle

hypertrophy (Hather et al., 1991), and elicit greater

muscle damage (Ebbeling & Clarkson, 1989) compared to

CON actions. Muscular strength is enhanced to a greater

extent when ECC actions are included (Dudley et al.,

1991). It is recommended that both CON and ECC muscle

actions be included in novice, intermediate, and advanced

resistance training programs (ACSM, 2002). The use of

ISOM actions is beneficial but adaptations to ISOM are

mostly specific to joint angles trained so ISOM actions

need to be performed throughout the range of joint

motion. 

Resistance

The amount of weight lifted is highly dependent on other

variables such as exercise order, volume, frequency,

muscle action, repetition speed, and rest interval length,

and has a significant effect of both the acute response and

chronic adaptation to resistance training. Individual

training status and goals are primary considerations when

considering the level of resistance. Light loads of

approximately 45-50% of one repetition maximum

(1 RM) or less can increase muscular strength in novices

who are mostly improving motor coordination at that level

(Anderson & Kearney, 1982). As one becomes

progressively stronger, greater loading is needed to

increase maximal strength (i.e., 80-85% of 1 RM for

advanced training) (Häkkinen et al., 1985). These findings

have also been recently supported by a meta-analysis,

which demonstrated that 85% of 1 RM yielded the highest

effect size for strength gains in athletes (Peterson et al.,

2004). It is important to note, however, that there are few

3
4

number of exercises performed per session, the number of

repetitions performed per set, or the number of sets per

exercise. Volume and intensity are inversely related such

that use of heavy loads results in lower volumes whereas

use of light to moderate loads results in higher training

volumes. Typically, high volume programs are

synonymous with training for muscle hypertrophy and

local muscular endurance whereas low volume programs

are synonymous with strength and power training. 

The vast majority of studies that examined volume and

resistance training have investigated the number of sets

performed per exercise. Most comparisons have been

made between single- and multiple-set programs (Galvao

& Taafe, 2004; Wolfe et al., 2004). In novice individuals,

similar results have been reported from single- and

multiple-set (mostly 3 sets) programs (Messier & Dill,

1985; Starkey et al., 1996), whereas some studies have

shown multiple sets superior (Berger, 1963; Borst et al.,

2001; Sanborn et al., 2000). Thus, either may be used

effectively during the initial phase of resistance training.

However, periodized (i.e., varied), multiple-set programs

have been shown to be superior as one progresses to

intermediate and advanced stages of long-term training in

all (Kraemer, 1997; Kraemer et al., 2000; Marx et al.,

2001; Kramer et al., 1997; Rhea et al., 2002;

Schlumberger et al., 2001) but one study (Hass et al.,

2000). Interestingly, a recent study (using a randomized,

cross-over design) in trained postmenopausal women

showed that multiple-set training resulted in a 3.5 to 5.5%

range of strength increase whereas single-set training

resulted in a 1.1 to 2.0% reduction in strength (Kemmler

et al., 2004). Within multiple-set training programs, two

(Dudley & Djamil, 1985), three (Berger, 1962), four-five

(Campos et al., 2002; Dudley et al., 1991), and six or

more (Sale et al., 1990) sets per exercise have all

produced significant increases in muscular strength in

both trained and untrained individuals. Only a few studies

have made direct comparisons and they reported similar

strength gains in novice individuals between two and

three sets (Capen, 1956), and two and four sets

(Ostrowski et al., 1997), whereas three sets have been

reported as superior to one and two (Berger, 1963).

Therefore, it appears that similar improvements, at least in

novice-trained individuals, may be gained within various

multiple-set protocols. Less is known with intermediate

and advanced training. Typically, 3-6 sets per exercise are

common during resistance training, although more and

less have been used successfully. It is important to note

that each set will have a specific purpose and that each

exercise may be performed with a different number of

total sets. Performing each set to near or actual muscular

exhaustion (as well as the impact of rest interval length)

may affect the total number of sets per exercise. We have

recently shown that when 2-3 min rest intervals are used

during 10-repetiton sets of multiple-joint exercises (i.e.,

squats, bench press) with 70-75% of 1 RM, acute lifting

performance tends to decrease beyond the third set (when

5 or 6 sets are performed) (Ratamess et al., in review).

