Programming Resistance Training to Improve Sports Performance and Injury Resilience

In our previous blog (part 1), we discussed the importance of resistance training and force production, and the key principles of training. In this blog (part 2) we will discuss the 7-step process for designing resistance training (RT) programmes to improve your athlete’s strength and injury resilience.

RT Programming: The 7 step-process

In order to develop an optimal individualised RT training programme, practitioners must undergo a 7-step process in order to deliver and elicit the appropriate training stimulus, relevant to the goal and time of the year (NSCA, 2016):

1. Needs analysis:evaluation of the sport and athlete
2. Exercise Selection
3. Training Frequency
4. Exercise Order
5. Training Load & Repetitions
6. Volume (number of sets)
7. Rest Periods

Steps 1-7 will vary and will be dependent on the aim / training goal (i.e., strength, power, hypertrophy, muscular endurance) and can vary during the time of the year (e.g., preparation phase vs a peaking / taper phase).

Step 1: Needs Analysis

In simple terms, the needs analysis entails a two-stage process that includes:

• An evaluation of the requirements and characteristics of the sport

• Evaluation of the sport movement analysis: Body and limb movement patterns and muscular involvement (kinesiological and motion analysis)
• Physiological analysis: Strength, power, hypertrophy, and muscular endurance priorities
• Injury analysis: Common sites for joint and muscle injury and causative factors
• An assessment of the athlete

1. Training status & experience
   1. Injury history of the athlete
   1. Results from fitness testing / pre-screening tests

This will help then inform the key exercise selection and training priorities for the athlete.

Step 2: RT Exercise Selection

Based on the need’s analysis and the intended training goals, RT exercises must be selected which conform to the principles of specificity and dynamic correspondence. A plethora of RT exercises are available for the practitioner, but these are simply categorised into different movement patterns / muscle groups / goals which are summarised in Table 1. Please note this is not an exhaustive list but a general example of the main exercises which typically feature in most S&C programmes.

Generally, most RT programmes will involve 3-4 lower and upper body exercises each (if doing a full body session), and this will typically entail one exercise from each of the following categories: knee dominant, hip dominant, split leg/unilateral, and some specific hamstring / calf / adductor exercises for the lower limb. A power exercise may also replace one of the other categories depending on the goal and time of the season. For the upper limb, generally one horizontal push and pull and vertical push and pull exercises are included. However, there is complete flexibility with this, and exercise selection will vary and be dependent on the individual, aims, and time of the season. Additionally, isolation / accessory exercises may also be included where appropriate.

Step 3: Training Frequency

This will depend on the training status and the sports season for the athlete. RT frequency will be influenced by the overall amount of physical stress and overall training load the athlete experiences. For example, RT training frequency will depend on the frequency and volume of the other training components such as technical / tactical sessions, endurance sessions, multidirectional speed sessions etc. and their daily physical activity. This is all part of the periodisation and programming puzzle.

Optimal frequency for RT appears to be 3 × week for beginners and 2 × week for advanced trainers (Peterson et al., 2004); however, this will depend on the needs’ analysis, time of season, fixtures, and desired adaptation. For example, during a preparation phase, greater RT training frequencies are possible in contrast to the in-season phases where competitions and fixtures have greater priority. Depending on the volume-load of the session, minimum of 48 hours recovery should be provided between RT sessions when performing / targeting the same muscle group.

 Recently, however, Grgic et al. (2018) reported that increased training frequency (1, 2, 3, 4) improved muscular strength gains due to increased volume-load. However, when training frequency was matched for volume-load, increased frequency had no additional benefits, thus volume-load could be the key driver for strength gains. This is further is supported by Schoenfeld et al. (2019) and Ralston et al. (2018) who reported similar hypertrophy and / or strength gains can be achieved with lower frequency vs. higher training frequency when volume-matched. Additionally, Ralston et al. (2017) reported that medium (5-9) to high (≥10) weekly set volumes (total sets per multi-joint exercise) are marginally more effective than low weekly (≤3) set volumes, but medium and high may be more appropriate dosages for well-trained athletes, while novice / intermediate warrant medium weekly set volumes. Cuthbert et al. (2021) suggest that micro-dosing the volume-load (i.e., dividing the volume load across more sessions across the microcycle – reduced volume per session but increasing frequency) during a microcycle could be an effective strategy to maintain and / or develop strength in-season where there are other competing demands. However, when reduced for time, usually in-season where technical / tactical training has a greater emphasis and priority in sports such as soccer, relatively small RT volumes (i.e., one session per week) are required to maintain strength and muscle mass (Iverson et al., 2021). Resultantly, there appears to be some degree of flexibility when it comes to progressing RT methods which offer some choices for the practitioner when aiming to accommodate for different sport environments, competition schedules, and individual needs.

