Will Partial Reps Give You Those Horseshoes Everyone Else But You Seems to Develop? 20% Increased Gains in 8 Wks

Partial reps for maximal increases in horseshoe (=triceps) size?

Believe it or not: A recent Japanese study suggests that "doing everything right" may be holding you back: doing triceps extensions over the full range of motion seems to be inferior to throwing around the weights over a partial range of motion - the effects may be mediated by temporary hypoxia, but before we delve into an analysis of the mechanisms and the practical relevance of the results, let's first take a look at what exactly Masahiro Goto and his colleagues did with their 44 resistance-trained male subjects (members of a resistance weight training club) before they arrived at the conclusion "that intramuscular hypoxia might facilitate muscular hypertrophy with PRE [partial reps] being more effective than FRE [full reps]" (Goto 2017).

Read about the latest nutrition, exercise & supplementation science on the SuppVersity

Alcohol, Microbes & International Chest Day

Cannabis, Cushioned Shoes & More

Blood-Flow-Restriction ↑, Muscle Damage ↓

HbA1c, Bone Health, BFR & More | Jan'17

TeaCrine®, ALA, Tribulus, Cordy-ceps, Sesamin...

The Latest Fiber & Microbiome Research

Goto et al. used a randomized, counterbalanced two-group (PRE and FRE) pre- and post-test design to investigate the effects on muscle strength and cross-sectional area (CSA). The subjects, all of whom had at least one year of resistance training experience, were divided into two groups, the...

• PRE group (n = 22), in which the subjects performed the exercise over the limited elbow range from 45° to 90, and the ...
• FRE group (n = 22), in which the subjects performed the exercise over the full elbow range from 0° to 120°, ...

... each performed only one (identical) exercise at their pre-determined 8-RM for 3 sets, with a minute interval between sets - the classic lying elbow extension (using a bench and a barbell | check it out) with different elbow joint range of motion. Intensity was increased by 2.5 kg on the first day of every week and adjusted to the maximum weight which can be performed 8 times per set (see Table 1).

Table 1: Changes in exercise intensity of 8RM during the 8-week exercise training (Goto 2017).

To compare the acute metabolic and mechanical responses to the PRE with FRE, area under the oxygenated hemoglobin (Oxy-Hb) curve, blood lactate concentration, and RMS of EMG were evaluated during and after PRE or FRE.  After assessing the acute effects, PRE or FRE were performed by each group three times a week for 8 weeks.

Figure 1: Oxygenation (left) and EMG activity (right); Means ± SD (n = 22 for both group) are shown. p < 0.05, significant differences between PRE and FRE values (*) and between before and after 8-week exercise training values (✣ | Goto '17)

All that to compare the long-term effects of PRE with FRE, CSA and muscular strength were evaluated - long-term effects of which you already know that the scientists ascribed them to one of the few statistically significant inter-group difference (lactate levels, not shown in Figure 1, were also slightly higher in the PRE vs. FRE group): the difference in muscle oxygenation (see Figure 1). What you've learned, yet, is that you the results include a highly significant difference in the increase in cross-sectional area of the triceps brachii (CSA) of the 44 young, male study subjects.

Figure 2: When it comes to the actual increase in triceps brachii "size", i.e. the cross-sectional area of the horseshoe-muscle, the authors observed a highly significant difference in favor of the partial rep group (Goto 2017).

With a >20% difference between the 48.7 ± 14.5% the subjects in the PRE group gained and the comparatively small 28.2 ± 10.9% in the FRE group, this difference wasn't just statistically significant, it was - at least that's what I guess - also significantly more pronounced than most of you probably expected the partial rep advantage to be (if you even believed that it may exist).

Full Squat for Full Size Gains, Partial Squat for Full Strength - For lower body, weight-bearing muscle different rules apply | learn more!

Do not falsely assume that the study at hand would prove a general superiority of partial over full reps As the authors point out, we have to assume "that weight-bearing and non-weight-bearing muscles react differently to a particular exercise" (Goto 2016), which may limit the significance of the results of the study at hand to upper extremity muscles. And in fact, as a SuppVersity reader you will remember that squats, i.e. an exercise for the legs and thus a weight bearing muscle group produce the greatest gains in size, when they're done over the full range of motion - and that despite the fact that partials produce identical, if not more pronounced strength gains.