Based on the aforementioned data, the American College

of Sports Medicine (2002) has made the following

strength training recommendations: 1) Novice—1-3 sets

per exercise x 8-12 repetitions per set; 2) Intermediate—

multiple sets of 6-12 repetitions per set; and 3) Advanced—

multiple sets of 1-12 repetitions per set (periodized).

The number of sets performed per workout has not been

extensively studied. In a recent meta-analysis examining

37 studies, Peterson et al. (2004) reported that 8 sets per

workout (per muscles trained) yielded the largest effect

size for strength development in athletes. However, few

data directly compare resistance training programs of

varying total sets, thus leaving numerous possibilities for

the strength and conditioning professional when designing

programs. 

Exercise Selection 

Two general types of free weight or machine exercises

may be selected in resistance training: single- and

multiple-joint. Single-joint exercises stress one joint or

major muscle group whereas multiple-joint exercises

stress more than one joint or major muscle group.

Although both are effective for increasing muscular

strength, multiple-joint exercises (e.g. bench press, squat)

have generally been regarded as most effective for

increasing muscular strength because they enable a

greater magnitude of resistance to be used (Kraemer &

Ratamess, 2000). Exercises stressing multiple or large

muscle groups have shown the greatest acute metabolic

and anabolic (e.g., testosterone, growth hormone 

family) hormonal responses (Ballor et al., 1987; Kraemer

& Ratamess, 2005) which may play a role in muscle size

and strength increases. The American College of Sports

Medicine (2002) recommends that novice, intermediate,

and advanced resistance training programs incorporate

single- and multiple-joint exercises with emphasis on

multiple-joint exercises for advanced training.

Exercise Order and Structure

The sequencing of exercises significantly affects the acute

expression of muscular strength. In addition, sequencing

depends on program structure. There are three basic

workout structures: 1) total body workouts (e.g.,
performance of multiple exercises stressing all major

muscle groups per session), 2) upper/lower body split

workouts (e.g., performance of upper body exercises only

during one workout and lower body exercises only during

the next workout), and 3) muscle group split routines

(e.g., performance of exercises for specific muscle groups

during a workout). All three structures are effective for

improving muscular strength and it appears that individual

goals, time/frequency, and personal preferences will

determine which one(s) will be used. One study has

shown similar improvements in previously untrained

women between total body and upper/lower body split

workouts (Calder et al., 1994). Once the structure has

been developed, the sequencing of exercise will ensue.

For strength training, minimizing fatigue and maximizing

energy are critical for optimal acute performance —

especially for the multiple-joint exercises. Studies have

shown that placing an exercise early vs. later in the

workout will affect acute lifting performance (Sforzo et

al., 1996). Thus, exercise sequencing strategies are

described in Table 2 (Kraemer & Ratamess, 2004). 

Rest Intervals 

Rest interval length depends on training intensity, goals,

fitness level, and targeted energy system, and affects acute

performance and training adaptations. Acute

force production may be compromised with

short (i.e., 1 min) rest periods (Kraemer,

1997; Ratamess et al., in review). Kraemer

(1997) showed that all participants

completed 3 sets of 10 repetitions with 10

RM loads when 3-min rest periods were

used. However only 10, 8, and 7 repetitions

were completed, respectively, with 1-min

rest intervals in the study. We have recently

developed a continuum for rest interval

length for the bench press in which 3-5 min

rest intervals were most effective for

maintaining acute lifting performance, but

30 sec to 2 min of rest produced significant

reductions in set performance (Ratamess et

al., in review). Longitudinal studies have

shown greater strength increases with long

vs. short rest periods between sets (Robinson

et al., 1995; Pincivero et al., 1997). These

studies show the importance of recovery for

optimal strength training. Rest intervals will

vary based on the goals of that particular

exercise, i.e., not every exercise will use the

same rest interval. Muscle strength may be

increased using short rest periods but at a

slower rate, thus demonstrating the need to

establish goals (i.e., the magnitude of

strength improvement sought) prior to selecting a rest

interval. The American College of Sports Medicine (2002)

recommends 1-2 min rest intervals for novice training, 2-3

min rest intervals for core exercise and 1-2 min rest

intervals for others for intermediate training, and at least 3

min rest intervals for core exercises and 1-2 min rest

intervals for others for advanced strength training.

