COMPARISON OF THE ACUTE METABOLIC RESPONSES
TO TRADITIONAL RESISTANCE, BODY-WEIGHT, AND
BATTLING ROPE EXERCISES
NICHOLAS A. RATAMESS, JOSEPH G. ROSENBERG, SAMANTHA KLEI, BRIAN M. DOUGHERTY,
JIE KANG, CHARLES R. SMITH, RYAN E. ROSS, AND AVERY D. FAIGENBAUM
Department of Health and Exercise Science, The College of New Jersey, Ewing, New Jersey
ABSTRACT
Ratamess, NA, Rosenberg, JG, Klei, S, Dougherty, BM, Kang, J,
Smith, CR, Ross, RE, and Faigenbaum, AD. Comparison of the
acute metabolic responses to traditional resistance, body-weight,
and battling rope exercises. J Strength Cond Res 29(1): 4757,
2015The purpose of this study was to quantify and compare
the acute metabolic responses to resistance exercise protocols
comprising free-weight, body-weight, and battling rope (BR) ex-
ercises. Ten resistance-trained men (age = 20.6 6 1.3 years)
performed 13 resistance exercise protocols on separate days in
random order consisting of only one exercise per session. For
free-weight exercise protocols, subjects performed 3 sets of up
to 10 repetitions with 75% of their 1 repetition maximum. For the
push-up (PU) and push-up on a BOSU ball protocols, subjects
performed 3 sets of 20 repetitions. For the burpee and PU with
lateral crawl protocols, subjects performed 3 sets of 10 repeti-
tions. For the plank and BR circuit protocols, subjects performed
3 sets of 30-second bouts. A standard 2-minute rest interval (RI)
was used in between all sets for each exercise. Data were aver-
aged for the entire protocol including work and RIs. Mean oxygen
consumption was significantly greatest during the BR (24.6 6
2.6 ml$kg21$min21) and burpee (22.9 6 2.1 ml$kg21$min21)
protocols. For the free-weight exercises, highest mean values
were seen in the squat (19.6 6 1.8 ml$kg21$min21), deadlift
(18.9 6 3.0 ml$kg21$min21), and lunge (17.3 6 2.6
ml$kg21$min 21 ). No differences were observed between
PUs performed on the floor vs. on a BOSU ball. However,
adding a lateral crawl to the PU significantly increased
mean oxygen consumption (19.5 6 2.9 ml$kg21 $min 21).
The lowest mean value was seen during the plank exercise
(7.9 6 0.7 ml$kg21 $min 21). These data indicate perfor-
mance of exercises with BRs and a body-weight burpee
exercise elicit relatively higher acute metabolic demands
Address correspondence to Nicholas A. Ratamess, ratamess@tcnj.edu.
29(1)/4757
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
2015 National Strength and Conditioning Association
Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
than traditional resistance exercises performed with moder-
ately heavy loading.
KEY WORDS V_ O2, free weights, resistance training, oxygen
consumption
INTRODUCTION
R
esistance training is a modality shown to increase
several fitness components (17). Although many
participants train for increased muscle strength,
hypertrophy, endurance, power, and motor per-
formance (17,25), another primary goal for many trainees is
to augment energy expenditure (EE) to target body fat re-
ductions. Body fat reductions are predicated, in part, on
acute EE during each training session and the additional
EE seen during the recovery period after the training ses-
sions. In addition to the muscle action (20), intensity
(10,32), volume (9,22), repetition velocity (1,11,19), exercise
sequence (7,26), and rest interval (RI) length in between sets
and exercises (6,24,26), the amount of muscle mass
recruited during each exercise has been shown to be a pri-
mary contributor to the acute metabolic responses
(1,6,13,14,20,26,27,29). Several studies have examined
machine-based resistance exercises and circuit resistance
training protocols (1,14,18,22,33). However, only few studies
have examined free-weight exercise protocols, and these
have used different exercise intensities, volumes, and RI
lengths. Thus, comprehensive studies examining many free-
weight exercises are needed to better quantify the metabolic
demands of resistance exercise.
Metabolic resistance training programs have become
popular in recent years. These programs consist of tradi-
tional low-to-moderate intensity resistance exercises as well
as body-weight movements and exercises using implements
with short RIs. In addition, some trainers integrate other
modalities (i.e., plyometrics, speed and agility drills) into the
programs. A goal of these programs is to maximize muscle
mass involvement to increase EE. Body-weight exercises
such as burpees, planks, and push-up (PU) variations are
commonly included but little is known concerning the acute
metabolic demands of these exercises.
VOLUME 29 | NUMBER 1 | JANUARY 2015 | 47
 Resistance Exercise and Oxygen Consumption

