Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Strength Cond Res. 2018 Aug 21. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002785. [Epub ahead of print]

Effect of 2- vs. 3-Minute Interrepetition Rest Period on Maximal Clean Technique and Performance.

Author information

1
Research Unit (EM2S), High Institute of Sport and Physical Education, Sfax University, Sfax, Tunisia.
2
Institute of Sport Science, Otto-von-Guericke-University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.
3
Biodynamics and Human Performance Center, Georgia Southern University, Savannah, Georgia.
4
Research Center on Sport and Movement (EA 2931), UFR STAPS, University of Paris Nanterre, Nanterre, France.

Abstract

Ammar, A, Riemann, BL, Abdelkarim, O, Driss, T, and Hökelmann, A. Effect of 2- vs. 3-minute interrepetition rest period on maximal clean technique and performance. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2018-Currently, it is widely accepted that adopting a long rest period (3-5 minutes) during maximal strength and power exercise is of importance in reducing acute fatigue and maintaining power and technique proficiency. However, despite the fact that weightlifting is an example of maximal strength exercise, only 2 minutes are officially allowed when athletes attempt 2 successive lifts. The purpose of this study was to compare 3- vs. 2-minute intermaximal repetition rest periods (IMRRPs) on performance, rate of perceived exertion (RPE), technical efficiency, and power production during 2 successive maximal repetitions of clean & jerk (C&J). Nine elite weightlifters (age: 24.4 ± 3.6 years, body mass: 77.2 ± 7.1 kg, height 176.0 ± 6.4 cm, and 1 repetition maximum C&J: 170.0 ± 5.0 kg) performed 2 separate testing sessions using 2-minute IMRRP (IMRRP-2) and 3-minute IMRRP (IMRRP-3), in a randomized order, while barbell kinematics and kinetics were recorded. Results showed that the longer IMRRP-3 minutes led to the maintenance of clean technique (from the first to the second repetition) evidenced by a 1.86% lower decline in peak vertical displacement (p = 0.03) and attenuation of increased peak horizontal displacements with a 1.74% (p = 0.03) less backward movement during the first pull, a 3.89% (p = 0.008) less forward movement during the second pull, and a 4.7% (p = 0.005) less backward movement during the catch phase. In addition, attenuation of peak velocity (2.22%; p = 0.02), peak vertical ground reaction force (1.70%; p = 0.03), and peak power (2.14%; p = 0.02) declines were shown using IMRRP-3 compared with IMRRP-2. Increasing IMRRP from 2 to 3 minutes was also shown to decrease RPE values (8.02%; p = 0.008) and to enhance supramaximal C&J performance (1.55%; p = 0.003). The results of this study suggest 3 minutes to be the most advantageous IMRRP in terms of maintaining technical efficiency, power output, reducing fatigue perception, and enhancing performance in elite weightlifters.

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wolters Kluwer
Loading ...
Support Center