Repetition Velocity 

The velocity at which dynamic repetitions are performed

affects the responses to resistance exercise. When

discussing repetition velocity, it is important to note that

velocity applies mostly to submaximal loading. Heavy

loading requires maximal effort in order to lift weight. For

dynamic constant external resistance (also called isotonic)

training, significant reductions in force production are

observed when the intent is to lift the weight slowly.

There are two types of slow-velocity contractions,

unintentional and intentional. Unintentional slow

velocities are used during high-intensity repetitions in

which either the loading and/or fatigue facilitate the

velocity of movement (i.e., the resultant velocity is slow

despite maximal effort) (Mookerjee & Ratamess, 1999).

Intentional slow-velocity repetitions are used with

5

TABLE 2

GENERAL SEQUENCING STRATEGIES

FOR STRENGTH TRAINING

Total Body Workout:

1. Large before small muscle group exercises 

2. Multiple-joint before single-joint exercises

3. Rotation of upper and lower body exercises or

opposing (agonist-antagonist relationship)

exercises

Upper and Lower Body Split Workout:

1. Large before small muscle group exercises 

2. Multiple-joint before single-joint exercises 

3. Rotation of opposing exercises (agonist-antagonist

relationship)

Muscle Group Split Routines:

1. Multiple-joint before single-joint exercises 

2. Higher intensity before lower intensity exercises
1994; Dudley et al., 1991). For increasing strength,

a) 3 days per week was superior to 1 day per week

(McLester et al., 2000) and 2 days per week (Graves et al.,

1988); b) 4 days per week was superior to 3 days per

week (Hunter, 1985); c) 2 days were superior to 1 day

(Pollock et al., 1993); d) 3-5 days per week was superior

to 1 and 2 days (Gillam, 1981); and e) 2 and 3 days per

week were similar (Carroll et al., 1998). Progression does

not necessitate a change in frequency for training each

muscle group, but may be more dependent upon

alterations in other acute variables such as exercise

selection, volume, and intensity. Advanced training

frequency varies considerably. It has been shown that

football players training 4-5 days/week achieved better

results than those who trained either 3 or 6 days/week

(Hoffman et al., 1990). Other advanced athletes have used

frequencies higher than this (i.e., 8-12 workouts per week

or more). It is important to note that not all muscle groups

are trained specifically per workout using a high

frequency. Rather, each major muscle group may be

trained 2-3 times per week despite the large number of

workouts. The American College of Sports Medicine

(2002) recommends 2-3 days per week for novice

training, 2-4 days per week for intermediate training, and

4-6 days per week for advanced strength training.

Summary

Resistance training poses numerous health and fitness

benefits to all individuals, providing that a threshold of

activity/effort is reached. Progressive overload, specificity,

and variation are critical elements to resistance training

programs targeting progression. These elements may be

attained by proper manipulation of the acute program

variables in order to obtain specific, individualized goals.

Specific recommendations have been set forth by the

American College of Sports Medicine and were discussed

in the present document.

6

submaximal loads where the individual has greater control

of the velocity. Concentric force production is

significantly lower for an intentionally slow lifting

velocity (5-sec CON: 5-sec ECC) compared to a

traditional (moderate) velocity with a corresponding lower

neural activation (Keogh et al., 1999). These data

demonstrate that motor unit activity may be limited when

the individual intentionally slows contraction velocity.

Lighter loads (e.g. ~30% reduction) are required for

intentionally slow velocities (i.e., > 5-sec CON, > 5-sec

ECC) of training (when a targeted number of repetitions

are desired) and may not provide an optimal stimulus for

1 RM strength enhancement in resistance-trained

individuals (Keeler et al., 2001). Compared to slow

velocities, moderate (1-2-sec CON, 1-2-sec ECC) and fast

(< 1-sec CON, 1-sec ECC) velocities have been shown to

be more effective for enhanced muscular performance,

e.g., number of repetitions performed, work and power

output, volume (Morrissey et al., 1998), and for increasing

the rate of strength gains (Hay et al., 1983). The American

College of Sports Medicine (2002) recommends slow to

moderate velocities for novice training (i.e., with light

loads while correct technique is learned), moderate

velocities for intermediate training, and unintentionally

slow (with heavy weights) and moderate to fast (with

moderate to moderately heavy weights) for optimal

strength training. 