Nevertheless, the practitioner must decide what is critical for the block of training: maintenance or development. Subsequently, the appropriate volume-load much be selected accordingly as this will dictate what the RT training programme will look like. For example, an endurance athlete may only require two 1-2 RT sessions per week as endurance training will be their priority. Conversely, an Olympic weightlifter may perform 6 RT sessions a week due to the importance of strength and power. While in team sports where there are periods of fixture congestion, some athletes may omit RT sessions completely from their programmes, though this will result in detraining. In cases such as these, regular monitoring of athletes (e.g., through gym registers and performance testing) becomes a key part of the training programme to ensure key athletic qualities are maintained and performance levels are not diminishing throughout the competitive season.

Below presented is a hypothetical scenario.

After conducting a needs analysis in rugby union, it has been identified that an athlete needs to increase their lean body mass (i.e., muscle mass). Thus, a greater training frequency of 3-5 sessions per week might be required to increase the volume-load necessary to induce muscle hypertrophy (Schoenfeld et al., 2019). Conversely, an athlete in the same squad who has the optimal body composition may only warrant two RT sessions. As such, there is no one size fits all approach for RT frequency, the dosage will be dependent on a myriad of factors and should be individualised to the athlete accordingly (NSCA, 2016). Finally, other factors such as nutrition, recovery, sleep, and wellness can affect training frequency and dosages. 

Step 4: Exercise Order

In line with NSCA (2016) recommendations, the most technically and physically challenging exercise should be selected and performed first while the athlete is fresh and not in an acute fatigued state. There are various methods of structuring exercises within a RT training session, and generally this will be influenced by equipment availability, time of season, and session time (i.e., logistical issues).

Typically, a RT programme will follow the specific order from compound, multi-joint exercises to isolation/ single-joint exercises (if applicable):

1. Power exercise or other core lift (i.e., main knee dominant / hip dominant exercise / vertical push / pull)
2. Other core lift
3. Assistance exercises such as split, unilateral, hamstring specific, tissue specific exercises

Other RT structures include

1. Upper- and lower-body exercises (alternated)
2. ‘Push’ and ‘Pull’ exercises (alternated)
3. Super-setting (agonist vs antagonist)

Generally, as most athletes have limited time for RT due to the sports-specific training, and potentially other work commitments (i.e., if amateur or semi-professional), maximising any physical preparation time is integral. Therefore, pairing a lower body exercise with an upper limb / mobility / or neuromuscular control exercise seem to be the most effective method to maximise the time available for structured, supervised RT. For example, after an athlete performs a set of back squats, they may then alternate this with a bent over row / ankle mobility exercise / or a submaximal single leg hop and hold during their rest period.

Step 5-7: Load, Repetition and Volume Assignments Based on the Training Goal

It should be noted that an inverse relationship exists between number of repetitions and intensity (%1RM) which is illustrated in Figure 1. When aiming to elicit a specific adaptation, i.e., strength, power hypertrophy, or muscular endurance, it is imperative that the appropriate load, repetition range, and volume is performed to optimise the training stimulus (NSCA, 2016). In order to prescribe an individualised load / intensity for an athlete, typically you would establish their one repetition maximum (1RM) through maximal strength testing or estimating their 1RM using a prediction equation or velocity-based prediction equation (Weakley et al., 2021). However, as athletes will perform several exercises, it is not feasible to directly assess the 1RM for each exercise, thus estimated methods will typically be used, especially for the accessory exercises. For example, the Epley (1985) equation is often used to predict 1RM but please note there is some individual variation and it is only an estimation:

(0.033 × Number of repetitions × load (kg)) + Load (kg)

Nevertheless, training loads and repetition ranges are then prescribed generally in line with the typical training goal guidelines as suggested by the NSCA (2016) Figure 1. Figure 1 illustrates the optimal repetition range (in white) to elicit the specific training adaptation for strength (1-6), power (1-5), hypertrophy (6-12), and muscular endurance (≥12).