Rope training has increased in popularity in numerous cises are commonly used while attempting to maintain sim-
areas from general health and fitness trainees to professional ilar set durations.
athletes. Battling ropes (BRs) are used for multiple purposes,
Subjects
that is, climbing, pulling, and suspension training. However,
Ten healthy resistance-trained men (age range = 19 to 22
BRs are most commonly used for undulations, or wave
years old) agreed to participate in this study (Table 1). Each
training, to increase strength, endurance, and provide potent
subject initiated the study in a trained state (i.e., were resis-
metabolic and cardiovascular responses (3,21). Waves are
tance training 24 days per week), were current or former
generated through multiple movement patterns as the ropes
athletes, and none were taking any medications such as ana-
are anchored at a fixed point. The length and diameter of the
bolic steroids known to affect resistance exercise perfor-
ropes, as well as the velocity and amplitude of the waves, are
mance. Subjects underwent 1 week of familiarization (23
thought to govern exercise intensity (21). However, only one
sessions) with study procedures before testing. Familiariza-
study (8) has examined BR exercise to date.
tion focused on subjects ability to perform all of the exer-
The primary purpose of this study was to quantify acute
cises comfortably while wearing a respiratory mask. During
oxygen consumption and EE of 7 traditional free-weight
this time, height was measured using a wall-mounted stadi-
resistance exercises and compare these responses to
ometer, and body mass was measured using an electronic
body-weight and BR exercises. A popular fitness trend
scale. Percent body fat was estimated through a 3-site skin-
is the combination of resistance training programs using
fold test. The sites measured were the pectoral, anterior
free weights, strength implements, and body-weight
thigh, and abdominal skinfolds using methodology previ-
exercises. Thus, our intent was to provide a comparative
ously described (12). Body density was calculated using
metabolic profile of these different modalities. It was
the equation of Jackson and Pollock (12), and percent body
hypothesized that exercises stimulating the largest
fat was calculated using the equation of Siri (30). The same
amount of muscle mass would elicit the greatest acute
research assistant performed all skinfold assessments. This
metabolic responses.
study was approved by The College of New Jerseys Institu-
METHODS tional Review Board, and each subject subsequently signed
an informed consent document before participation. No sub-
Experimental Approach to the Problem
ject had any physiological or orthopedic limitations that
To examine the primary hypothesis of this investigation,
could have affected exercise performance as determined by
subjects were tested for V_ O2max and maximal strength on 7
completion of a health history questionnaire.
free-weight exercises and subsequently performed 13 resis-
tance exercise protocols (using various levels of muscle Strength Testing
mass) consisting of only one exercise per session. Subjects One-repetition maximum strength was assessed for 7 free-
performed 3 sets of up to 10 repetitions with 75% of 1 rep- weight resistance exercises using a standard protocol (16,23).
etition maximum (RM) for the free-weight protocols. In For each exercise, a warm-up set of 510 repetitions was
addition, a few popular body-weight and BR exercises were
examined to compare their metabolic demands to that of
traditional resistance exercise performance. For the burpee
and PU with lateral crawl protocols, subjects performed 3
TABLE 1. Descriptive characteristics.*
sets of 10 repetitions. For the PUs on the floor and BOSU
ball protocols, subjects performed 3 sets of 20 repetitions. Subjects
For the plank and BR circuit protocols, subjects performed (N = 10)
3 sets of 30-second bouts. Two-minute RIs were used in
between sets of all exercises. Metabolic and performance Age (y) 20.6 6 1.3
Height (cm) 178.8 6 6.7
data were collected during each protocol under close super- Body mass (kg) 83.1 6 11.1
vision. This study design enabled us to systematically exam- Body fat (%) 13.3 6 5.5
ine the influence of muscle mass involvement on acute Resistance training experience (y) 5.7 6 1.9
exercise performance and metabolic responses during resis- 1RM bench press (kg) 97.3 6 16.6
tance exercise and compare their metabolic responses to 1RM squat (kg) 130.0 6 31.0
1RM curl (kg) 53.6 6 8.0
various body-weight and BR exercises. The main objective 1RM bent-over row (kg) 86.1 6 14.9
was to assess the exercises in a manner commonly per- 1RM high pull (kg) 70.6 6 15.7
formed in practical settings. Thus, a standard intensity, vol- 1RM lunge (kg) 98.4 6 22.0
ume, and RI length was used for the free-weight exercises. 1RM deadlift (kg) 146.8 6 22.5
However, it is difficult to equate intensity of body-weight V_ O2max (ml$kg21$min21) 48.4 6 7.5
and BR exercises to that of free-weight exercises. Thus, we *RM = repetition maximum.
felt it important to base our comparisons of free-weight and
nonfree-weight exercises on methods of how these exer-
the TM

48 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

performed using 4060% of the perceived 1RM. After
a 1-minute RI, a set of 23 repetitions was performed at
6080% of the perceived 1RM. Subsequently, 24 maximal
trials were performed to determine the 1RM with 23 minutes
RI between trials. Maximal strength was determined for
a maximum of 2 exercises per session separated by 2448
hours. A complete range of motion and proper technique
was required for each successful 1RM trial. For the bench
press (BP), the bar was lowered until it touched the lower-
to-mid sternum (with no bouncing) and was lifted to full
elbow extension (with no excessive arching of the back). For
the back squat (SQ), subjects descended with the bar on the
rear shoulders until their upper thighs were parallel to the
ground. At that point, a lift signal was given by a research
assistant (to ensure proper depth), and the subject ascended to
the starting position. For the barbell curl, subjects began the
exercise with elbows fully extended and subsequently flexed
the elbows in control without extending the hips or swing-
ing the weight upward. For the bent-over barbell row (BOR),
subjects initiated the exercise from the floor position and
raised the bar until it touched the upper rectus abdominis.
For the high pull (HP), subjects began the exercise from the
hang position above the knees and rapidly lifted the barbell
as fast as possible until it reached the level of the inferior
sternum. A research assistant visually confirmed proper range
of motion for the exercise. For the lunge, subjects began with
the barbell on their rear shoulders, stepped forward with their
dominant leg, descended until the rear knee touched the
ground, and then returned to the starting position in 1 step.
For the conventional-style deadlift (DL) (i.e., arms were posi-
tioned lateral to the legs with a grip width wider than stance
width), subjects lifted the bar from the ground until full hip
extension was achieved. Assessment of 1RM strength enabled
calculation of the protocol loads (i.e., 75% of 1RM).
Maximal Aerobic Capacity (V_ O2max) Testing
All subjects reported to the laboratory for maximal aerobic
capacity testing. Subjects refrained from exercise for at least 24
hours before each testing session. V_ O2max was assessed using
a progressive multistage ramp protocol on a treadmill (Med-
Graphics ULTIMA Metabolic System; MedGraphics Corpo-
ration, St. Paul, MN, USA). It consisted of 2-minute stages at
a speed of 6.0 mph with increments in percent grade of 2.5%
per stage. All subjects were verbally encouraged to continue
exercise until volitional exhaustion. Breath-by-breath V_ O2 data
were obtained, and V_ O2max was determined by recording the
highest measure. Gas analyzers were calibrated before each
trial using gases provided by MedGraphics Corporation: (a)
calibration gas: 5% CO2, 12% O2, balance N2 and (b) reference
gas: 21% O2, balance N2.
Resistance Exercise Protocols
All subjects reported to the Human Performance Laboratory
at least 2 hours after their last standardized meal on 13
occasions separated by at least 24 hours. Subjects refrained
from caffeine consumption for at least 24 hours before each
testing session. Upon arrival, each subject was encouraged to
drink water ad libitum to prehydrate and was subsequently
fitted with a respiratory mask that was placed over the

