Combination Training for Hypertrophy

[P-funk]

Muscular Adaptations to Combinations of High- and Low-Intensity Resistance Exercises

Goto K., M. Nagasawa, O. Yanagisawa, T. Kizuka, N. Ishii, and K. Takamatsu.

The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research: Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 730???737, 2004.

Acute and long-term effects of resistance-training regimens with varied combinations of high- and low-intensity exercises were studied. Acute changes in the serum growth hormone (GH) concentration were initially measured after 3 types of regimens for knee extension exercise: a medium intensity (approximately 10 repetition maximum [RM]) short interset rest period (30 s) with progressively decreasing load (???hypertrophy type???); 5 sets of a high-intensity (90% of 1RM) and low-repetition exercise (???strength type???); and a single set of low-intensity and high-repetition exercise added immediately after the strength-type regimen (???combi-type???). Postexercise increases in serum GH concentration showed a significant regimen dependence: hypertrophy-type > combi-type > strength-type (p < 0.05, n = 8). Next, the long-term effects of periodized training protocols with the above regimens on muscular function were investigated. Male subjects (n = 16) were assigned to either hypertrophy/combi (HC) or hypertrophy/ strength (HS) groups and performed leg press and extension exercises twice a week for 10 weeks. During the first 6 weeks, both groups used the hypertrophy-type regimen to gain muscular size. During the subsequent 4 weeks, HC and HS groups performed combi-type and strength-type regimens, respectively. Muscular strength, endurance, and cross sectional area (CSA) were examined after 2, 6, and 10 weeks. After the initial 6 weeks, no significant difference was seen in the percentage changes of all variables between the groups. After the subsequent 4 weeks, however, 1RM of leg press, maximal isokinetic strength, and muscular endurance of leg extension showed significantly (p < 0.05) larger increases in the HC group than in the HS group. In addition, increases in CSA after this period also tended to be larger in the HC group than in the HS group (p = 0.08). The results suggest that a combination of high- and low-intensity regimens is effective for optimizing the strength adaptation of muscle in a periodized training program.

Pretty good study here. It gives merit to performing heavier tension work followed by lower weight metabolic work. In this study they used a down set. So the combination group performed the strength routine and then after their last set, they rested only 30sec before performing a set using 50% of their 1RM. Also, the other thing to take away from the study is the periodization involved. A hypertrophy routine with mediume reps (10 per set) and short rest (30sec) was used for 6 weeks, followed by either a strength routine or a combined routine (strength work followed by the 'down' set).

 

[fufu]

Interesting.

 

[fufu]

What is the training history of the participants?

 

[P-funk]

What is the training history of the participants?

Subjects
To obtain an insight into the anabolic hormone responses to the hypertrophy-type (H-type), strength-type (S-type), and combi-type regimens, GH responses were initially investigated with 8 male subjects aged 20???23 years (height, 175.0 ± 1.0 cm; body mass, 71.5 ± 2.0 kg). All subjects were undergraduate or graduate students and had a minimum of several months of recreational resistance training experience, but they had not taken part in any regular training program for at least 6 months prior to the beginning of the present study. Also, they had not taken supplements (e.g., amino acid, creatine), anabolic steroids, or other drugs that might affect growth hormone secretion before the study.

 

[fufu]

Thank you.

 

[zl214]

After the subsequent 4 weeks, however, 1RM of leg press, maximal isokinetic strength, and muscular endurance of leg extension showed significantly (p < 0.05) larger increases in the HC group than in the HS group. In addition, increases in CSA after this period also tended to be larger in the HC group than in the HS group (p = 0.08).

It seems that strength/combined trainging protocol is not as effective as hypertrophy/combined in either 1 RM or size.

does this mean that HIT should be of the least priority when design a routine?

 

[P-funk]

It seems that strength/combined trainging protocol is not as effective as hypertrophy/combined in either 1 RM or size.

does this mean that HIT should be of the least priority when design a routine?

not sure i am following your question. where did you get high intensity training from this study?

 

[DanOz]

Am I understanding correctly that this study is advocating a style of training such as the Power / Rep Range / Shock program which combines different methods of training?

 

[wilwn]

Am I understanding correctly that this study is advocating a style of training such as the Power / Rep Range / Shock program which combines different methods of training?

P/RR/S is just a simple linearly periodized program. the study involved varying intensity within each workout.

 

[zl214]

5 sets of a high-intensity (90% of 1RM) and low-repetition exercise (???strength type???); and a single set of low-intensity and high-repetition exercise added immediately after the strength-type regimen (???combi-type???).

the study defined high-intensity exercise as "strength type". and also the results have suggested that hypertrophy type is more effetive in raising GH level and HC is more effective than HS in gaining strength (1RM) and muscle size (Muslce fibre cross section).

It seems that positive outcomes associated with resistance training, including increase in GH, gain in size and strength is disproportional to the level of intensity (or the amount of strength regime incorporated).

this would suggest to me that incorporating hypertrophic type exercise would be more preferable than strength type exercise with high intensity.

yet, it is unclear whether regimens purely comprised of hypertrophic type is better than regimens solely comprised of strength type (or combined regimen unless it is assumed that higher GH means more 1RM/size ) in size/strength gain as only combined/strength and combined/hypertrophy were investigated.

 

[P-funk]

the study defined high-intensity exercise as "strength type". and also the results have suggested that hypertrophy type is more effetive in raising GH level and HC is more effective than HS in gaining strength (1RM) and muscle size (Muslce fibre cross section).

It seems that positive outcomes associated with resistance training, including increase in GH, gain in size and strength is disproportional to the level of intensity (or the amount of strength regime incorporated).

this would suggest to me that incorporating hypertrophic type exercise would be more preferable than strength type exercise with high intensity.

yet, it is unclear whether regimens purely comprised of hypertrophic type is better than regimens solely comprised of strength type (or combined regimen unless it is assumed that higher GH means more 1RM/size ) in size/strength gain as only combined/strength and combined/hypertrophy were investigated.

oh, I see what you are asking.

The GH release was higher during the first phase of training (weeks 1-6), which was only hypertrophy training. After that the subjects were broken up into the combination or the strength group. GH release was probably higher during the hypertrophy phase because the number of reps were higher. When the subjects moved to the strength phase (neural adaptation), the group that added one high rep set following their strength sets had a higher increase in GH. The researchers had concluded that these findings may suggest a new strategy for exercise prescription during this phase of training.

You are only looking at one factor, the release of growth hormone. Look at the bigger picture.....the groups all had increases in cross sectional area following in the hypertrophy phase and then the combination group saw greater increases in CSA than did the strength group (probably due to a higher training volume, due to the lighter set of higher reps, the combination training).

I think the things to take away from this are that (A) we need to periodize in order to make increases in our hypertrophy and (b) some form of combination training appears to give you good results in terms of muscular growth (like I always say here, have some strength/tension work and some metabolic work in your program. I really believe that BB'ers need both types of training).

 

[Valias]

My new (i doubt it's actually MINE of course) type of periodization is just to have a "really heavy day" then a "active recovery day" then a "medium day" over the course of 7 or so days, hopefully that's enough for now : /