Acute Effects of Two Different Resistance Circuit Training Protocols on Performance and Perceived Exertion in Semiprofessional Basketball Players

Abstract

Acute effects of two different resistance circuit training protocols on performance and perceived exertion in semiprofessional basketball players. J Strength Cond Res 30(2): 407–414, 2016—This study aimed to investigate the acute effects of two different resistance circuit training protocols on basketball players' physical and technical performance and rating of perceived exertion (RPE). In a repeated-measures, crossover experimental design, 9 semiprofessional basketball players performed a Power Circuit Training (PCT; 45% 1RM) and a High-Resistance Circuit Training (HRC; 6RM), on consecutive weeks. Vertical and horizontal jump performance, 3-points shooting accuracy, repeated-sprint ability (RSA), agility, and upper body power output were measured before and after training. The RPE was assessed 20 minutes after resistance training. One-way repeated-measures analysis of variance showed performance decrements in vertical jump height and peak power, horizontal jump distance, 3-points percentage, bench-press power output, RSA total and ideal time, and agility T-Test at total time following HRC, but not PCT (p <= 0.05). The RPE was higher in HRC compared with PCT. The results of this study indicated that HRC was perceived as being harder and produced higher fatigue levels, which in turn lowered acute performance. However, low-to-moderate intensity loads did not negatively affect performance. Thus, completing a PCT session may be the most appropriate option before a practice or game as it avoids acute–resistance–training-induced performance decrements. However, if the objective of the basketball session is to develop or perfect technical skills during fatiguing conditions, HRC may be the more suitable option.