This result does, as Goto et al. point out in the practical implications section of their paper, indicate that using an 8RM load and doing only the middle range of motion during triceps extensions will yield significantly greater size gains (in terms of muscle cross-sectional are) than doing the same exercise over the full range of motion.

Figure 3: The scientists found a significant correlation between the hypoxic effects of the training and the increase in muscle CSA only in the partial rep (PRE), yet not the full rep (FRE) group (Goto 2017)

What will probably intrigue you most, though, is that this form of training could turn out to be particularly useful for those of you who have been training for years, now, because it appears to restore the hypoxic muscle stimulation that's reduced over years of training and increased in response to the (a) higher muscular tension and (b) constant muscle contraction doing triceps extensions only over the partial rep range provides by leading to mechanical capillary compression and thus, consequently, a sign. restriction of blood flow to muscles. With the latter inducing a temporary state of intramuscular hypoxia that appears to blunted in trained athletes (Okamoto 2009), the PRE-advantage observed in the study at hand could/should remind you of the previously discussed advantages of blood flow restriction (BFR).

Bigger Triceps in 8 Weeks of Reduced Oxygen Training  | learn more

So, partial reps it is, right? For the triceps, the answer to this question does indeed seem to be "YES!" Or rather: "Yes, if we're talking about training the non-weight-bearing triceps muscle and, possibly, other upper body muscles." In that, the increased hypoxic stress and the correspondingly increased growth stimulus makes partial reps particularly interesting for trained individuals, for whom it becomes increasingly difficult to provide their body with adequate, novel growth-stimuli without risking to out-train their recovery capacity (overtraining) in their effort to make consistent, measurable and visible gains in both, muscle strength and size.

In view of the fact that using partial reps and thus reversing/compensating the previously alluded to training-induced decrease in exercise-induced temporal muscle hypoxia in was a novel stimulus for the trained participants of the study at hand, future RCTs will have to investigate whether the benefits are a mere result of a slowly but progressively waning novelty effect and will thus be lost after a couple of months of training with partial reps. In addition, it would be nice to investigate the exact difference in volume and total load lifted and its effects on your gains (this was not done in the study at hand). After all, it is quite obvious that the partial rep group will have been able to use higher loads - with a lower range of motion they may eventually have achieved the same volume, but still trained with significantly higher and thus more anabolic loads | Comment on Facebook!

References:

• Goto, Masahiro, et al. "Partial range of motion exercise is effective for facilitating muscle hypertrophy and function via sustained intramuscular hypoxia in young trained men." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research (2017).
• Okamoto, Takanobu, Mitsuhiko Masuhara, and Komei Ikuta. "Upper but not lower limb resistance training increases arterial stiffness in humans." European journal of applied physiology 107.2 (2009): 127-134.

Bench Press Study: The Higher the Weight, the Less of it Will be Lifted by Your Pecs - What are the Implications?

Lighter weight = relatively larger contribution of the pecs ≠ greater gains

In their latest paper in the Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, Henryk Król, and Artur Golas (2017) write about an experiment they designed to identify the "prime movers" during the bench press - an interesting and methodologically complex experiment that can tell us one or two things about the effects of increasing the weight you bench gradually from the standard 12-rep (70%-1RM) to the maximal 1-rep (100%-1RM) load and how it affects the activity of your chest (pectoralis major), front delts (anterior deltoids), triceps (triceps brachii) and even your lats (latissimus dorsi) during different phases of the movement.

Learn all about training your chest/pectoralis muscle at the SuppVersity

Best Pec Exer-cises by EMG

Fast or Slow, Ec- or Concentric?

Alternative Pec Ex. Equip.

Truth About the Bench Angle

What are Optimal Angles & Grips

DB, BB or Machine for BPs

By combining IEMG and camera techniques in a multimodular measuring system SMART, the scientists were also able to record the muscle activity and track the exact path of the barbell in the twenty healthy, male recreational weight trainers with at least 1 year of lifting experience (the mean +/- SD = 3.3 +/- 1.6 years) who were recruited for their study.

Figure 1: As you can see in the relative difference between pectoralis and anterior deltoid activity (negative value = anterior deltoids do the main work) the magic happens during the early phase of the

In the measuring session, the participants performed consecutive sets of a single repetition of bench pressing with an increasing load (about 70, 80, 90, and 100% of their 1 repetition maximum - 1RM).

Relative increase in load (%) = increase of EMG activity of pecs, delts, triceps and lats compared to lifting only the 12-RM (70% of 1RM).

Previous studies showed: More weight = more activity -- While this is right, these previous studies did not do the same complex measurement of how the load spreads across the pectoralis, deltoid and triceps muscle. If you look at the absolute values, this is still the case... I've plotted that for you in the figure to the left. If you scrutinize the data you will see that the relative change in load with an increase in weight on the pectoralis during when you go from 70% of the 1RM to 80% is 13% during the descending phase and 1% during the ascending phase. For the triceps, however, it's 29% and 22% - that's a difference of 16% and 21%, respectively; and if you ramp the weight up from 70% to 100% of the 1RM the difference increases to 62% and 82%.

In other words: If you go from your 12RM (that's ~70% of your 1RM) the relative load on the pecs on the descending and ascending phase of the bench press increases 62% and 82% less, respectively, than the load on your triceps.

As you can see in Figure 1, the relative contribution of pectoralis and deltoid muscle at the beginning of the movement reverses with increasing weights. Let's look at an example: At a weight equal to your 12RM (70% of the 1RM max), the pectoralis is still doing most of the work (3-6% more than the delts), with increasing weights, however, the anterior deltoid will take over. Eventually, at 100% of the 1RM, its normalized EMG activity will be 14-26% higher than those of the pectoralis.

Figure 2: Phase structure of the movement. Internal structure (averaged and normalized IEMG of shoulder muscle activity) of the descent phase (left string of figures) and ascent phase (right string of figures) during the flat bench press when attempting loads at 70% of the 1RM (top) and 100% of the 1RM (bottom | Król. 2017).

As you can conclude based on the absolute activity levels in Figure 2, the anterior deltoid muscles are yet not the only muscle group to help the pectoralis as the light increases. Especially during the middle segment of the ascending phase (25-75%) of the movement, it is the triceps that fills the gap between what your chest muscle can actually press and the weight you've loaded onto the bar.

"EMG Study Can Tell Us Something About Using Dumbbells, Barbells and Machines During Chest & Triceps Workouts"- The dumbbell bench press is a pec-stretcher. Doesn't it already look like maximal pectoralis major activity? I've discussed this and related questions in an October 2016 article about a study from Brazil.

So, does that mean that you should always bench with light weight? It's not that simple, no. It's true that the main message of Król's study is that the load on the pectoralis increases much less with increasing weights. So much less, in fact, that during the ascending phase (Figure 2, right, bottom) the activity of all three supporting muscles, i.e. delts, triceps, and lats, will be higher than that of the pectoralis muscle. On the other hand, though, the absolute EMG activity the scientists measured for the pectoralis major, the large chest muscle, will still increase (see Figure in the light box) - linearly up to 90% of the 1RM, a weight with which you should be able to perform ~3-4 reps and thus the lowest number of reps of which it appears to make sense to use them as the rep-goal in your regular workouts (Yes, you can train by doing only 1-RM max efforts, but does that make sense for the average gymrat?).

To cut my long elaborations short: If you are aware of the caveat that increasing the weight will reduce the ability of the bench press to isolate the chest muscle, you are free to increase the weight to 90% of the 1RM and train with 3-4 reps and will still see a higher muscle activity in the pecs than you'd do with 70% and 12 reps. Whether that's conducive to your goals, however, is a totally different question, one that you are most likely to answer affirmatively if your goal is to build strength and/or to doing full body workouts with only a limited number exercises | Comment!

References:

• Król, Henryk, and Artur Golas. "Effect Of Barbell Weight On The Structure Of The Flat Bench Press." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research (2017).

EMG Study Can Tell Us Something About Using Dumbbells, Barbells and Machines During Chest & Triceps Workouts

The dumbbell bench press is a pec stretcher. Doesn't it already look like maximal pectoralis major activity?

No, a high EMG activity will not necessarily translate into improved long-term muscle or strength gains, but it can tell you a lot about the biomechanics of different exercises and/or, as in the latest study by de Araújo Farias et al. (2016), exercise equipment and order.

The true purpose of this study by scientists from Brazil and the US was to investigate muscle activation, total repetitions, and training volume for three bench press exercise modes, the smith machine (SMBP), barbell (BBP), and dumbbell (DBP) - all followed by a triceps extension (TE).