Frequency 

Frequency refers to the number of training sessions

performed during a specific period of time (e.g., 1 week)

and/or the number of times certain exercises or muscle

groups are trained per week. It is dependent upon several

factors such as volume and intensity, exercise selection,

level of conditioning and/or training status, recovery

ability, nutritional intake, and training goals. Numerous

studies have successfully used frequencies of 2-3

alternating days per week in novices (Hickson et al.,
7

Please Post

President’s Council on Physical Fitness & Sports

200 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, DC 20201

(202) 690-9000 • FAX (202) 690-5211

The act of resistance training itself

does not result in health-promoting

benefits unless the training stimulus

exceeds the individual’s fitness

threshold. Progression in

program design entails gradual

progressive overload, specificity, and

variation in the training stimulus

in order for the individual to improve

one’s level of fitness.

William J. Kraemer, Ph.D., FACSM, CSCS

Department of Kinesiology, Human Performance Laboratory

University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT

Nicholas A. Ratamess, Ph.D., CSCS

Department of Health and Exercise Science

The College of New Jersey, Ewing, NJ
8

Kraemer, W.J. (1997). A series of studies-the physiological basis for strength training in

American football: fact over philosophy. Journal of Strength and Conditioning

Research 11, 131-142.

Kraemer, W.J. & Ratamess, N.A. (2000). Physiology of resistance training: current issues.

Orthopedics & Physical Therapy Clinics in North America: Exercise & Technology. 9:4.

Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders. pp 467-513.

Kraemer, W.J. & Ratamess, N.A. (2004). Fundamentals of resistance training: progression

and exercise prescription. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 36, 674-688.

Kraemer, W.J. & Ratamess, N.A. (2005). Hormonal responses and adaptations to

resistance exercise and training. Sports Medicine 35, 339-361.

Kraemer, W.J., Ratamess, N., Fry, A.C., et al. (2000). Influence of resistance training

volume and periodization on physiological and performance adaptations in college

women tennis players. American Journal of Sports Medicine 28, 626-633.

Kraemer, W.J., Ratamess, N.A., & French, D.N. (2002). Resistance training for health and

performance. Current Sports Medicine Reports 1, 165-171.

Kraemer, W.J., Fleck, S.J., & Ratamess, N.A. (2005). General principles of exercise

testing and exercise prescription for muscle strength and endurance. In: Exercise

Testing and Exercise Prescription for Special Cases (ed. J.S. Skinner). 3rd ed.

Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. pp. 38-53.

Kramer, J.B., Stone, M.H., O’Bryant, H.S., et al. (1997). Effects of single vs. multiple sets

of weight training: impact of volume, intensity, and variation. Journal of Strength &

Conditioning Research 11, 143-147.

Marx, J.O., Ratamess, N.A., Nindl, B.C., et al. (2001). The effects of single-set vs.

periodized multiple-set resistance training on muscular performance and hormonal

concentrations in women. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 33, 635-643.

McLester, J.R., Bishop, P., & Guilliams, M.E. (2000). Comparison of 1 day and 3 days per

week of equal-volume resistance training in experienced subjects. Journal of

Strength & Conditioning Research 14, 273-281.

Messier, S.P. & Dill, M.E. (1985). Alterations in strength and maximal oxygen uptake

consequent to Nautilus circuit weight training. Research Quarterly for Exercise &

Sport 56, 345-351.

Mookerjee, S. & Ratamess, N.A. (1999). Comparison of strength differences and joint

action durations between full and partial range-of-motion bench press exercise.

Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 13, 76-81.

Morrissey, M.C., Harman, E.A., Frykman, P.N., & Han, K.H. (1998). Early phase differential

effects of slow and fast barbell squat training. American Journal of Sports Medicine

26, 221-230.

Ostrowski, K.J., Wilson, G.J., Weatherby, R., et al. (1997). The effect of weight training

volume on hormonal output and muscular size and function. Journal of Strength &

Conditioning Research 11, 148-154.

Peterson, M.D., Rhea, M.R., & Alvar, B.A. (2004). Maximizing strength development in

athletes: a meta-analysis to determine the dose-response relationship. Journal of

Strength & Conditioning Research 18, 377-382.