TABLE 2. Comparison of the resistance exercise protocols.*

Exercise Resistance Sets No. Repetition Set duration RI

Free weights
Squat 75% of 1RM 3 Up to 10 each set ;37 s 2 min
Bench press 75% of 1RM 3 Up to 10 each set ;24 s 2 min
Curl 75% of 1RM 3 Up to 10 each set ;22 s 2 min
BOR 75% of 1RM 3 Up to 10 each set ;14 s 2 min
High pull 75% of 1RM 3 Up to 10 each set ;14 s 2 min
Lunge 75% of 1RM 3 Up to 10 each set ;33 s 2 min
Deadlift 75% of 1RM 3 Up to 10 each set ;30 s 2 min
Push-ups
Regular BW 3 20 each set ;23 s 2 min
BOSU BW 3 20 each set ;25 s 2 min
PU-LC BW 3 10 each set ;35 s 2 min
Burpee BW 3 10 each set ;32 s 2 min
Plank BW 3 1 each set 30 s 2 min
Ropes circuit
SA wave 10.9 kg, 15.2 m (50 ft) in length 3 ;23 each set 10 s 2 min between each circuit
DA wave 3 ;18 each set 10 s
DA slams 3 ;13 each set 10 s

*RI = rest interval; RM = repetition maximum; BOR = bent-over barbell row; PU-LC = push-up with lateral crawl; SA = single-arm;
DA = double-arm.

VOLUME 29 | NUMBER 1 | JANUARY 2015 | 49

Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Resistance Exercise and Oxygen Consumption

subjects face, fastened, and carefully checked for proper mine test-retest reliability. Reliability was shown to be
sealing. Subjects were also fitted with a Polar heart rate high for the metabolic measurements (R = 0.90).
(HR) monitor (Polar Electro, Inc., Woodbury, NY, USA) Following BL measures, each subject performed a warm-
that was used to measure HR at baseline (BL), after each up consisting of 3 minutes of stationary cycling and 12
set of resistance exercise, and after each minute of recov- light-to-moderate sets (4060% of 1RM) of each free-
ery. Subsequently, each subject was positioned on a reclin- weight exercise and 1 set of each body-weight and BR exer-
ing chair and sat quietly for 15 minutes before cise. The protocols consisted of performing 3 sets of each
measurement of BL HR and oxygen consumption (which exercise on separate days. Only one exercise was assessed
was recorded over a 3-minute period). Breath-by-breath during each session to avoid the potential of 1 exercise influ-
oxygen uptake (V_ O2) was measured throughout each pro- encing the metabolic responses of a subsequent exercise
tocol through a metabolic system (MedGraphics (7,26). For free-weight exercises, 3 sets of up to 10 repetitions
ULTIMA Metabolic System; MedGraphics Corporation). per set using 75% of 1RM with 2-minute RIs were per-
Gas analyzers were calibrated with gases of known com- formed. For each exercise, standard exercise technique was
position before collection of metabolic data. Heart rate used (as described in the Strength Testing section), and only
data presented are the mean protocol values obtained those repetitions that met the criteria were counted. For the
after each set of resistance exercise and after lunge, repetitions were alternated between right and left
each minute of recovery. During the familiarization sides during each set. Pilot data from our laboratory indi-
period, V_ O2 data were collected on 2 occasions to deter- cated a 9% larger metabolic response using the alternating
version of the lunge vs. per-
forming the lunge with the
same leg forward for the entire
set. For all exercises, resistance
TABLE 3. Metabolic responses to the resistance exercise protocols.*
remained constant while total
Mean V_ O2 Peak V_ O2 EE numbers of repetitions were re-
(ml$kg21$min21) (ml$kg21$min21) (kcal$min21) RER corded. Subjects used a self-
selected cadence to maximize
Baseline 2.5 6 0.9 1.1 6 0.4 0.80 6 0.1
Squat 19.6 6 1.8 32.5 6 5.0 8.2 6 1.1 1.08 6 0.1 acute resistance exercise per-
BP 12.5 6 2.1z 19.8 6 4.0z 5.2 6 0.9z 1.11 6 0.1 formance. Durations for each
Curl 12.3 6 2.1 20.2 6 3.0k 5.1 6 0.8 1.05 6 0.1 set of each exercise were re-
BOR 12.2 6 1.7 22.4 6 3.6# 5.1 6 0.7 1.10 6 0.1 corded and subsequently
HP 14.2 6 3.2** 25.2 6 5.0 6.0 6 1.3** 1.00 6 0.1 analyzed.
Lunge 17.3 6 2.6zz 28.7 6 4.6 7.2 6 1.3zz 1.03 6 0.1
DL 18.9 6 3.0 31.2 6 5.1 7.8 6 1.2 1.15 6 0.1 For the BR protocol, sub-
Burpee 22.9 6 2.1kk 35.9 6 4.1 9.6 6 1.3kk 1.00 6 0.1 jects performed 3 sets of 30-
Plank 7.9 6 0.7kk 12.8 6 1.6kk 3.3 6 0.7kk 0.90 6 0.1 second bouts of exercise using
BR 24.6 6 2.6kk 38.6 6 4.7## 10.3 6 1.4kk 1.21 6 0.1 2-minute RIs in between sets.
PU 11.9 6 1.3*** 18.9 6 1.4 4.9 6 0.6*** 1.11 6 0.1 Each set was divided into three
BOSU 11.9 6 1.0zzz 20.3 6 1.7zzz 5.0 6 0.7zzz 1.10 6 0.1
PU 10-second bouts consisting of
PU-LC 19.5 6 2.9 31.0 6 4.9kkk 8.1 6 1.1 1.05 6 0.1 3 BR exercises. Subjects
performed 10 seconds of
*All data were significantly different from BL. EE = energy expenditure; RER = respiratory
single-arm alternating waves,
exchange ratio; BP = bench press; BOR = bent-over barbell row; HP = high pull; DL =
deadlift; BR = battling rope; PU = push-up; PU-LC = push-up with lateral crawl. followed by 10 seconds of
p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except DL and PU-LC. double-arm waves with a half-
zp # 0.05 compared with all exercises except CU, BOR, PU, and BOSU PU.
p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except BP, BOR, PU, and BOSU PU. SQ, followed by 10 seconds of
kp # 0.05 compared with all exercises except BP, PU, and BOSU PU. double-arm rope slams with
p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except BP, CU, HP, PU, and BOSU PU.
#p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except BP, HP, PU, and BOSU PU. a half-SQ. A research assistant
**p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except BOR and BOSU PU. kept time and provided a verbal
p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except BOR.
zzp # 0.05 compared with all exercises except DL. switch signal to begin the
p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except SQ, LN, and PU-LC. next exercise. Each repetition
kkp # 0.05 compared with all exercises.
p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except BR. was performed as rapidly as
##p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except burpee. possible to maintain rope oscil-
***p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except BP, CU, BOR, and BOSU PU.
p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except BP, CU, and BOSU PU. lations and maximize intensity.
zzzp # 0.05 compared with all exercises except BP, CU, BOR, HP, and PU. The BR used was 10.9 kg,
p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except SQ and DL.
kkkp # 0.05 compared with all exercises except SQ, LN, and DL. 15.2 m (50 ft) in length,
3.8 cm thick and was anchored
in a low position to a power
the TM

