A COMPARISON OF PERIODISED RESISTANCE TRAINING METHODS ON PHYSICAL PERFORMANCE.

Multiple periodisation methods of resistance training have been used by strength and conditioning coaches to elicit physiological adaptions over time. The purpose of this review is to compare periodised resistance training methods and their effectiveness in eliciting strength, power, hypertrophy, and endurance gains. Findings from this review detail the advantages and disadvantages within each model researched, as well as the results they yield. The Edith Cowan Database, SPORTDiscus, Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, Journal of Australian Strength and Conditioning, and Google Scholar were searched using the following key words and phrases: ‘block periodization’, ‘periodization methods’, ‘resistance training periodization’, ‘traditional periodization’, ‘undulating periodization’, and ‘non periodized resistance training’. A total of 25 original research papers, 15 articles, and 2 meta-analyses were included in this review. It was concluded that periodised methods of resistance training are more effective than non-periodised methods in eliciting physiological adaptions. Furthermore traditional, block, and undulating methods appear to elicit similar gains, however undulating methods appear more suitable for short term training periods whereas traditional and block methods are superior in long term training situations. In conclusion, coaches should periodise resistance training for their athletes as well as choose models appropriate for their given time constraints and level of training. Altering the training program over time through varied volume, frequency, and intensity ensures that athletes are well recovered and able to display increased fitness levels for competition. ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR