Introduction
Strength and conditioning in team sports has evolved significantly over the years, with coaches and athletes constantly seeking ways to optimize performance and gain a competitive edge. To achieve these goals, training programs must be designed with a clear understanding of the specific demands of the sport and the principles that govern effective athletic development. In this context, the concept of dynamic correspondence has emerged as a pivotal framework for structuring resistance training programs that directly translate to improved on-field performance.
Dynamic correspondence, as proposed by Goodwin en Cleather (2016), encompasses a set of criteria that guide the selection and execution of resistance exercises to maximize their effectiveness in promoting sport-specific adaptations. These criteria include amplitude and direction of movement, accentuated regions of force production, dynamics of effort, rate and time of maximum force production, regime of muscular work, and segmental interrelation. By aligning resistance training with these criteria, coaches can enhance an athlete's ability to apply force, withstand varying magnitudes of force, and generate force within specific time intervals—all of which are fundamental attributes in team sports (Goodwin & Cleather, 2016).
This comprehensive review aims to provide a thorough examination of the dynamic correspondence framework and its application in team sports. By analyzing the existing literature and incorporating key references, we will explore the critical components of dynamic correspondence and how they can be integrated into strength and conditioning programs for team sport athletes. Additionally, we will consider the direct and indirect transfer effects of training strategies, the balance between specificity and fundamental training principles, and the overall impact on athletic performance.
By delving into these concepts, this review seeks to offer coaches, researchers, and practitioners a valuable resource for optimizing strength and conditioning protocols in team sports. Understanding the principles of dynamic correspondence and their practical implementation can lead to more effective training programs that directly translate to improved performance on the field.
Specificity
Specificity concerns the degree of bioenergetics and biomechanical similarity between training modes and methods, and performance. Indeed, there is little doubt that, as a result of genetics and training for long periods in different manners, adaptations and capabilities impacting strength and endurance related parameters are markedly different (Bompa & Haff, 2009; Enoka & Duchateau, 2016; Fleck & Kraemer, 2014). Substantial differences can occur even among strength-power athletes using resistance training in different manners (Hoffman et al., 2004; Kraemer & Ratamess, 2004; Stone et al., 2000). Thus, it appears that specificity is a primary factor, dictating the types of physiological and biomechanical adaptations resulting from defined stimuli (Baechle & Earle, 2008; Haff & Triplett, 2016) as well as specific performance outcomes (Hawley & Burke, 2010). However, overload, represented by training impulses and the development of “capacities,” seems to be at odds with the concept of specificity (Bompa & Haff, 2009).
Conceptually, specificity primarily depends upon the existence of two conceptual paradigms, the Strength-Endurance (S-E) continuum and the idea of Dynamic Correspondence (DC).
Strength–Endurance continuum (Figure 1). From a weight-training standpoint, traditionally, this concept indicates that a few heavier loaded repetitions are advantageous for strength development and, higher repetitions of lighter loads are advantageous for developing HIEE (Baechle & Earle, 2008; Fleck & Kraemer, 2014; Zatsiorsky & Kraemer, 2006).
The S-E continuum can be assessed in absolute or relative terms. Essentially, as maximum strength increases, then more repetitions and total work can be completed at an absolute load (Baechle & Earle, 2008; Enoka & Duchateau, 2016). This occurs largely because a given (absolute) load represents a smaller percentage of the new maximum strength level (Fleck & Kraemer, 2014). However, when examined on a relative basis in which high-intensity endurance is usually measured by repetitions accomplished at the same relative intensity (% 1RM), little change occurs in the number of repetitions performed at the increased absolute load (Fleck & Kraemer, 2014). Thus, it becomes discernible that maximum strength as measured by 1RM plays an important role in altering HIEE. This is apparent, for both absolute and relative tests, in that gains in maximum strength can allow more absolute work to be accomplished. However, it should also be noted that training with low repetitions and heavier weights generally produces superior gains in maximum strength (1RM), so athletes training in this manner may be at a disadvantage when HIEE is assessed using a relative (% 1RM) method as a result of using a substantially heavier absolute load (Fleck & Kraemer, 2014).