50 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

rack using zip ties (with 1 loop) 1012 in from the floor. of variance with repeated measures was used to analyze
Each BR protocol was recorded on video, and repetitions within-subject metabolic and performance data. Subsequent
for each exercise were subsequently counted and analyzed. Tukeys post hoc tests were used to determine differences
For the PU and PU on a BOSU ball protocols, 3 sets of 20 when significant main effects were obtained. For all statistical
repetitions were performed using 2-minute RIs in between tests, a probability level of p # 0.05 denoted statistical
sets. Twenty repetitions were performed due to the ease of significance.
performance and rapid cadence by which the body-weight
PU is performed and to increase the duration of each set to
be more similar to the other exercises assessed. The height of TABLE 4. VE and HR responses to the resistance
the BOSU ball was measured before each session to ensure exercise protocols.*
standard inflation. The PU on the BOSU ball was performed
VE (L$min21) HR (b$min21)
with the flat base up and convex part on the ground. Hand
position was standardized for each PU variation. For the PU BL 6.1 6 2.0 62.2 6 6.5
with lateral crawl (PU-LC), subjects performed 3 sets of 10 Squat 49.5 6 7.7 135.2 6 14.5
repetitions with 2-minute RIs in between sets. For this BP 32.7 6 4.1z 123.7 6 15.2
Curl 32.3 6 5.0k 117.2 6 15.4
exercise, subjects performed 1 PU, laterally crawled 3 steps BOR 32.8 6 6.1# 113.5 6 17.1#
to the right (while maintaining the PU position) as quickly as HP 32.5 6 7.3** 117.6 6 19.3
possible, performed a second PU, laterally crawled 3 steps Lunge 40.8 6 9.7zz 126.0 6 15.9
back to the left as quickly as possible, and continued this DL 52.5 6 9.0kk 136.1 6 16.2
pattern until 10 repetitions were completed. Tape markers Burpee 50.0 6 5.7## 136.3 6 14.0##
Plank 17.7 6 3.6zz 92.8 6 15.2zz
were placed on the floor (at a length equal to each subjects
BR 79.7 6 16.2zz 153.5 6 13.9zz
grip width) to ensure subjects moved the required length PU 31.1 6 2.3*** 117.1 6 11.3
with each crawl. BOSU PU 30.6 6 3.4zzz 116.9 6 15.6
For the burpee, subjects performed 3 sets of 10 repetitions PU-LC 47.2 6 5.7kk 133.7 6 18.2kkk
using 2-minute RIs in between sets. Each subject began the
*All data were significantly different from BL. HR =
exercise in a standing position, descended into an SQ heart rate; BL = baseline; BP = bench press; BOR =
position with hands on the ground, extended the legs bent-over barbell row; HP = high pull; DL = deadlift;
posteriorly to the PU position, performed an SQ thrust, BR = battling rope; PU = push-up; PU-LC = push-up with
lateral crawl.
ascended by to the starting position, and jumped to p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except DL,
complete each repetition. For the plank, subjects maintained burpee, and PU-LC.
zp # 0.05 compared with all exercises except CU,
the prone isometric exercise position for 3 sets of 30-second BOR, HP, PU, and BOSU PU.
bouts with 2-minute RIs in between sets (see Table 2 for p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except CU,
comparisons). BOR, HP, LN, PU, and BOSU PU.
kp # 0.05 compared with all exercises except BP,
BOR, HP, PU, and BOSU PU.
Metabolic and Cardiorespiratory Measurements p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except BP,
Heart rate, absolute V_ O2, relative V_ O2, respiratory exchange BOR, HP, LN, PU, and BOSU PU.
#p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except BP,
ratio (RER), and ventilation (VE) data were recorded during
CU, HP, PU, and BOSU PU.
the entire protocol. Individual breath-by-breath data points **p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except BP,
for all metabolic variables were averaged for the entire set CU, BOR, PU, and BOSU PU.
p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except BP,
and for the first 15 seconds of each minute for each RI in CU, BOR, LN, PU, and BOSU PU.
between sets (24,26). The time corresponding to the initia- zzp # 0.05 compared with all exercises.
p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except BP,
tion of each set, the time of the completion of each set, and CU, HP, DL, BOSU PU, and PU-LC.
the RI length between sets were precisely recorded and used kkp # 0.05 compared with all exercises except SQ
subsequently for determination of each phase of the proto- and burpee.
p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except SQ,
cols. Gross EE per minute for each protocol was estimated LN, burpee, and PU-LC.
by multiplying absolute V_ O2 (L$min21) by 5.05 kcal$L21 ##p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except SQ,
DL, and PU-LC.
because all RER values were $1.0 except for the plank. ***p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except BP,
For the plank, V_ O2 (L$min21) was multiplied by 4.864.92 CU, BOR, HP, and BOSU PU.
p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except CU,
kcal$L21 depending on RER. Baseline EE was estimated by
BOR, HP, and BOSU PU.
multiplying absolute V_ O2 (L$min21) by 4.80 kcal$L21 to zzzp # 0.05 compared with all exercises except BP,
match BL RER. Ventilation data are presented as the mean CU, BOR, HP, and PU.
p # 0.05 compared with all exercises except BP,
of each entire protocol. CU, BOR, HP, LN, and PU.
kkkp # 0.05 compared with all exercises except SQ,
Statistical Analyses LN, DL, and burpee.
Descriptive statistics (mean 6 SD) were calculated for all
dependent variables. A 1 (group) 3 13 (exercise) analysis