Want to try something very different? Try BFR and Hypoxia Training

BFR, Cortisol & GH Responses

BFR - Where are we now?

Hypoxia + HIIT = Win?

BFR for Injured Athletes

Strength ⇧ | Size ⇩ w/ BFR

Training & Living in Hypoxia

With nineteen trained men as subjects, the scientists had each study participant perform three testing protocols with 4 sets of bench presses (10RM) with dumbbells, barbells or smith machine being the primary exercises that were then followed up with triceps extensions and two minutes of rest.

Figure 1: EMG activity in pectoralis (left) and the anterior deltoids (right | de Araújo Farias. 2016).

Surface electromyographic (SEMG) activity was assessed for the pectoralis major (PM), anterior deltoid (AD), biceps brachii (BB), and triceps brachii (TB).

Figure 2: Bench press repetition performance and volume for each mode (de Araújo Farias. 2016).

The results of the scientists' EMG and total volume analyses indicat that (a) dumbbells elicit a significantly greater pectoralis major activity than barbells, that (b) the anterior deltoid (shoulder) activity peaks on the smith machine, and that (c) the triceps does the least while the biceps the most work when the bench press is done with dumbbells instead of smith machine or barbell.

Chest	Biceps	Back	Core	Legs	Triceps	Shoulders
Navigate the SuppVersity EMG Series - Click on the desired body part to see the optimal exercises.

Figure 3: Mean and standard deviation values for IEMG (a) bench press (pectoralis major activation) and (b) bench press (triceps brachii activation) with and without pre-exhaustion in Suares. 2016).

Why exactly, the triceps activity during the triceps extensions was still reduced after the dumbbell bench press is not clear, but one may argue that the higher EMG activity after barbell bench presses may be the consequence of pre-exhaustion, which has been shown to augment muscle activity in previous studies, already (Brennecke. 2009; Soares. 2016 - see Figure 2); this, obviously, implies that the muscle activity in the barbell trial was increased, which is different from the initially questioned assumption that using dumbbells despite (or rather due to) their low strain on the triceps yielded inferior results.

As previously pointed out, though, there is no way of using these results for reliable prediction about the long-term adaptational response to training with dumbbell, barbell and smith machine. If we go by the prognostic power of training volume, it should be the dumbbell with a total volume of 31.2 ± 3.2 reps (versus the BBP 27.8 ± 4.8) that builds the most muscle. In that, I will leave it up to you to decide whether it's a coincidence that the dumbbell bench press also produced the greatest EMG activity ... ;-)

What I can and still want to tell you, though is that using dumbbells had the added benefit of showing the least interference with the subsequent triceps extensions (total volume: BBP = 1204.4 ± 249.4 kg; DBP = 1216.8 ± 287.5kg SMBP = 1097.5 ± 193 kg) - an observation that appears logical, and still raises the question: what's more conducive for your gains? The pre-exhaustion of the triceps you get from barbell bench presses and the resulting increase in EMG activity, or the rest your triceps will get during dumbbell bench presses and the subsequently increased training volume during triceps extensions. Well, I can't tell, but based on previous studies, it would appear as if the increased activity and decreased volume would balance each other out and explain why previous research found conflicting results (Prestes. 2015).

The jury on "pre-exhaustion" is still out there. But there is evidence of its usefulness I've discussed in previous articles on suppversity.com | example

So what do I do? You remember the benefits of daily changing loads I discussed in June 2016? Well, what if you kept your body guessing on the type of equipment you use, as well? I would not necessarily recommend switching back and forth between barbells, dumbbells, and the smith machine within a single workout and/or from one workout to the next.

What may make sense, on the other hand, is using dumbbells for two, barbells for two weeks, each, and the (boring ;-) smith machine for another week in a 5-week cycle and thus making sure that you grasp the individual benefits of each of them and the added benefit of motivation and keeping the muscle guessing.

On a side note: The study confirms what many of you probably "felt" anyways. The "best" as in "most pectoralis specific way" of bench pressing is clearly the dumbbell, which - much in contrast to the barbell and smith machine - do not allow the pecs to rest while triceps and front delts take over and lift a sign. percentage of the weight | Comment on Facebook!

