Leg Press Rest Intervals of One, Three, and Five Minutes in Collegiate Basketball Players

Caleb McKusick
Grove City College, 2015

Introduction: Resistance training (RT) improves jump height, a common motion in basketball,
and increases muscular strength and endurance. The length of the rest interval (RI) between RT
sets can affect total volume, and the impact of rest intervals on RT is a controversial topic.
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of different rest intervals (1, 3,
and 5 min) on lower body endurance in Division III collegiate varsity male basketball players.
Methods: Collegiate male basketball players (n = 10, 19.4 1.3 years, 83.3 10.7 kg, 189.1 7.8
cm) participated in a single blind, counterbalanced, crossover study where they were randomized
to a RI of 1, 3, or 5 minutes for three sets of the leg press to failure after undergoing a 1RM test;
each test separated by 3 days. Heart rate (HR) was recorded at rest, RPE was recorded every four
repetitions, and HR and RPE were recorded immediately post-exercise, and halfway through each
RI. The number of repetitions completed at 85% of the 1RM was recorded for each set of each RI.
Results: There were no significant differences in volume between RIs or in RPE between RIs (p
< 0.05). There was a significant difference in HR between 1-minute and 5-minute RIs (5-min:
120.452 18.3 bpm vs. 1-min: 131.900 22.8 bpm; p = 0.012), and between average repetitions
completed during the first set across all RIs compared to the second set (Set 1: 12.433 1.5 reps
vs. Set 2: 10.433 1.5 reps; p = 0.001) and third set (Set 3: 9.500 1.1 reps; p = 0.005) across all
RIs. Conclusion: These results indicate that rest interval length does not affect exercise volume,
which may have application for athletes seeking increased exercise efficiency without sacrificing
total volume.

INTRODUCTION
Physical training is a prerequisite for learning the technique and tactics of the game of
basketball and their application in the game (Ghitescu et al., 2014). During a basketball game, the
physical training consists of developing and fully educating players based on the specific effort
characteristics and driving skills including: speed mode skill, skill mode speed, force under speed,
game mode specific strength (Ghitescu et al., 2014). In a study completed by Jakovljevic et al.,
(2011) the game of basketball is explained to have a variety of movements such as running,
dribbling, shuffling, and jumping. These movements are directional, multi-directional, intense and
short-lasting (Jakovljevic et al., 2011).
When looking at the sport, basketball is an anaerobic and high intensity sport (Tsai et al.,
2006). Because of the high intensity and anaerobic property of basketball, a player must be
prepared to perform to the best of their best ability in a short amount of time for quick bouts of
explosive movement (Tsai et al., 2006).
It is also found that vertical jump (VJ) is one of the most prevalent acts performed by
basketball players (Ziv et al., 2010). It has also been found that to improve jumping height, leg
muscles must be trained to react quickly (Brown et al., 1986). Exercising the lower extremity
musculature with resistance exercise will help in improving the jump height which is a common
motion in basketball players.
In basketball players, short-term power is important for maximal performance (Van Praagh
et al., 2002). Maximal short-term power output is defined as the highest mechanical power that
can be produced during exercise of up to 30 second duration, with the time period depending on
the force or load against which the individual has to work and organization of the acceleration

(Van Praagh et al., 2002). In basketball, movement patterns rely on short, intense and repeated
episodes of activity that require rapid changes in direction (Carvalho et al., 2011).
Literature has shown that resistance training can increase strength and muscular endurance
(de Salles et al., 2010). The length of rest between sets of a resistance training program can affect
the total repetitions in the set. It has been found in other studies that there are greater strength
increases with longer (i.e. 2-3 min) versus shorter (i.e. 30-40 sec) rest intervals between sets (de
Salles et al., 2010). Long rest intervals have been typically defined as 2-5 min between sets,
whereas short rest intervals have been defined as 30 sec to 2 min between sets (de Salles et al.,
2009, Willardson et al., 2006). This is mainly seen in untrained individuals where strength
increases typically occur with any amount of training (de Salles et al., 2010).
Studies have been performed to examine the influence of different rest interval lengths on
strength performance of individuals in a resistance training program (Pincivero et al., 1997,
Robinson et al., 1995, and de Salles et al., 2010). In a study conducted by Miranda et al. (2007),
for upper body exercises, rest intervals between sets and exercises were found to directly affect
the total volume of a training session. Within this study, the results indicated one minute rest
between sets lead to a reduction in total training volume and completion of number of repetitions
in subsequent sets compared to three-minute rest intervals (Miranda et al., 2007). This study only
analyzed exercises for the trunk and upper body and used only one and three-minute intervals. It
has also been found in male basketball players, that a standardized isometric leg press can improve
values of the isometric force-time characteristics of leg extensors in trained healthy male athletes
(Ivanovic, J., 2013).
Basketball is explained to have a variety of movements such as running, dribbling,
shuffling, and jumping (Jakovljevic et al., 2011) and literature has shown that resistance training