Specific RT guidelines from the NSCA (2016) and ACSM (2009) are presented in Tables 2 and 3, respectively. Please note that these are based on a muscle group / exercise category. In order to increase strength and power, higher intensities, smaller repetition ranges and longer rest periods are needed in order to recruit the high threshold fast twitch motor units based on the size principle. This subsequently results in low to moderate volume-load. Conversely, for hypertrophy (alternatively known as strength endurance or anatomical adaptation), moderate to high volume-loads are required, resulting in higher repetition ranges in combination with moderate to high sets and shorter rest periods as volume-load is a key driver for muscular hypertrophy by promoting the key mechanisms of hypertrophy: muscular damage, tension, and metabolic stress (Schoenfeld, 2020). Generally, muscular endurance training is not included in most S&C programmes, nor considered a key training goal, as increasing an athlete’s absolute and relative strength should increase their ability to perform sub-maximal repetitions with the same load. For example, an athlete with an absolute strength of 100 kg should only be able to perform ~65kg for 15 reps (i.e., 65% of 1RM) based on Figure 1B. However, if the athlete increases their absolute strength to 150kg, 65% of 1RM is now 97.5 kg and they should therefore be able to perform ~15 reps with a heavier load, and thus muscular endurance has improved. This is extremely pertinent for endurance athletes where improving strength can improve mechanical efficiency, exercise economy, while improving tissue integrity and reducing injury risk (Bazyler et al., 2015). As such, strength development should be considered a key training priority for endurance athletes.

ACSM (2009) acknowledge training status in the prescription of RT; however, the NSCA (2016) are very similar to the advanced recommendations of the ACSM (2009). Nevertheless, an example hypertrophy and strength RT session are provided for a female shot put (Table 4)  and male basketball player (Table 5), respectively. The aims of these programmes will be to increase progressive overload (linear periodisation) with small increases in load week-to-week in line with Figure 2 recommendations, generally 1.25-5 kg per week / 1-3% each week depending on training status and exercise. But please remember this is only one form of progressive overload.

Strength Standards

Due to the importance of strength outlined, establishing how much strength is necessary is a topical issue. Recommended minimum relative strength standards for athletes have been established (Kiener et al., 2013; Suchomel et al., 2016) (Figure 3). Figure 3A created by Suchomel et al. (2016) provides clear strength standards for the youth athletes based on the work of Keiner et al. (2013) for front and back squat strength. Kiener et al. (2013) provides a timeline for the presented model, suggesting that with 4–5 years of structured strength training, relative strength levels with the back squat should be at a minimum 2.0 × BM for late adolescents (16–19 years old), 1.5 × BM for adolescents (13–15 years old), and 0.7 × BM for children (11–12 years old) (Figure 3A). Suchomel et al. (2016) highlight that athletes who can at least back squat 2.0 × BM can produce greater external mechanical power, jump higher, sprint faster, and can potentiate earlier and to a greater extent, compared to weaker athletes. This has led to the recommendations to focus on building a foundation strength to improve neuromuscular and athletic performance, particularly if the athlete is in the strength deficit and strength association phases zone illustrated in Figure 3B. Once the athlete has obtained ~ 2 × BM back squat, a greater emphasis should be placed on developing power / impulsive characteristics (Suchomel et al., 2016; Suchomel and Comfort, 2018).

Summary

In this blog, we have highlighted the importance of developing strength for athletes, and a strength training stimulus is paramount and should feature all-year round. We hope that you are now more confident in programming and designing a resistance training  following the 7-step process is a simple method to assist you with this.

Key reading:

Sheppard, J. M., & Triplett, N. T. (2016). Program design for resistance training. Essentials of Strength Training and Conditioning, 4th ed.; Haff, GG, Triplett, NT, Eds, 439-470.

Kraemer, W. J., & Nitka, M. (2021). Variables in Designing a Workout. Strength & Conditioning Journal, 43(3), 127-128.

Suchomel, T. J., & Comfort, P. (2018). Developing muscular strength and power. Advanced Strength and Conditioning-An Evidence-based Approach, 13-38.

Suchomel, T. J., Nimphius, S., & Stone, M. H. (2016). The importance of muscular strength in athletic performance. Sports medicine, 46(10), 1419-1449.

Suchomel, T. J., Nimphius, S., Bellon, C. R., & Stone, M. H. (2018). The importance of muscular strength: training considerations. Sports medicine, 48(4), 765-785.