The degree to which resistance training-induced gains in isometric maximum strength are related to alterations in the 1RM or HIEE is not completely clear, particularly among initially untrained or minimally trained subjects. It does appear that maximum isometric strength among strength-power athletes chronically training with complex movements (weightlifters and throwers), and well-trained subjects, are altered in accordance with loading demands and tend to increase as the athlete improves their sport performance (Aagaard et al., 2002; Cormie et al., 2010; Stone et al., 2003; Turner et al., 2011).
Effects of Volume
Although there is general agreement that optimal maximum strength gains require heavy loading, there is little agreement on the S-E continuum at the endurance end. Indeed, the observation of the relatively strong association of maximum strength with HIEE seems to obviate the S-E continuum, at least in part (Fleck & Kraemer, 2014). However, the degree of effect on HIEE and work capacity may depend upon the difference in the repetition range of the training stimulus: for example, 1–3 repetitions per set with heavy loading versus ≥10 or sets of 5 repetitions versus >20 repetitions per set with relatively light loading (Baechle & Earle, 2008; Kraemer & Ratamess, 2004; Zatsiorsky & Kraemer, 2006).
One reason for the gains in HIEE may be the effect of the total volume of work during training and not simply the number of repetitions per set (Baechle & Earle, 2008; Fleck & Kraemer, 2014). Therefore, another factor that impacts the development of HIEE is the manner in which the training volume is achieved. Obviously, using reasonable loading, the volume of work accomplished during 3 × 10 repetitions would be more than 3 × 2 repetitions, and the increase in maximum strength would be expected to be greater with the heavier loading lower repetition range group but the opposite for HIEE and enhanced work capacity (Baechle & Earle, 2008; Fleck & Kraemer, 2014). However, the effects of 5 × 5 repetitions versus 3 × 10 on HIEE may be similar as the total volume of work would be nearly equal or, perhaps depending on loading, somewhat larger in the 5 × 5 protocol. Thus, achieving more work by adding sets, and perhaps increasing training frequency, likely enhances HIEE.
The effects of volume on HIEE outcomes have been illustrated by McGee et al. (2013). In this 7-week training study, 1 × 8–12 repetitions to failure (N) was compared to 3 × 10, not to failure (H). An intermediate volume group (P) with decreasing repetitions (not to failure) over the 7 weeks was also examined. The relative estimated volume load of the groups was H > P > N. HIEE was measured by improvement for squats with increasing load to failure and incremental cycle ergometry to exhaustion. The results indicated that gains in HIEE for both squats and ergometry followed the differences in volume. This study suggests that an S-E continuum based on volume exists and is somewhat similar to the suggestions of Painter et al. (2002; 2007).
However, to simply add additional sets versus using more repetitions per set to promote greater volumes may produce somewhat different adaptations that would affect alterations in HIEE. It is well known that variation of resistance exercise variables can lead to different acute neuromuscular and metabolic responses (Kraemer et al., 1988). Therefore, it is important to consider the specific training goals and desired adaptations when designing resistance training programs, taking into account factors such as repetition range, set volume, rest intervals, and exercise selection. These variables play a crucial role in shaping the physiological and metabolic responses to resistance training and can have a significant impact on the development of high-intensity endurance (HIEE) and work capacity.
This conclusion highlights the importance of tailoring resistance training programs to specific training goals and considering various training variables to achieve desired adaptations in HIEE and work capacity.
Strength-Endurance and Dynamic Correspondence
In summary, our examination of the available evidence suggests the existence of a strength–endurance continuum, particularly when considered from an absolute perspective. Several factors support this continuum, as depicted in Figures 2 and 3:
Higher Repetitions Per Set: It is evident that higher repetitions per set lead to greater metabolic stress, which can drive potential metabolic alterations. This, in turn, results in greater high-intensity endurance (HIEE) and expanded work capacity.