can increase strength and muscular endurance (de Salles et al., 2010). The purpose of this study is
to investigate the influence of different rest intervals (1, 3, and 5 min) on lower body endurance in
Division III collegiate varsity male basketball players. It is hypothesized that the longer the rest
interval, the more repetitions can be performed in each set, showing greater recovered strength and
less fatigue felt during each set.

METHODS
Experimental Design
This study followed a single blind, counterbalanced, crossover design where subjects were
randomized to a rest interval of 1, 3, or 5 minutes (min) followed by a rest period of 3 days to
ensure adequate recovery between subsequent sets before the next testing session. Each subject
participated in 4 days of testing: 1) Orientation/familiarization session and one repetition
maximum (1RM) test; 2) Rest interval I; 3) Rest interval II; 4) Rest interval III. During the first
visit to the laboratory, subjects performed a leg press test (Cybex, Owatonna, MN, USA) (LP)
until their 1RM was determined. A minimum of three days after finding the 1RM, subjects were
randomly assigned to a rest interval of 1, 3, or 5 min before performing 85% of their LP 1RM for
three sets to failure at the assigned rest interval. No less than three days after the first rest interval
trial, subjects returned to the laboratory and performed the LP with the second assigned rest
interval. This was repeated again for the third rest interval.
Subjects
A total of ten male collegiate varsity basketball players were recruited to participate in this
investigation. Subjects were recruited when the researchers presented their proposal to the team
following a regularly scheduled practice. The purpose of the study was explained, in addition to

what the subjects would be doing if they decided to participate in the research. Any players
interested in being subjects were given contact information and were free to contact the researchers
letting them know they wanted to participate in the study. Inclusion criteria included participating
on a Grove City College mens basketball team. Exclusion criteria included the presence of any
medical condition that prohibits exercise. Subjects were asked to not change their regular training
and dietary habits for the duration of the study.
Subjects were screened for health status using a health history questionnaire to assess the
individuals readiness to participate in exercise training programs. The subjects were informed of
the purpose, procedures, and possible risks of the investigation before they gave written consent
to participate in the study.
Procedures
Orientation/Familiarization Session
During the orientation/familiarization session, participants were allocated to rest intervals
by counterbalancing the order of the treatments (1, 3, and 5 minutes) across the three experimental
trials and were informed with an overview of the study. Subjects completed a medical history
questionnaire (Appendix B) and read and signed the informed consent form if they agreed to the
terms and conditions and wished to continue participating in the study. Questions about the study
were welcomed before and after the subject gave their consent to participate. All subjects were
asked to wear athletic clothing and training shoes during the subsequent experimental trials.
Subjects had their anthropometric measures taken, including height (cm), weight (kg), fat
free mass (kg) and fat mass (% and kg). Height (cm) was measured using a physicians scale.
Weight (kg) and body composition were measured using a Tanita bioelectrical impedance analyzer
(BIA) (TBF-310GS Tanita Corporation of America, Arlington Heights, Illinois). All BIA testing