References:

Al Attar, W. S. A., Soomro, N., Sinclair, P. J., Pappas, E., & Sanders, R. H. (2017). Effect of injury prevention programs that include the Nordic hamstring exercise on hamstring injury rates in soccer players: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Medicine, 47(5), 907-916.

American College of Sports Medicine. (2009). American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults. Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 41(3), 687.

Bazyler, C. D., Abbott, H. A., Bellon, C. R., Taber, C. B., & Stone, M. H. (2015). Strength training for endurance athletes: Theory to practice. Strength & Conditioning Journal, 37(2), 1-12.

Cuthbert, M., Haff, G. G., Arent, S. M., Ripley, N., McMahon, J. J., Evans, M., & Comfort, P. (2021). Effects of variations in resistance training frequency on strength development in well-trained populations and implications for in-season athlete training: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Medicine, 1-16.

Cuthbert, M., Ripley, N., McMahon, J. J., Evans, M., Haff, G. G., & Comfort, P. (2020). The effect of Nordic hamstring exercise intervention volume on eccentric strength and muscle architecture adaptations: a systematic review and meta-analyses. Sports Medicine, 50(1), 83-99.

Epley, B. (1985). Poundage Chart. Boyd Epley Workout. Lincoln, NE: Body Enterprises.

Grgic, J., Schoenfeld, B. J., Davies, T. B., Lazinica, B., Krieger, J. W., & Pedisic, Z. (2018). Effect of resistance training frequency on gains in muscular strength: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Medicine, 48(5), 1207-1220.

Huygaerts, S., Cos, F., Cohen, D. D., Calleja-González, J., Guitart, M., Blazevich, A. J., & Alcaraz, P. E. (2020). Mechanisms of hamstring strain injury: Interactions between fatigue, muscle activation and function. Sports, 8(5), 65.

Iversen, V. M., Norum, M., Schoenfeld, B. J., & Fimland, M. S. (2021). No Time to Lift? Designing Time-Efficient Training Programs for Strength and Hypertrophy: A Narrative Review. Sports Medicine, 1-17.

Keiner, M., Sander, A., Wirth, K., Caruso, O., Immesberger, P., & Zawieja, M. (2013). Strength performance in youth: trainability of adolescents and children in the back and front squats. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 27(2), 357-362.

Peterson, M. D., Rhea, M. R., & Alvar, B. A. (2004). Maximizing strength development in athletes: a meta-analysis to determine the dose-response relationship. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 18(2), 377-382.

Ralston, G. W., Kilgore, L., Wyatt, F. B., & Baker, J. S. (2017). The effect of weekly set volume on strength gain: a meta-analysis. Sports Medicine, 47(12), 2585-2601.

Ralston, G. W., Kilgore, L., Wyatt, F. B., Buchan, D., & Baker, J. S. (2018). Weekly training frequency effects on strength gain: a meta-analysis. Sports medicine-open, 4(1), 1-24.

Schoenfeld, B. (2020). Science and development of muscle hypertrophy. Human Kinetics.

Schoenfeld, B. J., Grgic, J., & Krieger, J. (2019). How many times per week should a muscle be trained to maximize muscle hypertrophy? A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies examining the effects of resistance training frequency. Journal of sports sciences, 37(11), 1286-1295.

Sheppard, J. M., & Triplett, N. T. (2016). Program design for resistance training. Essentials of Strength Training and Conditioning, 4th ed.; Haff, GG, Triplett, NT, Eds, 439-470.

Suchomel, T. J., & Comfort, P. (2018). Developing muscular strength and power. Advanced Strength and Conditioning-An Evidence-based Approach, 13-38.

Suchomel, T. J., Nimphius, S., & Stone, M. H. (2016). The importance of muscular strength in athletic performance. Sports medicine, 46(10), 1419-1449.

Suchomel, T. J., Nimphius, S., Bellon, C. R., & Stone, M. H. (2018). The importance of muscular strength: training considerations. Sports medicine, 48(4), 765-785.

Timmins, R. G., Bourne, M. N., Shield, A. J., Williams, M. D., Lorenzen, C., & Opar, D. A. (2016). Short biceps femoris fascicles and eccentric knee flexor weakness increase the risk of hamstring injury in elite football (soccer): a prospective cohort study. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 50(24), 1524-1535

Weakley, J., Mann, B., Banyard, H., McLaren, S., Scott, T., & Garcia-Ramos, A. (2021). Velocity-based training: From theory to application. Strength & Conditioning Journal, 43(2), 31-49.