•  
  •  
 

Authors

Diego Pessoa, 1.Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, School of Physical Education and Sports, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; 2.Lato Sensu Postgraduate Program in Strength Training, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, BrazilFollow
Henrique Penfold, 1.Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, School of Physical Education and Sports, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; 2.Lato Sensu Postgraduate Program in Strength Training, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, BrazilFollow
Sincler Pegado, 1.Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, School of Physical Education and Sports, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; 2.Lato Sensu Postgraduate Program in Strength Training, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, BrazilFollow
Michel Gonçalves, 1.Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, School of Physical Education and Sports, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; 2.Lato Sensu Postgraduate Program in Strength Training, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; 3.LADTEF - Performance, Training, and Physical Exercise Laboratory, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; 4.CCFEx – Brazilian Army Physical Training Center, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, BrazilFollow
Juliana Brandão Pinto de Castro, 5.Sport and Exercise Laboratory, State University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil; 6.Lato Sensu Postgraduate Program in Sport and Exercise Science, Physical Education and Sport Institute, State University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, BrazilFollow
Jeffrey Willardson, 7.Health and Human Performance Department, Montana State University Billings, Billings, MT, USAFollow
Humberto Miranda, 1.Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, School of Physical Education and Sports, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; 2.Lato Sensu Postgraduate Program in Strength Training, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; 3.LADTEF - Performance, Training, and Physical Exercise Laboratory, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, BrazilFollow

Abstract

International Journal of Exercise Science 16(4): 665-675, 2023. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of static stretching (SS) of agonists and antagonists between sets on the total training volume (TTV) performed across multiple sets for the leg extension exercise. Twelve male subjects with experience in resistance training (RT) participated in this study. Subjects performed 10 repetition maximum (10RM) test and retest trials for the leg extension exercise. Four different protocols were randomly applied as follows: quadriceps stretching (AG); hamstrings stretching (AN); quadriceps and hamstrings stretching (AGN); and traditional control without stretching (TR). Significant differences (p≤0.05) were observed in the TTV between the AG (4855.42 ± 1279.38 kg) and AN (6002.08 ± 1805.18 kg), AGN (5977.50 ± 1778.49 kg), and TR (6206.04 ± 1796.15 kg) protocols. These results suggest that when practicing inter-set SS, it should be done for antagonist rather than agonist muscles when the intent is to maximize TTV.

Figure_1.tif (104 kB)
Study design

Figure_2.tif (74 kB)
Total training volume (TTV) in each protocol

2 - Title Page_II.docx (13 kB)
Title Page

4 - Article IJES_IV.docx (257 kB)

Share

COinS