was conducted in Athletic mode because of the characteristics of the basketball athlete testing
sample. Subjects were then oriented on the OMNI Perceived Exertion Scale (Lagally et al., 2006)
for resistance training (Appendix A) that was used in the experimental trials. The subjects were
oriented on the leg press machine to ensure they could perform the leg press before they test for
their 1RM. During this orientation, subjects were instructed to maintain a controlled eccentric
portion of the leg press to eliminate momentum from the movement.
Following the orientation and assessment procedures, subjects performed the leg press until
their 1RM was found. Subjects performed the leg press and progressed until a resistance load was
ascertained that could be moved only one time through a complete range of motion (Kingsley et.
al., 2012). Once the 1RM was achieved, the testing for the first session was complete and all
information was recorded. Researchers would discontinue testing if at any time the subjects
showed signs of pain, nausea, dizziness, or any other physical/psychological symptoms of exercise
intolerance. Emergency equipment was made available for all testing procedures.
Experimental Resistance Exercise Sessions I, II, and III
No less than three days after the 1RM test for the leg press, subjects returned to the
mechanized weight room to undergo the first of three experimental trials (1, 3, or 5 min rest
intervals). Each session was separated by a minimum of 72 hours to provide enough rest for
adequate recovery (Filho et al., 2013). When first arriving for their experimental sessions, subjects
were fitted with a Polar Heart Rate monitor (Polar Electro, Kempele, Finland) enabling researchers
to monitor the heart rate (HR) of subjects during work and rest intervals. The heart rate monitor
was wetted and applied to the subject at the level of the xiphoid process to ensure a quality heart
rate signal. Subject subsequently completed a 5 minute warm-up on the cycle ergometer (Cybex
750C, United States).

Researchers recorded the rest interval assigned to each subject by the counterbalance
design, set the leg press weight to 85% of the subjects 1RM, and then began testing. During each
testing session, subjects were required to attempt three sets of the leg press completing as many
repetitions as possible during each set. The subjects rested between each set for the duration of the
assigned rest interval.
While subjects performed the leg press, RPE was taken every fourth repetition and
immediately following the achievement of volitional muscular failure. RPE was also recorded
halfway through each selected rest interval. RPE was recorded during each set and rest, and all
measurements were made using the OMNI scale for resistance exercise. Exercise testing sessions
were separated by a minimum of 3 days to ensure adequate recovery between sessions, after which,
subjects returned to the weight room for their next session. Each subject performed three sets of
the leg press to volitional muscular failure during each session. All sessions were administered and
supervised by the investigators of this experiment.
Statistical Analysis
Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 22.0.
Armonk, NY: IBM Corp. Statistical significance was set a priori at p < 0.05. Descriptive statistics
were calculated for all variables. A 3 x 3 repeated measures analysis of variance were used to
verify if there were differences in the number of repetitions per set across rest intervals, and to
determine differences in total volume between rest intervals. Two ANOVA one-way repeated
measures were conducted to analyze the interaction and significance of rest intervals with HR and
RPE, respectively. When significant differences were presented, the Fischers LSD post hoc test
was applied for multiple comparisons.

RESULTS
Characteristics of the total analytical sample are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1. Physical and physiological characteristics of the athletes (n = 10)
Range
Minimum
Maximum
Mean ( SD)
Height (cm)
20.5
177.5
198.0
189.1 ( 7.8)
Weight (kg)
34.3
69.4
103.6
83.3 ( 10.7)
Age (years)
4.0
18.0
22.0
19.4 ( 1.3)
% Body Fat
10.4
5.0
15.4
9.7 ( 3.2)
Resting HR (bpm)
33.0
55.0
88.0
75.1 ( 10.9)

Difference of Repetitions between Rest Intervals

Figure 1 shows the average number of repetitions completed for each respective rest
interval. There were no significant differences observed between rest intervals for the number of
repetitions completed (1-min: 9.600 1.4; 3-min: 11.700 1.6; 5-min: 11.067 1.6; p < 0.05).
The hypothesis is rejected, as there are no differences between rest intervals.
14
12

Repetitions

10
8
6
4
2
0
1

3
Rest Interval (Minutes)

Figure 1. Average number of repetitions across three sets completed for 1, 3, and 5-minute rest
intervals. Values are means SD.

Difference of Repetitions between Sets

There was a significant difference for the average number of repetitions completed for the
first set when compared to the second and third sets, respectively. The average number of
repetitions completed during the second set for all rest intervals (1, 3, and 5) was significantly less
than the number of repetitions completed during the first set for all rest intervals (Set 2: 10.433
1.5; Set 1: 12.433 1.5; p = 0.001). The average number of repetitions completed during the third
set across all rest intervals were significantly fewer than the number of repetitions completed
during the first set across all three rest intervals (Set 3: 9.500 1.1; p = 0.005). Figure 2 shows the
average number of repetitions completed per set for all three rest intervals.
14
12

*
Repetitions

10

8
6
4
2
0
1

2
Set

Figure 2. Average number of repetitions completed during Sets 1, 2, and 3 for all rest intervals.
Values are means SD. * = statistically significant compared to the first set (p < 0.05)
RPE
No significant differences were observed for RPE between rest intervals (1-min: 8.252
0.4; 3-min: 8.122 0.4; 5-min: 8.096 0.6; p < 0.05). Figure 3 shows RPE ratings across all three
rest intervals.