Pincivero, D.M., Lephart, S.M., & Karunakara, R.G. (1997). Effects of rest interval on

isokinetic strength and functional performance after short term high intensity

training. British Journal of Sports Medicine 31, 229-234.

Ploutz, L.L., Tesch, P.A., Biro, R.L., & Dudley, G.A. (1994). Effect of resistance training on

muscle use during exercise. Journal of Applied Physiology 76, 1675-1681.

Pollock, M.L., Graves, J.E., Bamman, M.M., et al. (1993). Frequency and volume of

resistance training: effect of cervical extension strength. Archives of Physical

Medicine & Rehabilitation 74, 1080-1086.

Rhea, M.R., Alvar, B.A., Ball, S.D., & Burkett, L.N. (2002). Three sets of weight training

superior to 1 set with equal intensity for eliciting strength. Journal of Strength &

Conditioning Research 16, 525-529.

Robinson, J.M., Stone, M.H., Johnson, R.L., et al. (1995). Effects of different weight

training exercise/rest intervals on strength, power, and high intensity exercise

endurance. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 9, 216-221.

Sale, D.G., Jacobs, I., MacDougall, J.D., & Garner, S. (1990). Comparisons of two

regimens of concurrent strength and endurance training. Medicine & Science in

Sports & Exercise 22, 348-356.

Sanborn, K., Boros, R., Hruby, J., et al. (2000). Short-term performance effects of weight

training with multiple sets not to failure vs. a single set to failure in women. Journal

of Strength & Conditioning Research 14, 328-331.

Schlumberger, A., Stec, J., & Schmidtbleicher, D. (2001). Single- vs. multiple-set strength

training in women. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 15, 284-289.

Sforzo, G.A. & Touey, P.R. (1996). Manipulating exercise order affects muscular

performance during a resistance exercise training session. Journal of Strength &

Conditioning Research 10, 20-24.

Silvester, L.J., Stiggins, C., Mcgown, C., & Bryce, G.R. (1982). The effect of variable

resistance and free-weight training programs on strength and vertical jump. NSCA

Journal, 3: 30-33.

Starkey, D.B., Pollock, M.L., Ishida, Y., et al. (1996). Effect of resistance training volume

on strength and muscle thickness. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 28,

1311-1320.

Staron, R.S., Karapondo, D.L., Kraemer, W.J., et al. (1994). Skeletal muscle adaptations

during early phase of heavy resistance training in men and women. Journal of

Applied Physiology 76, 1247-1255.

Weiss, L.W., Coney, H.D., & Clark, F.C. (1999). Differential functional adaptations to shortterm low-, moderate-, and high-repetition weight training. Journal of Strength &

Conditioning Research 13, 236-241.

Wolfe, B.L., LeMura, L.M., & Cole, P.J. (2004). Quantitative analysis of single- vs.

multiple-set programs in resistance training. Journal of Strength & Conditioning

Research 18, 35-47.

References

American College of Sports Medicine. (1998). Position Stand: The recommended quantity

and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory and

muscular fitness, and flexibility in healthy adults. Medicine & Science in Sports &

Exercise 30, 975-991.

American College of Sports Medicine. (2002). Position Stand: Progression models in

resistance training for healthy adults. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 34:

364-380.

Anderson, T. & Kearney, J.T. (1982). Effects of three resistance training programs on

muscular strength and absolute and relative endurance. Research Quarterly 53, 1-7.

Ballor, D.L., Becque, M.D., & Katch, V.L. (1987). Metabolic responses during hydraulic

resistance exercise. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 19, 363-367.

Berger, R.A. (1962). Optimum repetitions for the development of strength. Research

Quarterly 33, 334-338.

Berger, R.A. (1963). Comparison of the effect of various weight training loads on

strength. Research Quarterly 36, 141-146.

Borst, S.E., Dehoyos, D.V., Garzarella, L., et al. (2001). Effects of resistance training on

insulin-like growth factor-1 and IGF binding proteins. Medicine & Science in Sports &

Exercise 33, 648-653.

Calder, A.W., Chilibeck, P.D., Webber, C.E., & Sale, D.G. (1994). Comparison of whole and

split weight training routines in young women. Canadian Journal of Applied

Physiology 19, 185-199.

Campos, G.E.R., Luecke, T.J., Wendeln, H.K., et al. (2002). Muscular adaptations in

response to three different resistance-training regimens: specificity of repetition

maximum training zones. European Journal of Applied Physiology 88, 50-60.