Potential for Better Recovery: The greater metabolic alterations induced by higher repetitions per set may also contribute to enhanced recovery, providing athletes with an advantage in recuperation.
Ecological Soundness: The continuum aligns well with ecological principles, making it a practical framework for designing training programs.
Basis for Periodization Protocols: The strength–endurance continuum forms a fundamental component of periodization protocols, which are widely used in sports training to optimize performance.
Moving forward, our understanding of resistance training should also consider the concept of Dynamic Correspondence (DC). DC acknowledges that the aims of resistance training extend beyond immediate effects, encompassing cumulative, long-term, and delayed adaptations to training demands. These adaptations are crucial for enhancing sport performance and rely on the thoughtful organization of training principles such as overload, specificity, and variation.
Periodization methodologies often guide the transition from extensive to intensive training phases. During transmutation and realization phases, transfer of training effects (ToTE) becomes particularly pertinent. To maximize the effectiveness of strength development, coaches must ensure that training aligns with the specific demands of the sport.
Within the principle of specificity, Dynamic Correspondence offers a deeper and more nuanced understanding of ToTE. Developed by Yuri Verkhoshansky, Dynamic Correspondence considers various aspects of training specificity, quantifying directed components such as:
Amplitude and Direction of Movements
Accentuated Regions of Force Production
Dynamics of Effort
Rate and Timing of Maximum Force Production
Arrangement of Muscular Work
Amplitude and Direction of Movement in Resistance Training
The concept of specificity, particularly dynamic correspondence, plays a pivotal role in the domain of resistance training (Verkhoshansky, 1990; Siff & Verkhoshansky, 2009). This principle highlights the importance of aligning training exercises with the amplitu
direction of movements relevant to a specific sport or athletic endeavor (Stone et al., 1998; Baker & Nance, 1999; Haff & Triplett, 2016). In this discussion, we delve into the critical aspects of amplitude and direction of movement within the context of resistance training specificity, supported by pertinent research findings.
Amplitude of Movement:
Amplitude refers to the range of motion (ROM) or the extent of movement displacement within an exercise (Baker & Nance, 1999; Haff & Triplett, 2016). It is an elemental component of specificity as it can significantly influence the transfer of training effects to sport-specific movements. For instance, when comparing exercises like rowing and bench pressing, they may share somewhat similar amplitudes but occur in opposite directions (Stone et al., 1998; Haff & Triplett, 2016). This highlights that even subtle variations in movement direction or grip width can impact the muscle groups engaged and potentially affect the transfer of training adaptations to sports movements (Baker & Nance, 1999; Stone et al., 1998).
Furthermore, research indicates that exercises with larger amplitudes have the potential to better mimic sport-specific movements, thereby enhancing their effectiveness in improving performance (Kawamori et al., 2006; Stone et al., 1998). The use of squats with varying amplitudes, for instance, has been associated with improvements in measures of maximum dynamic and isometric strength, rate of force development (RFD), as well as running and jumping performance (Kawamori et al., 2006; Stone et al., 1998; Suchomel et al., 2016). These findings emphasize the relevance of considering amplitude when designing resistance training programs aimed at enhancing athletic performance (Kawamori et al., 2006; Suchomel et al., 2016).
Direction of Movement and Force Application:
The direction of force application represents another fundamental aspect of specificity in resistance training (Suchomel et al., 2016; Stone et al., 1998). In sports, forces are often initiated by applying force through the ground, regardless of the direction in which the athlete moves (Baker & Nance, 1999; Suchomel et al., 2016). Consequently, exercises that deviate from this ground-based force application may not transfer effectively to sport-specific actions (Baker & Nance, 1999).