Heart Rate
There was a significant difference for heart rate across the rest intervals. HR for the 5minute rest interval was significantly lower than for the 1-minute rest interval (5-min: 120.452
18.3; 1-min: 131.900 22.8; p = 0.012). Heart rate for the 5-minute rest interval was not
significantly different from the 3-minute rest interval (3-min: 126.666 22.1; p < 0.05) Figure 4
shows heart rate for all three rest intervals.

OMNI Scale Units (0-10)

8.3
8.25
8.2
8.15
8.1
8.05
8
1

3
Rest Interval (Minutes)

Figure 3. Average RPE for 1, 3, and 5-minute rest intervals. Values are means SD.

Heart Rate (Beats Per Minute)

134
132
130
128
126
124
122

120
118
116
114
1

3
Rest Interval (Minutes)

Figure 4. Average HR for 1, 3, and 5-minute rest intervals. Values are means SD. * = statistically
significant compared to the 1-minute rest interval (p < 0.05)
DISCUSSION
The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of different rest intervals (1, 3, and
5 minutes) on lower body endurance in Division III collegiate varsity male basketball players. The
main finding of this study was that the length of the rest interval (either 1, 3, or 5 minutes) made
no difference in terms of the average number of repetitions completed across three sets.
Additionally, across all three rest intervals of 1, 3, and 5 minutes, the average number of repetitions
completed was significantly greater for the first set (12.433 1.5) compared with the second and
third sets, respectively (10.433 1.5; 9.500 1.1). Furthermore, a significant difference was noted
in heart rate between the 1-minute rest interval (131.900 22.8) and the 5-minute rest interval
(120.452 18.3). There were no significant differences in RPE across all rest intervals.
Existing research indicates that the performance of multiple sets is the most effective
method for developing muscular strength in resistance-trained individuals (Peterson et al., 2005;
Rhea et al., 2002). Additionally, studies show that when multiple sets are performed to voluntary
exhaustion, with the maintenance of a constant load throughout all sets, the rest interval plays a
key role in the performance of subsequent sets and in total volume (Garcia-Lopez et al., 2008;
Senna et al., 2008). Contrary to the present study, an investigation by Willardson and Burkett
(2006) found that a longer rest interval promoted a greater number of repetitions when compared
to a shorter rest interval. According to previous research, the use of longer or shorter rest intervals
could prove to be a strategy for changing the total volume, and hence, other variables (e.g. fatiguerelated metabolites) (Ratamess et al. 2007; Willardson and Burkett, 2005). A study done by Faraji
et al. (2011), reported that significantly greater workout volume (sets x repetitions per set) was

completed for each exercise when resting 3 minutes between sets and exercise. Because the
resistance was constant in all three sets of each exercise, these differences in workout volume
could be accounted for by the 3-minute rest condition. The 3-minute rest condition allowed for
greater consistency in repetitions over all three sets, whereas the 1-minute rest condition did not
allow sufficient recovery time. Conversely, the present study found no statistically significant
difference between the volumes of any of three different rest intervals. However, while not
statistically significant, there was a difference of approximately two repetitions between the 1minute rest interval and the 3 and 5-minute intervals. This may have practical significance
depending on the goals of a given exercise protocol, as an athlete could achieve roughly six
additional repetitions with either of the longer rest intervals. Nevertheless, statistically, there is no
tangible benefit to extending the rest interval with the goal of increasing total volume.
Ratamess et al. (2007) compared the difference in workout volume (resistance x repetitions
per set) over five sets of the bench press exercise when performed at two different intensities (i.e.
75% and 85% of a 1 RM) and with five different rest intervals between sets (i.e. 30 seconds, 1, 2,
3, and 5 minutes). The findings demonstrated that irrespective of the intensity, the workout volume
significantly decreased with each set in succession over five sets when 30-second and 1-min rest
intervals were used. The workout volume was maintained over two sets for 2 minutes, three sets
for 3 minutes, and four sets for 5 minutes. Consequently, the authors recommended that if more
than 2 to 3 sets of an exercise are performed, then at least 2 minutes of rest may be needed to
minimize load reductions and maintain repetition performance for the sets performed at the end of
a workout. Similarly, in resistance-trained older women, Jambassi Filho et al. (2010) compared
the effect of two rest intervals (RI) 1.5 minutes (RI-1.5) and 3 minutes (RI-3), on muscle
performance during an arm curl exercise (three sets of 10-12 RM). The number of repetitions