Capen, E.K. (1956). Study of four programs of heavy resistance exercises for

development of muscular strength. Research Quarterly 27, 132-142.

Carroll, T.J., Abernethy, P.J., Logan, P.A., et al. (1998). Resistance training frequency:

strength and myosin heavy chain responses to two and three bouts per week.

European Journal of Applied Physiology 78, 270-275.

Dudley, G.A. & Djamil, R. (1985). Incompatibility of endurance- and strength-training

modes of exercise. Journal of Applied Physiology 59, 1446-1455.

Dudley, G.A., Tesch, P.A., Miller, B.J., & Buchanan, M.D. (1991). Importance of eccentric

actions in performance adaptations to resistance training. Aviation, Space &

Environmental Medicine 62, 543-550.

Ebbeling, C.B. & Clarkson, P.M. (1989). Exercise-induced muscle damage and

adaptation. Sports Medicine 7, 207-234.

Evans, W.J., Patton, J.F., Fisher, E.C., & Knuttgen, H.G. (1983). Muscle metabolism during

high intensity eccentric exercise. In: Biochemistry of Exercise. Champaign, IL: Human

Kinetics, 225-228.

Feigenbaum, M.S. & Pollock, M.L. (1999). Prescription of resistance training for health

and disease. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 31, 38-45.

Galvao, D.A. & Taaffe, D.R. (2004). Single- vs. multiple-set resistance training: recent

developments in the controversy. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 18,

660-667.

Gillam, G.M. (1981). Effects of frequency of weight training on muscle strength

enhancement. Journal of Sports Medicine 21, 432-436.

Graves, J.E, Pollock, M.L., Leggett, S.H., Braith, R.W., Carpenter, D.M., & Bishop, L.E.

(1988). Effect of reduced training frequency on muscular strength. International

Journal of Sports Medicine 9, 316-319.

Häkkinen, K., Alen, M., & Komi, P.V. (1985). Changes in isometric force- and relaxationtime, electromyographic and muscle fibre characteristics of human skeletal muscle

during strength training and detraining. Acta Physiologica Scandinavica 125, 573-

585.

Hass, C.J., Garzarella, L., Dehoyos, D., & Pollock, M.L. (2000). Single versus multiple sets

and long-term recreational weightlifters. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 32,

235-242.

Hather, B.M., Tesch, P.A., Buchanan, P., & Dudley, G.A. (1991). Influence of eccentric

actions on skeletal muscle adaptations to resistance training. Acta Physiologica

Scandinavica 143, 177-185.

Hay, J.G., Andrews, J.G., & Vaughan, C.L. (1983). Effects of lifting rate on elbow torques

exerted during arm curl exercises. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 15, 63-

71.

Hickson, R.C., Hidaka, K., & Foster, C. (1994). Skeletal muscle fiber type, resistance

training, and strength-related performance. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 26, 593-598.

Hoffman, J.R., Kraemer, W.J., Fry, A.C., Deschenes, M., & Kemp, M. (1990). The effect of

self-selection for frequency of training in a winter conditioning program for football.

Journal of Applied Sport Science Research 3, 76-82.

Hunter, G.R. (1985). Changes in body composition, body build, and performance

associated with different weight training frequencies in males and females. NSCA

Journal 7, 26-28.

Keeler, L.K., Finkelstein, L.H., Miller, W., & Fernhall, B. (2001). Early-phase adaptations to

traditional-speed vs. superslow resistance training on strength and aerobic capacity

in sedentary individuals. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 15, 309-314.

Kemmler, W.K., Lauber, D., Engelke, K., & Weineck, J. (2004). Effects of single- vs.

multiple-set resistance training on maximum strength and body composition in

trained postmenopausal women. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 18,

689-694.

Keogh, J.W.L., Wilson, G.J., & Weatherby, R.P. (1999). A cross-sectional comparison of

different resistance training techniques in the bench press. Journal of Strength &

Conditioning Research 13, 247-258.

Komi, P.V., Kaneko, M., & Aura, O. (1987). EMG activity of leg extensor muscles with

special reference to mechanical efficiency in concentric and eccentric exercise.

International Journal of Sports Medicine 8: 22-29 (sup.).