References:

• Brennecke, Allan, et al. "Neuromuscular activity during bench press exercise performed with and without the pre exhaustion method." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 23.7 (2009): 1933-1940.
• de Araújo Farias, D., et al. "Maximal strength performance and muscle activation for the bench press and triceps extension exercises adopting dumbbell, barbell and machine modalities over multiple sets." Journal of strength and conditioning research (2016).
• Prestes, Jonato, et al. "Discussion of “The effects of pre-exhaustion, exercise order, and rest intervals in a full-body resistance training intervention”− Pre-exhaustion exercise and neuromuscular adaptations: an inefficient method?." Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism 40.8 (2015): 850-851.
• Soares, Enrico Gori, et al. "Comparison between Pre-Exhaustion and Traditional Exercise Order on Muscle Activation and Performance in Trained Men." Journal of sports science & medicine 15.1 (2016): 111.

Cables or Machines: Muscle Activity, Angle & ROM of Arms, Abs, Chest & Shoulders on Chest & Overhead P. & Curls

This is the cable curl as it was performed in the study at hand (Signorile. 2016)

As Joseph F. Signorile et al. point out in their latest paper, "cable resistance training machines are showing resurgent popularity and allow greater number of degrees of freedom than typical selectorized equipment" (Signorile. 2016). Ok, the "freedom" maybe not as absolute as it is with our beloved free weights, but cables come sign. closer than the average rigid Cybex machine. It is thus only logical that the scientists assume that "given that specific kinetic chains are used during distinct activities of daily living (ADL), cable machines may provide more effective interventions for some ADL" and eventually certain athletic endeavors (Signorile. 2016).

To identify these activities and corresponding exercise equipment, the scientists from the University of Miami came up with a study that examined differences in activity levels (rmsEMG) of six major muscles (Pectoralis major, PM; Anterior deltoid, AD; Biceps brachii, BB; Rectus abdominis, RA; External obliques, EO; and Triceps brachii; TB) and kinematics of multiple joints between a cable and standard selectorized machines (sounds special, but means the average rigid, plate-loaded resistance training equipment you will find in every gym). The exercises that were performed were the biceps curl, the chest press and the overhead press, all performed at 1.5s per contractile stage.

Free weights will always remain the most versatile muscle builder & fat shredder

Optimizing Rest for Size and Strength Gains

When Rodents Squat, We Can Learn A Lot!

Farmer's Walk or Squat? Is Strong- men T. For You?

Full ROM ➯ Full Gains - Form Counts!

Cut the Weight, Add the Vibe - Vibration Plates

Up Your Squat by 25% With Sodium Bicarbonate

For their study, the scientists recruited healthy, but only recreationally active 15 participants (9 men, 6 women; mean age ±SD, 24.33 ± 4.88 y) on a voluntary basis through personal contacts from an opportunity sample students in a university research program. The 15 subjects were then randomly assigned to do 5 reps of the previously listed exercises at their pre-determined 8-RM (less reps than maxto maintain optimal form) on either ...

• cable-based towers (Cybex Bravo Pro, multi-functional tower) or 
• rigid, plate-loaded machines (selectorized) from Cybex International.

To ensure optimal comparability, subjects in both groups did the same exercises, i.e. the bicep curl, chest press, and overhead press ... albeit with different motion sequences due to the restraints of the machines. 

Figure 1: Relative EMG acitivity (expressed as increase / decrease with using plates vs. cable-loaded machines) for  pectoralis major (PM), the anterior deltoid (AD), the biceps brachii (BB), the rectus abdominis (RA), the external obliques (EO) and the triceps brachii (TB) during chest press, overhead press and biceps exercises (Signorile. 2016).

The EMG values the scientists measured with electrodes that were attached to the pectoralis major (PM), the anterior deltoid (AD), the biceps brachii (BB), the rectus abdominis (RA), the external obliques (EO) and the triceps brachii (TB) speak for themselves:

• significant benefits favoring cable training were seen for all values beneath the x-axes of Figure 1 that are marked with the p < 0.05 asterisk (*), namely the pecs and the anterior deltaoid (=front delts) for curl exercises, the biceps, rectus abdominis (abs) and the external obliques for the chest press exercises with cables and the external obliques for the overhead press with cables
• significant benefits favoring plate-loaded machines, on the other hand, were observed only for the biceps on the curl machine (vs. cable curls) and the triceps that did half of the job during the chest press on the corresponding machine machine 

If we go by the number of significant benefits, cables do thus appear to be the better choice in many, but not all cases.

