Strength gains: Block vs. DUP weight-training among track and field athletes
International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance
Recently, the comparison of "periodized" strength training methods has been a focus of both exercise and sport science. Daily undulating periodization (DUP), using daily alterations in repetitions, has been developed and touted as a superior method of training, while Block forms of programming for periodization (Bl) have been questioned. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to compare Bl to DUP in Division I track and field athletes. Thirty-one athletes were assigned to either a 10 week Bl or DUP training group in which sex, year, and event were matched. Over the course of the study there were 4 testing sessions which were used to evaluate a variety of strength characteristics. Although, performance trends favored Bl group for strength and rate of force development, no statistically significant differences were found between the two training groups. However, statistically different (p≤ 0.05) values were found for estimated volume of work (volume load) and the amount of improvement per volume load between Bl and DUP groups. Based upon calculated training efficiency scores, these data indicate that a Bl training model is more efficient in producing strength gains than a DUP model.
HSG note: I would check out the full version of this to see:
The high drop out due to injury in the DUP group (significant in itself?).
That statistical significance was not reached primarily due to small sample size (an inherent problem with studies actually using athletes).
Possible confusion of terms / what periodization actually is in recent literature.