VOLUME 29 | NUMBER 1 | JANUARY 2015 | 51

Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Resistance Exercise and Oxygen Consumption

Figure 1. V_ O2 responses of the SQ, DL, lunge, and battling rope exercises. BL = baseline; S = set number; RI = rest interval; SQ = squat; DL = deadlift. * p #
0.05 between RI1 and each set and RI2; # p # 0.05 between ropes and SQ, DL, and lunge; $ p # 0.05 between SQ and lunge.

Figure 2. V_ O2 responses of the bench press, curl, bent-over row, and HP exercises. BL = baseline; S = set number; RI = rest interval; BP = bench press;
BOR = bent-over row; HP = high pull. * p # 0.05 between RI1 and each set and RI2; # p # 0.05 between HP and BP and curl.

the TM

52 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

Figure 3. V_ O2 responses of the burpee, plank, push-up, PU on BOSU ball, and PU with lateral crawl exercises. BL = baseline; S = set number; RI = rest
interval; BUR = burpee; PU = push-up; BOSU PU = push-up on BOSU ball; PU-LC = push-up with lateral crawl. * p # 0.05 between RI1 and each set and
RI2 with the exception of the plank; # p # 0.05 between burpee and plank, PU, BOSU PU, and PU-LC; $ p # 0.05 between PU-LC and plank, PU, and
BOSU PU; ^ p # 0.05 between plank and PU and BOSU PU.

RESULTS The exercises yielding the highest V_ O2 and EE responses

Acute metabolic and HR responses to each exercise pro- were BR, burpee, SQ, PU-LC, DL, and lunge. The plank
tocol are shown in Tables 3 and 4. Significant main effects yielded the lowest V_ O2 and EE responses. The BP, curl,
were observed for relative V_ O2 (p = 0.02) and EE (p = 0.04). BOR, PU, and BOSU PU yielded similar V_ O2 and EE

TABLE 5. Acute exercise performance.*

Repetitions Set duration (s)

Set 1 Set 2 Set 3 Set 1 Set 2 Set 3

Squat 10.0 6 0.0 9.5 6 1.6 9.3 6 1.5 38.4 6 12.2 36.9 6 7.1 36.3 6 7.1
BP 10.0 6 0.0 9.5 6 1.6 7.5 6 2.5 23.1 6 5.0 24.5 6 4.7 24.2 6 5.6
Curl 10.0 6 0.0 9.4 6 1.3 8.2 6 2.6 21.6 6 7.5 23.0 6 8.7 20.3 6 6.3
BOR 10.0 6 0.0 10.0 6 0.0 10.0 6 0.0 14.3 6 1.7 13.1 6 2.5 14.3 6 3.3
HP 10.0 6 0.0 10.0 6 0.0 10.0 6 0.0 16.2 6 4.9 14.1 6 4.2 13.3 6 3.5
Lunge 10.0 6 0.0 10.0 6 0.0 10.0 6 0.0 33.1 6 5.2 33.7 6 5.0 34.8 6 5.8
DL 10.0 6 0.0 9.6 6 0.8 8.8 6 2.1 30.4 6 10.9 31.0 6 9.8 29.5 6 9.6
Burpee 10.0 6 0.0 10.0 6 0.0 10.0 6 0.0 33.2 6 5.1 32.2 6 4.7 31.8 6 6.3
Plank 1.0 6 0.0 1.0 6 0.0 1.0 6 0.0 30.0 6 0.0 30.0 6 0.0 30.0 6 0.0
BR 54.8 6 10.8 54.3 6 9.5 54.0 6 9.8 30.0 6 0.0 30.0 6 0.0 30.0 6 0.0
PU 20.0 6 0.0 20.0 6 0.0 20.0 6 0.0 23.4 6 4.5 23.6 6 5.1 22.9 6 4.7
BOSU PU 20.0 6 0.0 20.0 6 0.0 20.0 6 0.0 26.2 6 6.9 24.7 6 5.8 25.7 6 6.3
PU-LC 10.0 6 0.0 10.0 6 0.0 10.0 6 0.0 36.9 6 6.2 33.2 6 7.7 34.5 6 8.5

*BP = bench press; BOR = bent-over barbell row; HP = high pull; DL = deadlift; BR = battling rope; PU = push-up; PU-LC = push-
up with lateral crawl.
p # 0.05 from set 1.