Consideration must also be given to the athlete's frame of reference, particularly when examining the direction of force application (Baker & Nance, 1999). For instance, during the acceleration phase of a sprint, an athlete produces a substantial amount of horizontal force relative to the global frame. However, when viewed from the athlete's perspective, this force is applied vertically through the longitudinal axis of the body (Baker & Nance, 1999). This distinction highlights the intricacies of force application in sport-specific movements and the need for alignment with these nuances in resistance training (Baker & Nance, 1999; Suchomel et al., 2016).
Applications in Training:
To effectively apply the principles of amplitude and direction of movement in resistance training, coaches must progress from less specific to more specific amplitudes that mirror the demands of the sporting actions (Haff & Triplett, 2016; Suchomel et al., 2016). This necessitates a deep understanding of the joint angles and amplitudes commonly used in a specific sport, enabling coaches to select exercises that target these specific requirements (Haff & Triplett, 2016; Suchomel et al., 2016).
In conclusion, the integration of amplitude and direction of movement into resistance training programs is paramount for enhancing sport-specific performance outcomes. Research underscores the significance of aligning training exercises with the amplitude and direction of movements inherent to a particular sport. By embracing these principles, coaches and athletes can optimize the transfer of training effects, ultimately leading to improved athletic performance (Suchomel et al., 2016; Kawamori et al., 2006; Baker & Nance, 1999).
Accentuated Regions of Force Production
In the realm of resistance training, the concept of accentuated regions of force production takes center stage as a critical determinant of specificity (Verkhoshansky, 1990). This principle revolves around the specificity of muscular effort and force application throughout the various phases of a movement (Suchomel et al., 2016; Verkhoshansky, 1990). Although direct research on the diverse regions of force production for different exercises remains limited, it holds promise as a potential explanation for why certain exercises exhibit superior transfer to athletic movements (Suchomel et al., 2016; Verkhoshansky, 1990).
Explosive Ballistic Training and High RFDs:
Explosive ballistic training characterized by high rates of force development (RFD) emerges as one of the most effective modes of resistance training to enhance athletic performance (Suchomel et al., 2016; Newton & Kraemer, 1994). This form of training has yielded remarkable results, including increased vertical jump height in elite volleyball players and enhancements in throwing and base running speed among baseball players (Suchomel et al., 2016; Newton & Kraemer, 1994). The transferability of ballistic training to athletic performance can be partly attributed to its alignment with the accentuated regions of force production observed in sport-specific movements (Suchomel et al., 2016).
Accentuated Regions of Force Production and Ballistic Movements:
Accentuated regions of force production manifest during specific phases of athletic actions, such as the stance phase of sprinting and the braking and propulsive phases of jumping (Suchomel et al., 2016). Ballistic movements, characterized by the acceleration of mass throughout the entire range of motion, tend to exhibit more closely aligned accentuated regions of force production with sport-specific actions than traditional resistance training exercises (Suchomel et al., 2016; Newton & Kraemer, 1994). Notably, research suggests that the force curves of ballistic exercises, like bench throws, resemble those of typical athletic movements (Newton & Kraemer, 1994).
It is worth acknowledging that substantial gains in strength through traditional resistance training can also lead to improvements in athletic movements (Suchomel et al., 2016; Newton & Kraemer, 1994). However, the combination of heavy non-ballistic and ballistic training has been shown to produce even greater gains, particularly among well-trained athletes (Suchomel et al., 2016; Newton & Kraemer, 1994). Notably, weightlifting movements, which combine high forces with semi-ballistic characteristics, have demonstrated significant improvements in sprinting, change of direction, and vertical jump performance across various athlete populations (Suchomel et al., 2016; Newton & Kraemer, 1994).
