Graduation Year

2015

Document Type

Thesis

Degree

M.S.

Degree Name

Master of Science (M.S.)

Department

Education

Degree Granting Department

Education and Psychological Studies

Major Professor

William I. Campbell, Ph.D

Co-Major Professor

Dominic D’Agostino, Ph.D

Committee Member

Dominic D’Agostino, Ph.D

Committee Member

Marcus Kilpatrick, Ph.D

Keywords

Bench Press, Deadlift, DUP, Periodization, Powerlifting, Squat

Abstract

Daily undulating periodization is a growing trend in the exercise science literature. Flexible daily undulating periodization allows for athletes to have some autonomy within a periodized training cycle and is a relatively new and unstudied concept. The comparison of a flexible and traditional daily undulating periodization program using trained males has not been examined in the literature. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of Flexible and Traditional Daily Undulating Periodization models on powerlifting performance in trained males.

25 resistance-trained males (23±6 years; 79±22 kg) completed a 9-week resistance-training program and were randomly assigned to one of two groups: Flexible Daily Undulating Periodization (FDUP; N=14) or Daily Undulating Periodization (DUP; N=11). All subjects possessed a minimum of 6 months of resistance training experience & were required to squat 125% their bodyweight, bench press their bodyweight, and deadlift 150% their bodyweight. Dependent variables (DV) included bench press 1RM, squat 1RM, deadlift 1RM, Powerlifting total, and Wilk's Coefficient. Each DV was assessed at baseline and after the 9-week training program. The DUP group performed a hypertrophy workout on Monday, a power workout on Wednesday, and a strength workout on Friday. The FDUP group completed the exact same workouts in a given week, but were allowed to choose the order of the workouts. Data for each DV were analyzed via a 2x2 between-within factorial repeated measures ANOVA. The alpha criterion for significance was set at 0.05.

There were no significant differences in total volume or intensity between groups. There was a main effect for time (p < 0.001) for 1RM Squat (FDUP pre = 132 ± 34 kg, FDUP Post = 148 ± 33 kg; DUP pre = 147 ± 31 kg, DUP post = 165 ± 25 kg), 1RM Bench Press (FDUP pre = 96 ± 20 kg, FDUP post = 102 ± 19 kg; DUP pre = 147 ± 31 kg, DUP post = 165 ± 25 kg), 1RM Deadlift (FDUP pre = 166 ± 41 kg, FDUP post: 181 ± 37 kg; DUP pre = 174 ± 25 kg, DUP post = 188 ± 29 kg), Powerlifting Total (FDUP pre = 394 ± 90 kg, FDUP post = 431 ± 84; DUP pre = 439 ± 71 kg, DUP post = 480 ± 69 kg), and Wilk's Coefficient (FDUP pre = 147 ± 25 kg, FDUP post = 304 ± 51; DUP pre = 299 ± 41, DUP post = 325 ± 38). There were no interaction effects between the FDUP and DUP for any of the variables assessed.

9 weeks of Flexible DUP leads to comparable gains in powerlifting performance when compared to a Traditional DUP program in trained males. This may be attributed to the fact that both groups performed similar volumes of work throughout the study. Specifically, FDUP improved squat 1RM by 12%, bench press 1RM by 7%, deadlift 1RM by 9%, powerlifting total by 9%, & Wilk's coefficient by 9%. Similarly, DUP improved squat 1RM by 12%, bench press 1RM by 8%, deadlift 1RM by 8%, powerlifting total by 9%, & Wilk's coefficient by 9%.

Share

COinS