In the September 2024 issue of REPS, I explored a study on drop-set and pre-exhaustion training methods. This month I dive into a new study on alternative training methods that compared traditional training with supersets. While traditional training edged out supersets in strength gains, superset training was almost as effective and took half the time. Let’s jump into the details.
Overview
- What did they test? The study included 26 participants (13 male and 13 female) who were not regularly engaged in resistance training. After an initial three-week standardized introductory phase, a 10-week intervention followed, where equal numbers of participants performed either traditional or superset resistance training. Maximal strength and body composition changes were measured from pre- to post-training.
- What did they find? They found that both groups improved their maximal strength across the four tested exercises (bench press, seated row, leg press, and pull-down), but traditional training resulted in statistically greater strength gains on the pull-down. While both groups showed improvements in body composition (increasing lean body mass and decreasing body fat), there were no significant differences between them.
- What does it mean for you? Since strength gains favored traditional training in only one of the four exercises, this study suggests that supersets effectively improve strength and body composition in previously untrained participants. Furthermore, as superset sessions took half the time, this approach may be valuable for those with time constraints.
What’s the problem?
Purpose
Non-traditional approaches to resistance training offer different ways to structure sets and reps. Traditionally, an individual performs a set number of reps, rests for a certain period, then completes another set. Non-traditional methods break from this approach.
In the September 2024 issue of REPS, we discussed two forms of non-traditional training: pre-exhaustion (performing a single-joint exercise before a multi-joint exercise) and drop-sets (lifting a lighter load to failure after completing traditional sets). These methods produced similar outcomes for strength and hypertrophy, provided the volume was equal, though they required more effort than traditional training.
This month, the article we review investigates supersets, where one exercise is performed immediately after another, followed by a rest period. The study includes both antagonist supersets (targeting opposing muscle groups) and upper-lower supersets (an upper body exercise followed by a lower body exercise, or vice versa). This approach minimizes fatigue during the second exercise, as the muscles used haven't been fatigued by the first.
Non-traditional approaches to resistance training are of interest for a couple of key reasons. Most obviously, there’s curiosity about whether these methods can improve outcomes. Since they often add intensity (by minimizing rest periods, pushing to failure, etc.), their impact on hypertrophy and strength is a research focus. However, there is growing interest in their potential to produce similar results in less time. If these methods are nearly as effective, they could help individuals benefit from resistance training with a reduced time investment.
Hypothesis
The authors hypothesized that traditional sets would be more effective for building strength than supersets, as longer rest periods allow for higher training volumes. They also predicted no differences in body composition outcomes between the groups.