showed a greater decrease from the first two sets to the third set in RI-1.5, as compared to RI-3
(49.5% vs. 29.7%, respectively). In addition, the total volume accrued in the experimental session
with RI-1.5 was significantly lower than for the RI-3. This previous research contradicts the
findings of the present study, as no significant differences in volume were observed between rest
intervals. However, the present investigation did note a significant difference in repetitions
completed between the first set and the second and third sets, respectively, but this difference was
seen across all rest intervals (1, 3, and 5 minutes). Another study done by Ahtiainen et al. (2005),
found that resting 3 min between sets might be sufficient during typical training scenarios in
previously trained lifters to allow for sufficient recovery between sets. Despite the additional
volume that might be achieved with 5 min rest intervals, there does not appear to be added strength
increases. Conversely, resting 1 min between sets appears to hinder strength increases, especially
over training periods that exceed 8 weeks (De Salles et al., 2010). According to Senna et al. (2008),
the impact of the rest intervals between sets in a training session is a controversial topic in the
literature, because it is strongly associated with the order of exercises within the session. However,
in the present research, only one exercise was being tested, thus rest interval testing was not
influenced by other sources of muscular fatigue.
The significant difference in HR found by the present study between the 1-minute and the
5-minute rest intervals could have an impact on exercise discomfort, as the athlete will be less
recovered with a 1-minute rest interval. However, as noted above, this decreased recovery made
no significant difference in the total volume achieved. Likewise, there was no significant
difference in RPE between any rest interval, showing a similar physical and mental exertion level
experienced when performing sets to failure across all rest intervals. Despite an increased HR after
1 minute of rest compared to 5 minutes of rest, athletes in this investigation had no significant

difference in RPE. Accordingly, the results of this investigation suggest that a 1-minute rest
interval could be used to achieve the desired total exercise volume for three sets of leg press
repetitions to failure in less time and with no added exertion compared to longer rest intervals.
Limitations
There were several limitations to the present study, including a small sample size.
Recommendations for the future include recruiting a larger pool of subjects to provide more
statistical power and accuracy of results. Secondly, an extended time between leg press trials may
have affected the outcome of testing performance. A minimum of 72 hours was required between
sessions to assure minimal muscular soreness and adequate muscular recovery, however, many of
the trials were separated by seven days or more, while some participants underwent a trial every
three days. Future investigations should seek to have a more consistent time between testing
sessions. Thirdly, the present investigation continued to test athletes beyond the scope of their
collegiate season. Due to required college breaks and decreased training frequency and intensity
out of season, the athletes were forced to change their dietary and training habits, contrary to initial
instruction, and the results of later testing sessions may have been influenced. Testing within the
timeline of the regular collegiate basketball season would eliminate this limitation for future
studies. Additionally, the recorded 1RM of the participants may have been more accurate if the
study design had included a 1RM confirmation. Future studies might consider two 1RM testing
sessions to validate the 1RM. Furthermore, the accuracy of the 85% of the 1RM was influenced,
as percentages had to be rounded to fit the limitations of the weight plates, which were available
in 5-lb intervals. Further recommendations include the study of female basketball players in
addition to male basketball athletes.

CONCLUSIONS
This study was designed to determine the most efficient rest interval for resistance training
for muscular endurance in male collegiate basketball players due to the use of lower body strength.
It was hypothesized that the longer the rest interval, the more repetitions could be performed in
each individual set, leading to greater total volume and showing greater recovered strength and
less fatigue felt during each set. The data did not support this hypothesis, as no difference was seen
in total volume between rest intervals of 1, 3, and 5 minutes. Furthermore, while heart rate was
significantly elevated after the 1-minute rest interval compared to the 5-minute interval, RPE was
essentially unchanged across all rest intervals. The following conclusions are warranted based on
the results of this investigation of three sets of leg press repetitions to failure: The length of rest
interval (RI) does not affect the volume of exercise, heart rate (HR) is significantly reduced after
a 5-minute rest interval compared to a 1-minute rest interval, and there is no difference in rating
of perceived exertion (RPE) across rest intervals of 1, 3 and 5 minutes.