SuppVersity Suggested Read for those of you who are interested in learning more: "Angle, Grip Width, Free Weight or Ma-chine, Failure & More - What Really Works for Building A Bigger Bench & Pecs" - Click here to read this article from Monday, February 9, 2015, now!

Wait!? Aren't free weights always better? The number of studies conducting respective comparisons is limited. A study by Silvester and Bryce, however, may be seen as exemplary of the existing evidence and it shows quite conclusively that "exercises performed with variable resis-tance machines and free-weights [are] equally effective at developing strength" (Silvester. 1981)". Eventually, I would yet suggest to follow an advise you can find in a 2002 paper by Stone et al. who say that "the majority of resistance exercises making up a training programme should include free weight exercises with emphasis on mechanical specificity (i.e. large muscle mass exercises, appropriate velocity, contraction type etc.)[, while] machines should be used as [a sports- and goal-specific] adjunct to free weight training" (Stone. 2002).

Based on the results of study at hand, this recommendation could be extended with another half-sentence that reads: '... in that, cable machines are the legitimate link between the totally free regular weights and the very guided movements on regular, plate-loaded machines which should both be part of your (generally free-weight based) training regimen.'

Not all cases? Yes, if we go by the ranges of motion the scientists measured for all of the exercises as well, the ...

• greater starting and ending angles were seen for the elbow and shoulder joints during selectorized biceps curl speak in favor enforcing a certain motion sequence and range of motion by the means of of the plate-loaded machines, while ...
• the higher hip and knee starting and ending angles for cable machines during chest and overhead presses (p<.0001), as well as the overall greater range of motion (ROM) the subjects covered with the cable machines (p<.0001), on the other hand would argue in favor of increasing the degrees of freedom with cable machines.

With the study at hand being an acute EMS study, the bad news, however, is the fact that the ultimate litmus test, i.e. the effect on lean mass and strength gains differences that occur with chronic cable vs. machine training (and additional free weights), will have to be determined in another study. Thus, the probably most significant and eventually only relevant conclusion of the study at hand reads: 

"The major finding of this study was that the activities of selected muscles during comparative exercises varied by machine use as did beginning and ending angles and ROM for specific joints. In examining muscle activity levels, it should be noted that the differences recorded between machines were seen primarily in accessory, rather than the muscles commonly targeted during each exercise" (Signorile. 2016).

On the other hand, it is questionable whether it even makes sense to ask a classic gym-question like 'what is better cables or plate-based machines' even makes sense without specifying the purpose. I believe the answer is 'no!' and thus follow-up studies with sports-specific outcomes will have to show which athletes benefit most from using cables instead of rigid machines and, eventually, how they compare to the good old free weights, we all love so much. 

Full ROM = More Growth, More Strength, More Structural Changes & More Sustainable Gains & Fat Loss - Insights from Realistic 8 Weeks Leg Training + 4 Weeks Detraining | more

Bottom line: Unfortunately, the focus of the study at hand was not on 'gains'. Accordingly, the scientists own conclusion discusses the possible transfer of training into activities of daily living (ADL) and here, "the higher activation levels of the core muscles during the chest press and overhead press exercises during cable versus selectorized machine use indicate that cable machines may be more effective when targeting sport and ADL activities that depend heavily on serape-dominated movements (transitions employing rotational movements that transfer force from the lower to upper body through the core)" (Signorile. 2016). In other words: Cables may help you sweep or transfer an object from one counter to another, or with groundstrokes in tennis or driving a golf ball. In contrast, more linear movements like the biceps curl or training of the front delts appear to benefit from limiting the degree of freedom and thus isolating the body segments on plate-loaded machines | Comment on Facebook!

References:

• Signorile, Joseph F., et al. "Differences In Muscle Activation And Kinematics Between Cable-Based And Selectorized Weight Training." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research (2016).
• Silvester, L. Jay, and G. Rex Bryce. "The Effect of Variable Resistance and Free-Weight Training Programs on Strength and Vertical Jump." Strength & Conditioning Journal 3.6 (1981): 30-33.
• Stone, M., S. Plisk, and D. Collins. "Training principles: evaluation of modes and methods of resistance training--a coaching perspective." Sports biomechanics/International Society of Biomechanics in Sports 1.1 (2002): 79-103.