Kai Alexander Homer

Both resistance training (RT) and long‐duration, high‐intensity stretching induce muscular adaptations; however, it is unknown whether the modalities are complementary or redundant, particularly in well‐trained individuals. A case‐study was conducted on a competitive bodybuilder implementing long‐duration, high‐intensity stretching of the plantar flexors (60 min 6x/week for 12 weeks) in conjunction with their habitual RT. Ultrasound muscle architecture (muscle thickness [MT], fascicle length [FL], and pennation angle [PA]) measurements were collected at multiple sites at four weekly baseline sessions, six (mid) and 12 (post1) weeks following the commencement of the intervention, and a week after the intervention (post2) while isometric strength and range of motion (RoM) were obtained once at baseline, mid, post1, and post2. 2SD band plots were constructed to determine meaningful changes in MT, FL, and PA from the four baseline measures while percentage and absolute change across each timepoint were calculated for all variables. From baseline to post 1, RoM, strength, and MT increased 25.9%, 11.4%, and 7.4%–23.4%, respectively, while four MT and two PA sites exceeded the threshold for meaningful change. The combined stretching and RT protocols resulted in flexibility, strength, and MT adaptations; however, findings should be generalized with caution given the case‐study nature of our investigation.

Ultrasound imaging is extensively used by both practitioners and researchers in assessing muscle thickness (MT); however, its use in the field is constrained by the transportability of stationary devices. New portable ultrasound probes pose as a cost‐effective and transportable alternative for field‐based assessments. This study evaluated the concurrent validity of a portable probe (Lumify) against a laboratory‐based device (Vivid S5) in measuring MT. Eighteen participants (nine males and nine females) visited the laboratory and their MT measurements were collected using each device at five different sites (anterior and posterior arm, anterior and posterior thigh, and posterior lower leg). Bland‐Altman plots (systematic and proportional bias, random error, and 95% limits of agreement), Pearson's product–moment correlation coefficient (r), and paired samples t‐tests with Cohen's d effect sizes (ES) were used to assess the concurrent validity of the Lumify device. Systematic bias was low at all sites ( ≤ 0.11 cm) while proportional bias was detected only at the posterior lower leg (r² = 0.217 [r = 0.466]). The difference in MT between devices was significant only at the anterior thigh (p < 0.05); however, ES for all sites were considered trivial (ES ≤ 0.131). Linear associations were found between the devices at each site of measurement (r ≥ 0.95). These results highlight that the Lumify probe can be used interchangeably with the Vivid S5 for MT measurements, providing practitioners and researchers with a more cost‐effective and portable alternative for field‐based assessments.

Homer, KA, Cross, MR, and Helms, ER. A survey of resistance training practices among physique competitors during peak week. J Strength Cond Res 38(10): 1745–1752, 2024—Physique athletes are ranked by their on-stage presentation of muscle size, proportionality, and leanness. To acutely maximize muscle size, competitors manipulate resistance training (RT) variables in the days before the contest, commonly referred to as peak week (PW). Resistance training manipulations during PW may act synergistically with nutrition strategies such as carbohydrate loading. However, because little information exists on changes made to RT during PW, the purpose of this research was to determine the current practices of physique athletes and whether competitor characteristics were predictive of the RT variables manipulated. A total of 104 responses to the RT section of a survey on PW nutrition and training were analyzed through a series of multiple logistic regression models to examine the relationship between RT manipulations and competitor characteristics. Furthermore, to determine the magnitude of differences between PW and the week before PW (WBPW) for these variables, a McNemar-Bowker test, paired t-tests, and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were conducted for nominal, continuous, and discrete outcomes, respectively. For all statistical analyses, p <0.05 was deemed significant. Competitors generally adjusted RT in a variety of ways, where proximity-to-failure was the most frequently manipulated and training frequency was the least; however, no competitor characteristic predicted any of the RT variables manipulated. Within those who manipulated RT variables during PW, frequency, volume, and intensity decreased while repetition ranges of compound exercises increased, empirically confirming that competitors seek to reduce training stress during PW. Such findings can be incorporated in future experimental designs examining the efficacy of peaking strategies to enhance the generalizability of results.

Physique athletes are subjectively judged on their on-stage esthetic per their competition division criteria. To succeed, competitors look to acutely enhance their appearance by manipulating nutritional variables in the days leading up to competition, commonly referred to as peak week (PW). Despite their documented wide adoption, PW strategies lack experimental evidence. Further, the relationship between the specific strategies and the characteristics of the competitors who implement them are unknown. The aim of this research was to examine the effect of competitor characteristics on the specific nutritional peaking strategies implemented, the length of these strategies, and the range of daily carbohydrate (CHO) intakes during these strategies. A 58-item survey was developed to gather information on peak week nutrition and training practices of physique athletes. A total of 160 respondents above the age of 18 who had competed in the last 5 years completed the nutrition section. The topics analyzed for this paper included competitor demographics, peaking strategies utilized, and PW CHO intakes. Competitor demographics are presented with the use of descriptive statistics. Associations between competitor demographics and peaking strategies implemented, peaking strategy length, and daily CHO intake ranges were assessed using multiple logistic regression, multiple ordinal logistic regression, and linear mixed models, respectively. From the sampled population, ages 24-39 years (71.2%), male (68.8%), natural (65%), and amateur (90%) were the most common characteristics from their respective categories, while mean competition preparation length was 20.35 ± 8.03 weeks (Males: 19.77 ± 7.56 weeks, Females: 21.62 ± 8.93 weeks), competition preparation body mass loss was 11.5 ± 5.56 kg (M: 12.7 ± 5.76 kg, F: 7.16 ± 3.99 kg), and competition body mass was 72.09 ± 15.74 kg (M: 80.15 ± 11.33 kg, F: 54.34 ± 7.16 kg). For males, the highest and lowest daily CHO intake during PW were 489.63 ± 224.03 g (6.22 ± 2.93 g/kg body mass) and 148.64 ± 152.01 g (1.94 ± 2.17 g/kg), respectively, while for females these values were 266.73 ± 131.23 g (5.06 ± 2.67 g/kg) and 94.42 ± 80.72 g (1.81 ± 1.57 g/kg), respectively. CHO back loading (45%) and water loading (40.6%) were the most popular peaking strategies, while the most prevalent peaking strategy length was 7 days (27.2%). None of the competitor characteristics predicted the use of CHO-based peaking strategies nor peaking strategy length. For non-CHO-based strategies, drug-enhanced competitors were more likely to restrict water than non-drug enhanced, while males and professional competitors had greater odds of loading sodium than females and amateurs, respectively. Finally, when comparing the disparity in highest and lowest CHO intakes during peak week, sex was the only significant factor. The results of this survey provide further information on the nutritional peaking strategies implemented by competitors. Certain characteristics were identified as predictors of sodium loading and water restriction, and the range of daily PW CHO intake. Contrastingly, no associations were found for CHO-based peaking strategies or peaking strategy length. While our analyses may be underpowered, and thus results should be interpreted with caution, it appears the nutritional peaking strategies implemented by physique competitors are seemingly complex and highly individual.

Background: Physique athletes are ranked by a panel of judges against the judging criteria of the corresponding division. To enhance on-stage presentation and performance, competitors in certain categories (i.e. bodybuilding and classic physique) achieve extreme muscle size and definition aided by implementing acute “peaking protocols” in the days before competition. Such practices can involve manipulating nutrition and training variables to increase intramuscular glycogen and water while minimising the thickness of the subcutaneous layer. Carbohydrate manipulation is a prevalent strategy utilised to plausibly induce muscle glycogen supercompensation and subsequently increase muscle size. The relationship between carbohydrate intake and muscle glycogen saturation was first examined in endurance event performance and similar strategies have been adopted by physique athletes despite the distinct physiological dissimilarities and aims between the sports.Objectives: The aim of this narrative review is to (1) critically examine and appraise the existing scientific literature relating to carbohydrate manipulation practices in physique athletes prior to competition; (2) identify research gaps and provide direction for future studies; and (3) provide broad practical applications based on the findings and physiological reasoning for coaches and competitors.Findings: The findings of this review indicate that carbohydrate manipulation practices are prevalent amongst physique athletes despite a paucity of experimental evidence demonstrating the efficacy of such strategies on physique performance. Competitors have also been observed to manipulate water and electrolytes in conjunction with carbohydrate predicated on speculative physiological mechanisms which may be detrimental for performance.Conclusions: Further experimental evidence which closely replicates the nutritional and training practices of physique athletes during peak week is required to make conclusions on the efficacy of carbohydrate manipulation strategies. Quasi-experimental designs may be a feasible alternative to randomised controlled trials to examine such strategies due to the difficulty in recruiting the population of interest. Finally, we recommend that coaches and competitors manipulate as few variables as possible, and experiment with different magnitudes of carbohydrate loads in advance of competition if implementing a peaking strategy.