VOLUME 29 | NUMBER 1 | JANUARY 2015 | 53

Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Resistance Exercise and Oxygen Consumption
responses. Metabolic responses did not differ between per-
forming PUs on a floor or BOSU ball; however, adding
a lateral crawl to the PU significantly increased acute V_ O2
and EE responses by 3739%, respectively. Significant main
effects were observed for VE and HR. The largest acute VE
and HR responses were seen in BR followed by DL, burpee,
and SQ. The lowest VE and HR responses were seen in the
plank. No significant main effects were observed in RER.
Figures 13 depict the acute V_ O2 responses to each exer-
cise protocol. In Figure 1, the mean V_ O2 seen during BR was
significantly greater than the SQ, lunge, and DL protocols. In
addition, SQ V_ O2 was significantly higher than the lunge. No
differences were observed between the DL and lunge. In
Figure 2, the mean V_ O2 observed during the HP was signif-
icantly greater than the BP and curl. No differences were
observed between the BP, curl, and BOR. In Figure 3, the
mean V_ O2 observed during the burpee was significantly
greater than the PU, BOSU PU, PU-LC, and plank. The
mean V_ O2 observed during the PU-LC was significantly
greater than the PU, BOSU PU, and plank. No differences
were observed between the PU and BOSU PU. The mean
V_ O2 observed for the plank was significantly lower than all
other exercises. For all exercises in Figures 13 with the
exception of the plank, the responses seen during R1 were
significantly larger than the set or R2.
Acute exercise performance data are presented in Table 5.
For the free-weight and BR protocols, repetition perfor-
mance was maintained across all 3 sets for most exercises
with the exception of set 3 for the BP and curl that were
both significantly reduced compared with the first set.
Although total BR repetitions per set did not differ over 3
sets, there were significant differences (p , 0.001) for indi-
vidual exercises within each set. Significantly more repeti-
tions per set were completed for the single-arm alternating
wave (23.1 6 4.4) than the double-arm wave with half-SQ
(18.3 6 3.6) and double-arm slam with half-SQ (13.0 6 1.7)
exercises. For all exercises, set duration was similar across all
3 sets with the exception of HP where set 3 was significantly
shorter than set 1. The duration of each set between exer-
cises ranged from ;14 seconds for the bent-over row and
HP to ;37 seconds for the SQ but these differences between
exercises did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.12).
DISCUSSION
This study provided a comprehensive comparison of a total
of 13 exercises including 7 free-weight, 5 body-weight, and 1
BR circuit of exercises. For free-weight exercises, the largest
acute metabolic responses were seen in the large muscle-
mass exercises, that is, SQ, DL, and lunge. Lower metabolic
responses were seen in the BP, curl, and bent-over row.
Interestingly, the BR protocol produced the largest acute
metabolic response of all exercises tested, and the plank
provided the lowest acute metabolic response. The burpee,
another popular total-body exercise, produced the second
largest mean V_ O2 response, and this response was signifi-
the TM
54 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
cantly larger than all of the free-weight exercises. Finally,
performing PUs on the floor vs. on a BOSU ball yielded
similar metabolic responses. However, the metabolic
response increased by 39% when a lateral crawl was added
to the PU.
For free-weight exercises, the largest acute metabolic
responses were seen in the SQ, DL, and lunge. These data
support previous studies indicating that the acute V_ O2 and
EE responses are higher during large muscle-mass exercises
than smaller muscle-mass exercises (1,13,19,20,26,27,29). In
particular, lower-body exercises have elicited the greatest
acute V_ O2 responses. The SQ has been shown to elicit
greater acute metabolic responses than the BP
(1,19,20,26,27), curl (1,20), overhead press (1,13), lat pull-
down (19), upright row (1), and bent-over row (19). Bloomer
(2) examined the SQ (13 sets of an average of ;7 repetitions
with 70% of 1RM with 90120 seconds of rest in between
sets) and reported a mean V_ O2 response of 20.2
ml$kg21$min21, which was similar to data reported in this
study. The DL has been shown to elicit greater metabolic
responses than the row, BP, shoulder press, and lat pull-
down (19). The leg extension has been shown to elicit higher
acute V_ O2 than the chest press and shoulder press (14). In
addition, the leg press has been shown to elicit nearly double
the acute V_ O2 response than the chest fly (6). Thus, the
results of this study extend these findings and also demon-
strate that the alternating lunge is another lower-body exer-
cise that yields a relatively large metabolic response.
Large muscle-massresistance exercise can elicit substan-
tial elevations in V_ O2 especially when coupled with short RIs
or as part of circuit training (18,26,33). Several studies have
reported mean protocol V_ O2 values in the range of 1825
ml$kg21$min21 (1,2,18,33). In this study, our large muscle-
mass free-weight exercises elicited mean V_ O2 responses of
;17.319.6 ml$kg21$min21 despite only 3 sets performed
and use of 2-minute RIs. Peak V_ O2 values ranged from
;28.7 to 32.5 ml$kg21$min21. Mean values elicited values
;3640% of V_ O2max that are within reported ranges of 20
58% of V_ O2max seen during various protocols
(1,14,26,29,33). Large muscle-mass exercises have elicited
EE values of ;811.5 kcal$min21 vs. ;5.07.3 kcal$min21
in smaller mass exercises (1,14,24,26,29,33). In this study, our
small mass free-weight exercises yielded ;5.16.0
kcal$min21 and the larger mass exercises yielded ;7.28.2
kcal$min21, which were similar to previous reports (19) but
lower than some studies (1,29,33) presumably because of the
low volume and 2-minute RIs used.
Another finding in this study was the similar metabolic
responses between several of the smaller mass resistance
exercises. We reported similar mean V_ O2 responses between
the BP, curl, and bent-over row exercises, that is, 12.212.5
ml$kg21$min21. Ballor et al. (1) and McArdle and Foglia
(20) reported similar V_ O2 responses in the BP and curl. How-
ever, the bent-over row response was surprising given its
muscle mass involvement. Ballor et al. (1) showed higher