REFERENCES
Ahtiainen, J.P., Pakarinen, A., Alen, M., et al. (2005) Short vs. long rest period between the sets
in hypertrophic resistance training: influence on muscle strength, size, and hormonal adaptations
in trained men. J Strength Cond Res. 19: 572-582.
Brown, M.E., Mayhew, J.L., and Boleach, L.W., (1986) Effect of plyometric training on vertical
jump performance in high school basketball players. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 26:14.
Carvalho, H.M., Silva, M.J.C.E, Figueiredo, A.J., Goncalves, C.E., Philippaerts, R.M., Castagna,
C., and Malina, R.M., (2011) Predictors of maximal short-term power outputs in basketball players
14-16 years. Eur J Appl Physiol. 111: 789-796.

De Salles, B.F., Simao, R., Miranda, H., Bottaro, M., Fontana, F., and Willardson, J.M. (2010)
Strength increases in upper and lower body are larger with longer inter-set rest intervals in trained
men. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport. 13: 429-433.
Faraji, H., Vatani, D.S., and Arazi, H., (2011) The effect of two rest intervals on the workout
volume completed during lower body resistance exercise. Kinesiology. 43: 31-37.
Filho, J.C.J., Gobbi, L.T.B., Gurjao, A.L.D., Goncalves, R., Pardo, A.K.G., and Gobbi, S., (2013)
Effect of Different Rest Intervals, between Sets, on Muscle Performance during Leg Press
Exercise, in Trained Older Women. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine. 12: 138-143.
Garcia-Lopez, D., Herrero, J.A., Abadia, O., Garcia-Isla, F.J. and Izquierdo, M. (2008) The role
of resting duration in the kinematic pattern of two consecutive bench press sets to failure in elite
sprint kayakers. International Journal of Sports Medicine. 29: 764-769.
Ghitescu, I.G., Tudor, V., and Moanta, A.D., (2014) Study on the Development of Vertical
Jumping Force in U18 Junior Basketball Players. Social and Behavioral Sciences. 117: 55-59.
Ivanovic, J., and Dopsaj, M., (2013) Reliability of force-time curve characteristics during maximal
isometric leg press in differently trained high-level athletes. Elsevier. 46: 2146-2154.
Jakovljevic S., Karalejic M., Pajic Z., and Gardasevic B., (2011). The influence of anthropometric
characteristics on the agility abilities of 14 year-old elite male basketball player, Facta
Universitatis, Series: Physical Education and Sport. 9: 141-149.
Jambassi Filho, J.C., Gurjao, A.L.D., Goncalves, R., Barboza, B.H.V. and Gobbi, S. (2010) The
effect of different recovery intervals between sets of strength training on muscular force in trained
older women. Brazilian Journal of Sports Medicine. 16: 113-116.
Kingsley, JD and Figueroa, A., (2012) Effects of resistance exercise training on resting and postexercise forearm blood flow and wave reflection in overweight and obese women. Journal of
Human Hypertension. 26: 684-690.
Lagally, K.M., Robertson R.J., (2006) Construct validity of the OMNI resistance exercise scale. J
Strength Cond Res. 20: 252-256
Miranda, H., Fleck, S.J., Simao, R., Barreto, A.C., Dantas, E.H.M. and Novaes, J. (2007) Effect
of two different rest period lengths on the number of repetitions performed during resistance
training. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 21: 1032-1036.