Manipulating Accentuated Regions of Force Production:
Recent research has explored various methods to manipulate accentuated regions of force production, each yielding different outcomes. Elastic band resistance (EBR) has been employed to adjust force production regions by accommodating natural strength curves (Suchomel et al., 2016). However, studies on EBR training have shown limited evidence of its efficacy in enhancing jump performance compared to traditional methods, despite its potential to increase strength and power (Suchomel et al., 2016).
Alternatively, accentuated eccentric loading (AEL) presents an intriguing approach for optimizing accentuated regions of force production (Suchomel et al., 2016). AEL involves overloading the eccentric phase of a movement and then promptly removing the load during the concentric phase, typically facilitated by weight releasers (Suchomel et al., 2016). This method has shown promise in augmenting force production, including the accentuated regions, potentially more effectively than standard loading (Suchomel et al., 2016). Nevertheless, its direct impact on athletic performance warrants further investigation.
In conclusion, the principle of accentuated regions of force production is paramount in resistance training for athletic performance. Explosive ballistic training and alignment with sport-specific force production patterns have demonstrated notable benefits. While manipulation methods like EBR and AEL hold potential, their implications for athletic performance necessitate continued exploration.
Dynamics of Effort in Resistance Training
The dynamics of effort, encompassing force-velocity characteristics, plays a pivotal role in optimizing athletic performance (Suchomel et al., 2016; Verkhoshansky, 1990). This concept emphasizes the need to align training dynamics with the force magnitudes and movement velocities associated with specific athletic movements (Suchomel et al., 2016; Verkhoshansky, 1990).
The Significance of Load and Velocity:
Research indicates that heavy-load resistance training primarily augments maximal strength, whereas low-load, high-velocity training assumes greater importance in improving high-velocity athletic performance, particularly among well-trained athletes (Suchomel et al., 2016). Combining both strength and power training emerges as a potent strategy for enhancing athletic movements (Suchomel et al., 2016). Notably, high-load resistance training can be more effective in weaker athletes compared to power training, underscoring the importance of establishing a foundation of strength to maximize power development (Suchomel et al., 2016). Periodized training models, such as block periodization, strategically sequence phases emphasizing various athletic qualities, ensuring the development of an appropriate foundation (Suchomel et al., 2016).
Rapid Contraction and Movement:
Purposeful rapid muscle contraction and movement are essential for improving movement velocity (Suchomel et al., 2016). Athletes are encouraged to execute movements with maximum intent, emphasizing explosiveness and high velocity throughout the entire range of motion. This approach optimizes the stimulus of both heavy and light loads within a single training session without altering overall training volume (Suchomel et al., 2016).
Rate and Time of Maximum Force Production:
The ability to maximize force production within specific time intervals significantly impacts athletic success (Suchomel et al., 2016). Training stimuli should prioritize enhancing the rate of force development (RFD) and replicate time constraints relevant to sport-specific movements (Suchomel et al., 2016). Ground contact times and stretch-shortening cycle duration can differentiate between slow and fast SSC utilization in jump tasks (Suchomel et al., 2016). Coaches must carefully select training protocols to ensure they align with sport-specific kinetics (Suchomel et al., 2016). Proper technical execution during training is crucial for promoting correspondence in the rate and time of force application (Suchomel et al., 2016).
Multiple Determinants of RFD:
Improvements in RFD stem from a combination of neural and muscular factors (Suchomel et al., 2016). High-load resistance training, high-power training, and plyometrics can enhance motor unit recruitment and discharge rates, contributing to RFD (Suchomel et al., 2016). Rapid ballistic contractions, in particular, lead to positive adaptations in motor neuron discharge rates, especially during the early RFD rise (Suchomel et al., 2016). These adaptations result from neural targeting, hypertrophy of type II muscle fibers, morphological changes in whole muscle, and augmenting tissue stiffness, including tendons (Suchomel et al., 2016). Long-term training adaptations in tendons affect performance differently between sprinters and endurance athletes (Suchomel et al., 2016).