values during the bent-over row at various repetition speeds
than either the BP or curl. One possible explanation for the
discrepancy could be subjects performed the bent-over row
with greater ease than the BP and curl in this study. For
example, every subject completed all 10 repetitions per set
for the bent-over row. However, subjects reached momen-
tary muscular failure in both the BP and curl, and repetitions
performed for both exercises during set 3 were significantly
less than set 1. Farinatti et al. (7) reported that the acute
metabolic response of the BP was significantly higher in
women when it was performed third in sequence (in
a semi-fatigued state after the triceps extension and shoulder
press) compared with when it was performed first in
sequence. Thus, the greater fatigue associated with the BP
and curl could have increased metabolic demand as repeti-
tions became slower (as evidenced by linear position trans-
ducer data not presented), and a nonsignificant increase in
set duration was observed. Another possibility is the use of
free weights for the bent-over row. Ballor et al. (1) used
hydraulic resistance exercise for the row that could increase
the force requirements throughout the full range of motion,
whereas a free weight may be accelerated early in motion
thereby reducing tension at the end of the range of motion.
One other possibility is that the exercise range of motion of
the bent-over row may be slightly less than the BP or curl
particularly because the torso is maintained slightly above
a parallel position to the floor and the bar is lifted until it
contacts the upper rectus abdominis. Thus, it is possible that
technical and kinetic factors involved with the free-weight
bent-over row may have lessened the metabolic response but
this warrants further investigation.
The acute VE and HR responses tended to parallel V_ O2
data. The values reported in this study were comparable to
a range of values observed in the literature. Several studies
have reported VE values of 1669 L$min21 during resistance
exercise with higher values seen during large muscle-mass
exercises and when short RIs are used (1,2,14,20,24,26). We
reported a range of values from ;32 to 53 L$min21 for all of
the free-weight exercises. These values were similar to other
studies examining the BP and SQ for 35 sets using 2-minute
RIs (24,26). In addition, average HR values per exercise pro-
tocol ranged from 114 to 136 b$min21 for the free-weight
exercises in this study. Values were higher in the large
muscle-mass exercises. The values for the large muscle-
mass exercises were similar to those reported in some studies
(15,20) but were less than other studies (1,2,26,32) presum-
ably because of differences in volume, intensity, RI lengths,
and the type of resistance used (i.e., free weight vs. hydraulic
machines). These findings extend the current literature base
and demonstrate exercise-specific VE and HR responses to
a variety of resistance exercises.
The exercise that produced the largest acute metabolic
response was the BR circuit (;51% of V_ O2max). Battling
rope protocols have increased in popularity in recent years
and have been included in many types of metabolic training
Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com
programs targeting muscle strength, endurance, and cardio-
vascular conditioning (3,21). Battling ropes are used for mul-
tiple purposes, that is, climbing, pulling, and suspension
training. However, BRs are most commonly used for wave
training (3,21). The size (length, weight, and diameter) of the
ropes, as well as the velocity and amplitude of the waves and
muscle mass involvement, are thought to govern the inten-
sity of the exercises (21). However, few scientific data are
available examining the efficacy of BRs. Fountaine and
Schmidt (8) examined a 10-minute protocol where double-
arm waves were performed for 15 seconds followed by a 45-
second RI for 10 sets altogether and reported average HR of
163 b$min21, peak V_ O2 of 40.2 ml$kg21$min21, and total EE
of 622 kJ. In this study, we reported a peak V_ O2 of 38.6 6 4.7
ml$kg21$min21 and mean HR of 153.5 6 13.9 b$min21
despite performing fewer sets, using a short circuit of 3 ex-
ercises instead of 1, and using a longer RI in between sets.
Thus, based on limited research, it seems BR circuits pose
a significant metabolic and cardiovascular stimulus although
further research is warranted examining other exercises in
addition to single-arm alternating and double-arm waves.
The second largest metabolic response was observed
during the body-weight burpee exercise (;47% of V_ O2max).
The burpee is a callisthenic-type exercise that stresses most
major muscle groups. The variation used in this study in-
volves SQs, SQ thrusts, a PU, and a jump-in-place combined
into 1 exercise (other variations of the exercise have differ-
ences particularly for the PU and jump components). The
burpee was created more than 80 years ago as a way of
assessing coordination, strength, and agility fitness in soldiers
and has been used as a conditioning exercise ever since. Our
data show that the burpee provides a potent metabolic stim-
ulus larger than that observed during several moderate-
intensity free-weight exercises.
The results of this study showed that performing a PU on
the floor and on a BOSU ball resulted in similar metabolic
demands. Little is known about the performance of PUs on
a BOSU ball. A recent study showed that training with PUs
on a BOSU ball provided no advantage to performing PUs
on the floor (4). Studies examining exercises performed on
BOSU balls have generally shown reduced force output
because of the instability (28). In addition, EMG activity
has been shown to be similar in most muscles tested
between exercises on BOSU balls compared with the floor
(28). Using resistance-trained individuals, Wahl and Behm
(31) reported that the moderate instability of BOSU balls
did not result in greater muscle activation compared with
performing exercises on the floor, whereas wobble boards
and stability balls did increase stabilizer muscle activity. The
authors suggested that trained individuals may already pos-
sess sufficient stability and a less-stable surface than a BOSU
ball may be needed to challenge the neuromuscular system
(31). Thus, it may be hypothesized that BOSU balls were not
sufficient to augment muscle activation during the PU in our
group of trained individuals, which could explain the lack of
VOLUME 29 | NUMBER 1 | JANUARY 2015 | 55
 Resistance Exercise and Oxygen Consumption
difference seen in the metabolic responses. However, adding
a lateral crawl to the PU increased the acute metabolic
demand significantly despite performing half of the full-
