- The traditional group used a ‘moderate tempo as recommended by Bompa’. So the Heavy Duty group indeed trained with a slower tempo.
- The key differences between the 2 groups were that the Heavy Duty group used a slower tempo, lower training intensity and much shorter inter-set rest interval, supposedly reaching a similar number of reps per set.
- No data on training volume was collected. Given the above, it logically follows that total work done by the Heavy Duty group must have been far lower.
- The authors are firm in their conclusion that short rest periods benefit muscle growth, as they write: “Recently I and my collegians were studied the effects of various rest time between the sets on muscle hypertrophy and its related hormones (not published). We concluded that the 30 second rest time is better than 120 second for muscle hypertrophy and anabolic hormones secretion. Thus it seems that the rest time and the tempo rate are very important factors.”
As Brad Schoenfeld’s and my papers have concluded essentially the opposite, consider me skeptical of this conclusion. I was literally writing a letter to the editor with my concerns about this paper as I received their reply. It turns out the corresponding author is the director of the journal he published his own paper in. This raises obvious questions about the standard of peer-review the publication was subjected to. I look forward to reading their upcoming publication, but I hope it is published in a different journal with proper peer-review and better reporting standards. As it stands, I do not give any credence to this paper.
Study reference: Effects of Heavy Duty versus traditional resistance training on thigh muscle cross-sectional area
Article 2, Volume 2, Issue 2 – Serial Number 6, Spring 2018, Page 13-28
Javad Mokaram Bakhtajerdi; Mehrzad Moghadasi