In conclusion, the dynamics of effort in resistance training is a multifaceted concept that can significantly impact athletic performance. Proper manipulation of load, velocity, and muscle contraction dynamics, combined with a sound understanding of force production, can lead to superior athletic outcomes.
Regime of Muscular Work in Resistance Training
The regime of muscular work in resistance training involves classifying muscular contractions, such as concentric, isometric, eccentric, or those incorporating stretch-shortening cycles (SSC) (Suchomel et al., 2016). While many athletic movements involve some form of SSC, their utility in dynamic correspondence has been debated due to the complex and interdependent nature of force production in sports (Suchomel et al., 2016). It is crucial to understand the distinct adaptations that occur between concentric and eccentric actions (Suchomel et al., 2016).
Concentric vs. Eccentric Contractions:
Concentric actions are particularly sensitive to the specificity of kinetic and kinematic properties of contraction, whereas eccentric training has a broader effect on a range of force outputs and velocities (Suchomel et al., 2016). Different structural adaptations are observed between concentric and eccentric contractions (Suchomel et al., 2016). Eccentric contractions demonstrate superior mechanical efficiency and energy dissipation, especially in submaximal conditions, compared to concentric contractions (Suchomel et al., 2016). Muscle hypertrophy and its distribution vary between the two types of contractions, with concentric training having a greater impact on the muscle belly and eccentric training influencing the distal portion of the muscle (Suchomel et al., 2016). Furthermore, eccentric training tends to increase type II muscle fibers and fascicle length, while concentric training is associated with increases in pennation angle (Suchomel et al., 2016). These structural adaptations have implications for subsequent physical capabilities and program design (Suchomel et al., 2016).
Complex Athletic Actions and SSC:
In the context of complex athletic actions and SSC, coaches must consider the specific mechanisms of each contraction type and their interaction. Motor unit recruitment during eccentric actions may deviate from the orderly size-dependent pattern observed in concentric contractions, particularly at faster contraction velocities (Suchomel et al., 2016). Combining eccentric and concentric actions in athletic training introduces a complex sequence of neural control strategies, involving different discharge rates and activation thresholds of motor units (Suchomel et al., 2016).
Developmental Considerations:
Coaches face unique challenges when programming complex SSC movements that resemble sport-specific actions. Athlete development, encompassing structural, metabolic, and neural aspects, plays a crucial role. The athlete's musculoskeletal system must be robust enough to withstand the high-stress nature of complex, high-intensity actions (Suchomel et al., 2016). Therefore, coaches should adopt a developmental approach to enhance capacities progressively. During the general preparation phase, focusing on contraction-specific mechanical loading can facilitate targeted changes in muscles and tendons, building the athlete's overall capacity (Suchomel et al., 2016). As training advances, attention can shift towards optimizing neural strategies to maximize sporting potential while minimizing injury risks (Suchomel et al., 2016).
In summary, understanding the regime of muscular work in resistance training is essential for enhancing athletic performance. Coaches must consider the unique adaptations associated with concentric and eccentric contractions, as well as their interplay in complex athletic movements, while taking into account athlete development.
Modified German Volume Training (M-GVT)
Is a training protocol used in the field of strength and hypertrophy (muscle growth) training. It is a variation of the traditional German Volume Training (GVT) method, which was popularized by German weightlifting coaches in the 1970s. M-GVT, as the name suggests, is a modification or adaptation of this approach.
Here's an explanation of Modified German Volume Training:
1. Repetition and Set Scheme:
In M-GVT, the primary focus is on performing a high volume of repetitions and sets for a specific exercise. The traditional GVT method involves 10 sets of 10 repetitions (10x10) with a relatively lighter weight, typically around 60% of one's one-repetition maximum (1RM). In contrast, M-GVT modifies this scheme to suit individual goals and needs. The efficacy of the modified GVT program appears to be on par with performing 5 sets per exercise in terms of enhancing muscle hypertrophy and strength. To optimize the training effects aimed at hypertrophy, it is advisable to engage in 4-6 sets per exercise. Going beyond this range may lead to a plateau in gains and could potentially result in regression due to overtraining (Amirthalingam et al., 2017).
2. Repetition Range Variation:
M-GVT allows for flexibility in the repetition and set scheme, depending on the desired training outcome. For example, instead of the classic 10x10, it may involve variations like 8x8, 6x6, or even 5x5, depending on the lifter's goals. This modification allows for targeting different aspects of strength and hypertrophy.
3. Progressive Overload:
Like traditional GVT, M-GVT emphasizes the concept of progressive overload, where the resistance is gradually increased over time. This ensures that the muscles are continually challenged and stimulated for growth.
4. Rest Periods:
M-GVT typically incorporates short rest periods between sets, usually around 60-90 seconds. These brief rest intervals are designed to increase the training intensity and metabolic stress on the muscles, contributing to hypertrophy.
5. Exercise Selection:
M-GVT is often used for compound exercises that work multiple muscle groups simultaneously, such as squats, bench presses, deadlifts, and rows. This approach maximizes muscle engagement and efficiency during the training session.
6. Training Frequency:
M-GVT can be employed in various training frequencies, ranging from full-body workouts to split routines. The choice of frequency depends on the individual's goals, recovery capacity, and overall training program.
7. Adaptation and Individualization:
M-GVT acknowledges that training needs and responses vary among individuals. Therefore, it allows for customization of the repetition and set scheme to suit an individual's training experience, strength level, and specific objectives.
Metabolic Training Effects
Modified German Volume Training (M-GVT) can elicit several metabolic training effects due to its high-volume, short-rest protocol. These effects are important for enhancing muscle hypertrophy, improving endurance, and potentially increasing calorie expenditure during and after workouts.
Lactic Acid Accumulation:
During M-GVT, the high volume of repetitions and short rest intervals can lead to the accumulation of lactic acid in muscles. This metabolic byproduct is associated with muscle fatigue and discomfort but is also believed to stimulate the release of growth hormone, a key factor in muscle hypertrophy (Kraemer, 2003).
Increased Metabolic Stress:
M-GVT induces metabolic stress within muscle cells, which is associated with the activation of molecular pathways involved in muscle growth (Schoenfeld, 2010). The high training volume and limited rest between sets increase metabolic demand and create an environment that promotes muscle protein synthesis.
Elevated Caloric Expenditure:
The high-intensity nature of M-GVT, combined with the metabolic demands it imposes, can result in a substantial calorie burn during the workout session. This can contribute to overall energy expenditure and potentially support weight management goals (Paoli et al., 2012).
Improved Glycolytic Capacity:
M-GVT primarily targets the glycolytic energy system due to the high-intensity, anaerobic nature of the training (Zatsiorsky, 2008). This can lead to improvements in glycolytic capacity, which is important for activities requiring short bursts of intense effort, such as sprinting in soccer.
Elevated EPOC (Excess Post-Exercise Oxygen Consumption):
The high metabolic demand and stress induced by M-GVT can lead to a significant EPOC effect. This means that even after the workout is completed, the body continues to burn calories at an elevated rate during the post-exercise recovery period (Børsheim & Bahr, 2003).
Weeks 1-2: Upper Body (3x/week)
Session 1:
A1) Bench Press - 5 sets x 9 reps
A2) Bent-Over Rows - 5 sets x 9 reps
B1) Chin-Ups - 4 sets x 8 reps
B2) Incline DB Bench press - 4 sets x 8 reps
C1) Incline Bicep Curls - 3 sets x 12 reps
C2) Rope triceps ext - 3 sets x 12 reps
Session 2:
A1) BB Overhead Press - 5 sets x 9 reps
A2) Lat Pulldowns - 5 sets x 9 reps
B1) DB Alt bent over row - 4 sets x 8 reps l/r
B2) Push-Ups - 4 sets to failure (aim for 30 push-ups)
C1) BB Reverse curls - 3 sets x 12 reps
C2) Skull Crushers - 3 sets x 12 reps
Session 3:
Incline Bench Press - 5 sets x 10 reps
Cable Rows - 5 sets x 10 reps
Pull-Ups (or Lat Pulldowns) - 4 sets x 8 reps
Push-Ups - 3 sets to failure
Preacher Curls - 3 sets x 12 reps
Tricep Kickbacks - 3 sets x 12 reps
Weeks 3-4: Lower Body (3x/week)
Session 1:
A1) BB Back Squats - 5 sets x 8 reps
A2) Romanian Deadlifts - 5 sets x 8 reps
B1) Lunges - 4 sets x 8 reps per leg
B2) Standing Calf Raises - 4 sets x 12 reps per leg
C) GHD Back extension - 3 sets x 12
Session 2:
A1) BB Hip Thrust - 5 sets x 8 reps
A2) DB Bulgarian split squat - 5 sets x 8 reps per leg
B1) DB Box Step-Ups - 4 sets x 8 reps per leg
B2) ISO Achilles hold - 4 sets x 6 reps per leg
C) Russian Twists - 3 sets x 10 reps per side
Session 3:
A1) BB Front Squats - 5 sets x 8 reps
A2) SL Landmine RDL - 5 sets x 8 reps
B1) FFE Split squat - 4 sets x 8 reps per leg
B2) Seated Keiser calf raise - 4 sets x 12 reps per leg
C) Side plank band pull - 3 sets x 12 reps
Weeks 5-6: Upper Body (3x/week)
Repeat the upper body workout routine from Weeks 1-2 with increased weight for progressive overload.
Weeks 7-8: Lower Body (3x/week)
Repeat the lower body workout routine from Weeks 3-4 with increased weight for progressive overload.
Additional Considerations
In this comprehensive review of dynamic correspondence in resistance training, we've explored several critical criteria for optimizing athletic performance. However, Goodwin and Cleather (Goodwin & Cleather, 2016) propose a sixth criterion that is equally important: segmental interrelation. This criterion emphasizes the intricate interplay between global (body), segmental (joint), and muscular actions during athletic movements. Coaches must recognize that dynamic correspondence criteria should be considered individually and collectively to develop training programs that effectively transfer to sport.
The type of transfer to sport is a crucial consideration. Training strategies can have both direct and indirect impacts on athletic performance. Direct transfer involves improving specific performance variables such as running, jumping, throwing, or agility. Indirect transfer occurs when training develops an athlete's overall capacity, making them more resilient to injuries (Askling et al., 2003; Blackburn et al., 2000) and more receptive to further training (Suchomel et al., 2016).
A deep understanding of the kinetic and kinematic relationships between training strategies and athletic performance is essential for coaches. Dynamic correspondence principles should be integrated with fundamental training principles like overload, specificity, and variation (Stone et al., 2021). While certain exercises may align with most dynamic correspondence criteria, their effectiveness depends on proper loading, sequencing, and variation over time. Neglecting these factors can hinder the desired transfer of training effects.
It's important to recognize that exercises with high specificity to sport movements, such as ballistic and plyometric training, tend to transfer more effectively, especially in well-trained athletes. Thus, prioritizing specificity over heavier loads might not be suitable for athletes who are relatively weak or less experienced. Assessing the overall potential of an exercise or training strategy to promote sport-specific transfer can be challenging. However, applying dynamic correspondence criteria can assist coaches in evaluating the effectiveness of training strategies and their appropriate placement within the training plan (Suarez et al., 2019).
In summary, coaches must consider not only the dynamic correspondence criteria but also segmental interrelation when designing training programs. Furthermore, they should weigh the direct and indirect transfer effects and strike a balance between specificity and other fundamental training principles to maximize athletic performance.