Peterson, M.D., Rhea, M.R. and Alvar, B.A. (2005) Applications of the dose-response for
muscular strength development: a review of meta-analytic efficacy and reliability for designing
training prescription. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 19: 950-958.
Pincivero, D.M., Lephart, S.M., and Karunakar, R.G., (1997) Effects of rest interval on isokinetic
strength and functional performance after short-term high intensity training. Br J Sports Med.
31:229-234.
Ratamess, R.A., Falvo, M.J., Mangine, G.T., Hoffman, J.R., Faigenbaum, A.D. and Kang, J.
(2007) The effect of rest interval length on metabolic responses to the bench press exercise.
European Journal of Applied Physiology. 100: 1-17.
Rhea, M.R., Alvar, B.A. and Burkett, L.N. (2002) Single versus multiple sets for strength: a metaanalysis to address the controversy. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 73: 485-488.
Robinson, J.M., Stone, M.H., Johnson, R.L., et al. (1995) Effects of different weight training
exercise/rest intervals on strength, power, and high intensity exercise endurance. J Strength Cond
Res. 9: 216-221.
Senna, G., Salles, B.F., Prestes, J., Mello, R.A. and Simao, R. (2008) Influence of two different
rest interval lengths in resistance training sessions for upper and lower body. Journal of Sports
Science and Medicine 8: 197-202.
Tsai C., Ho W., Lii Y., Huang C, (2006). The kinematic analysis of basketball three point shoot
after high intensity program, XXIV ISBS Symposium, 276-279.
Van Praagh E, Dore E (2002) Short-term muscle power during growth and maturation. Sports
Med 32:701728.
Willardson, J.M. and Burkett, L.N. (2005) A comparison of 3 different rest intervals on the
exercise volume completed during a workout. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 19:
23-26.
Willardson, J.M. and Burkett, L.N. (2006) The effect of rest interval length on the sustainability
of squat and bench press repetitions. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 20: 400403.
Ziv, G. and Lindor, R., (2010) Vertical jump in female and male basketball players A review of
observational and experimental studies. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport. 13: 332-339.

Appendix A
OMNI Scale for Resistance Training & Instructions
OMNI RESISTANCE SCALE INSTRUCTIONS
You are about to undergo a leg press exercise bout. This scale contains numbers 0 to 10, and
will be used to assess your perceptions of exertion while exercising. Perceived exertion is
defined as the subjective intensity of effort, strain, discomfort, and/or fatigue that is felt during
exercise. We use this scale so you may translate into numbers your feelings of exertion while
exercising.
OMNI RPE Instructions
The numbers on this scale represent a range of feelings from EXTREMELY EASY to
EXTREMELY HARD. Look at the person at the bottom of the slope who is just lifting the
bar. If you feel like this person when you are doing the leg press, the exertion will be
EXTREMELY EASY. IN this case, your rating should be the number zero. Now look at the
person who is barely able to hold the weight. If you feel like this person when doing the leg
press, the exertion will be EXTREMELY HARD. In this case, rating should be the number
10. If you feel somewhere between the extremely easy (0) and extremely hard (10) then give the
number between 0 and 10. Use both pictures and words to help you select a number.
We will ask you to point to or say a number that tells how your whole body feels. Do not
underestimate or overestimate the exertion; simply rate your feeling caused by the exercise at the
moment. There are no right or wrong numbers. Use any of the numbers to tell how you feel
when doing the leg press.

Appendix B
Health Questionnaire
Subject #: __________
Gender (circle one): Male / Female
Age: _______
Has a doctor or medical persons ever told you that you have any of the following conditions?
Heart Disease

YES

NO

Angina

YES

NO

Hypertension (High Blood Pressure)

YES

NO

Stroke

YES

NO

Heart Attack

YES

NO

Diabetes

YES

NO

Cancer

YES

NO

Asthma

YES

NO

Breathing/Lung Problems

YES

NO

Drug/Alcohol Problems

YES

NO

Fainting Spells

YES

NO

High Cholesterol

YES

NO

Do you smoke or have you quit smoking in the past 6 months?

YES

NO

Are you currently on a collegiate basketball team?

YES

NO

Do you take creatine supplements?

YES

NO

Do you have any medical problems that would prevent you from participating in a regular physical activity
program?
YES

NO

Is yes, please describe: __________________________________________________________

Have you participated in a regular exercise program over the past 6 months which consists of at least 20 minutes of
activity, 3 days per week?
YES

NO

Appendix C
Demographic Information and 1RM Test Sheet
Subject: __________
Demographic Information
Date _______________
Age _______________
Gender _______________
Height (cm) _______________
Weight (kg) _______________
% Body Fat _______________
FFM (kg) _______________
Fat Mass (kg) _______________
1RM Test
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 4 Trial 5 Trial 6 Trial 7 Trial 8 Trial 9
Weight:

Rest Interval 1
Set 1

Set 2

Set 3

Set 1

Set 2

Set 3

Set 1

Set 2

Set 3

Repetitions Completed:
Rest Interval 2

Repetitions Completed:
Rest Interval 3

Repetitions Completed: