Efeito do tempo de prática e de indicadores metodológicos do treinamento resistido com pesos sobre o número de repetições máximas obtidas por série em adultos jovens de ambos os sexos

Abstract

The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of variable training methodological (weight intensity, number of sets, recuperation time between sets and different exercises), and biologic (sex of the participant and different levels of familiarity with Resistive Exercises with Weight - ERP) over the number of Maximum Repetitions (nRM) obtained in each set. As such, 140 individuals were evaluated, between the ages of 18 and 30, organized as follows: a) 100 (one hundred) individuals (30 men with little familiarity (PF) with the ERP and 20 men with familiarity (FA), along with the same number of women), in order to establish the nRM of weight intensities (kilos) to 90, 80 and 60% of one maximum repetition, observing the effect of the person s sex, level of familiarity (PF and FA) and different exercises over the results (1o specific objective); b) 40 (forty) individuals (20 men and 20 women) PF with the ERP to evaluate the effect of different recuperation intervals between sets (one to three minutes) over the nRM weight intensities (kilos) of 80 and 60% of 1RM, observing the effects of sex and different exercises on the results (2o specific objective). Each subject signed free and clear terms of consent. The PF individuals of the 1o specific objective were adapted to the ERP with eight to eleven training sessions and, the following day, applied the test of 1RM, following the protocol of Moura et al. (1997). After this test, the values of 90, 80 and 60% of 1RM were calculated and corresponding tests of Maximum Repetitions were realized on different days. For the FA individuals, only two sessions of synesthetic adaptation and application of the 1RM and RM tests at 90, 80 and 60% of 1RM were used. For the 2o specific objective, the sample was adapted from eight to eleven sessions, and the 1RM test was applied, with the values of 80 and 60% of 1RM calculated. With intervals of one to three days, four tests of RM were applied of RM in the execution of three sets of the following form: 80% of 1RM with three minutes of interval between sets, 60% of 1RM with three minutes between sets, 80% of 1RM with one minute of interval and 60% of 1RM with one minute of interval. Analysis of this study was made on 10 different exercises for the 1o specific objective: knee extension, triceps extension, frontal pull, leg pressure, hip abduction and adduction, frontal and inverted chest contraction, and horizontal supine, while the 2o objective was only the first four. The treatment statistic was segmented for the1º and 2º specific objectives. In the 1o specific objective, a four-factor variance analysis (ANOVA), of weight intensity, sex, level of familiarity and different exercise, for repeated measures of the 1º and 4º factor were produced for a global analysis of the variances and, after bi-factor ANOVAs were conducted on the factors for a detailed analysis. The same process was realized for the 2º specific objective; initially a five-factor ANOVA (weight intensity, recuperation interval between sets, sets, different exercises and sex), for measures repeated in the 1º, 2º, 3º and 4º was realized, in the sense of a global analysis of the variances, after ANOVAs detailed the analysis. The results of the 1º specific objective demonstrated that the intensity of weight variable has a highly significant effect (p<0.0001) on the nRM, the different exercises variable also presented as a factor that produces a significant effect (p<0.001) on nRM, being the force in the same intensity of the weight. The level of familiarity variable to the ERP did not present a significant effect (p>0.05) on nRM. The sex variable only had a significant effect (p<0.05) on the nRM when the weight intensity was 60% of 1RM. The results of 2º specific objective demonstrated that the effect of the recuperation interval between sets of one minute presented the greatest impact on the decline of nRM than that of three minutes, that is in both the weight intensities, both sexes, and independent of the type of exercise performed. The nRM was significantly different (p<0.05) between the different weight intensities, between the different sets executed, between the different recuperation levels analyzed and between the different exercises evaluated. The sex variable, although very significant, presented the least effect on nRM as its principal effect was the lowest among the five factors analyzed, and when incorporated as the second or third factor of an interaction with other factors, the significance of the interaction decreased. It can be concluded that the nRM varies significantly as a function of variable training methodologies: weight intensity, different exercises, sets performed and recuperation intervals, being that, for the prescription of training these variables must be analyzed with caution. Individuals either familiarized or lightly familiarized respond in a similar form to different exercises and weight intensity in relation to nRM. Sex becomes a differentiating variable of the nRM only at the intensity of 60% of 1RM. And the impact of recuperation intervals in sets performed has more significant effects when it is less for this interval independent of weight intensity, the exercise performed and the sex of the practitioner.