range repetitions to account for the added time needed for
the lateral motion. The additional activation of muscle mass
of the trunk and lower body during the lateral crawl may
have led to the increased metabolic response.
The lowest metabolic and HR responses were seen during
the plank exercise. This was not surprising because the plank
is predominantly an isometric exercise. Isometric exercises
have been shown to elicit lower metabolic and HR
responses compared with dynamic exercises (5,20). McArdle
and Foglia (20) reported isometric sets of the BP, SQ, over-
head press, and curl elicited approximately half of the V_ O2
responses of their dynamic counterparts. Although the plank
exercise is commonly used in training programs targeting
increased trunk muscle strength and endurance, our data
demonstrate that it is less metabolically challenging.
In summary, the BR protocol used in this study elicited
the largest acute metabolic and HR responses compared
with all exercises tested and the plank elicited the lowest
acute metabolic response. The body-weight burpee exercise
protocol elicited the second largest mean V_ O2 response. For
the free-weight exercises, the largest acute metabolic re-
sponses were seen in the large muscle-mass exercises, that
is, SQ, DL, and lunge, and similar but lower metabolic re-
sponses were seen in the BP, curl, and bent-over row. Finally,
performing PUs on the floor vs. on a BOSU ball yielded
similar metabolic responses. However, the metabolic
response increased when a lateral crawl was added to the
PU. These data provide useful program designrelated infor-
mation to the practitioner regarding metabolic responses of
several different resistance exercises.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
Weight loss and/or body fat reductions are goals associated
with resistance training. Body fat reductions are predicated,
in part, on acute EE during each training session and the
additional EE seen during the recovery period (EPOC) after
the training sessions. The selection of resistance exercises, in
addition to the appropriate prescription of intensity, volume,
and RI lengths, which augment EE, is critical to targeting
body fat reductions and muscle endurance enhancement.
The results of this study indicate that free-weight exercises
that stress large muscle mass such as the SQ, DL, and lunge
yield high acute mean EE (7.28.2 kcal$min21) when 3 sets
of 10 repetitions with 75% of 1RM are used with 2-minute
RIs. Interestingly, lower-intensity exercises such as the bur-
pee (performed using body weight as a resistance) and a BR
circuit elicited a greater acute metabolic response, eliciting
9.610.3 kcal$min21 of EE. These results support the inclu-
sion of large muscle-mass exercises whether they use free
weights, body weight, or implements such as ropes for resis-
tance and can provide coaches and practitioners with useful
metabolic data that can assist in training program design.
the TM
56 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
REFERENCES
1. Ballor, DL, Becque, MD, and Katch, VL. Metabolic responses
during hydraulic resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc 19: 363
367, 1987.
2. Bloomer, RJ. Energy cost of moderate-duration resistance and
aerobic exercise. J Strength Cond Res 19: 878882, 2005.
3. Brookfield, J. Battling rope training systems. Available at www.
performbetter.com. Accessed April 3, 2014.
4. Chulvi-Medrano, I, Martinez-Ballester, E, and Masia-Tortosa, L.
Comparison of the effects of an eight-week push-up program using
stable versus unstable surfaces. Int J Sports Phys Ther 7: 586594,
2012.
5. Danoff, PL and Danoff, JV. Energy cost and heart rate response to
static and dynamic leg exercise. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 63: 130134,
1982.
6. Farinatti, PTV and Castinhierans Neto, AG. The effect of between-
set rest intervals on the oxygen uptake during and after resistance
exercise sessions performed with large- and small-mass exercises.
J Strength Cond Res 25: 31813190, 2011.
7. Farinatti, PTV, Simao, R, Monteiro, WD, and Fleck, SJ. Influence of
exercise order on oxygen uptake during strength training in young
women. J Strength Cond Res 23: 10371044, 2009.
8. Fountaine, CJ and Schmidt, BJ. Metabolic cost of rope training.
J Strength Cond Res, 2013. Epub ahead print.
9. Haddock, BL and Wilkin, LD. Resistance training volume and post
exercise energy expenditure. Int J Sports Med 27: 143148, 2006.
10. Hunter, G, Blackman, L, Dunnam, L, and Flemming, G. Bench press
metabolic rate as a function of exercise intensity. J Appl Sport Sci Res
2: 16, 1988.
11. Hunter, GR, Seelhorst, D, and Snyder, S. Comparison of metabolic
and heart rate responses to super slow vs. traditional resistance
training. J Strength Cond Res 17: 7681, 2003.
12. Jackson, A and Pollock, M. Generalized equations for predicting
body density of men. Br J Nutr 40: 497504, 1978.
13. Kalb, JS and Hunter, GR. Weight training economy as a function of
intensity of the squat and overhead press exercise. J Sports Med Phys
Fitness 31: 154160, 1991.
14. Katch, FI, Freedson, PS, and Jones, CA. Evaluation of acute
cardiorespiratory responses to hydraulic resistance exercise. Med Sci
Sports Exerc 17: 168173, 1985.
15. Keul, J, Haralambie, G, Bruder, M, and Gottstein, HJ. The effect of
weight lifting exercise on heart rate and metabolism in experienced
weight lifters. Med Sci Sports 10: 1315, 1978.
16. Kraemer, WJ, Fry, AC, Ratamess, NA, and French, DN. Strength
testing: Development and evaluation of methodology. In:
Physiological Assessment of Human Fitness (2nd ed.). P. Maud and C.
Foster, eds. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2006. pp. 119150.
17. Kraemer, WJ and Ratamess, NA. Fundamentals of resistance
training: Progression and exercise prescription. Med Sci Sports Exerc
36: 674688, 2004.
18. Lagally, KM, Cordero, J, Good, J, Brown, DD, and McCaw, ST.
Physiologic and metabolic responses to a continuous functional
resistance exercise workout. J Strength Cond Res 23: 373379, 2009.
19. Mazzetti, S, Wolff, C, Yocum, A, Reidy, P, Douglass, MS,
Cochran, H, and Douglass, MD. Effect of maximal and slow versus
recreational muscle contractions on energy expenditure in trained
and untrained men. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 51: 381392, 2011.
20. McArdle, WD and Foglia, GF. Energy cost and cardiorespiratory
stress of isometric and weight training exercises. J Sports Med Phys
Fitness 9: 2330, 1969.
21. Morton, C. The power of ropes. Train Cond, 22: 1321, 2012.
22. Phillips, WT and Ziuraitis, JR. Energy cost of the ACSM single-set
resistance training protocol. J Strength Cond Res 17: 350355, 2003.

23. Ratamess, NA, Faigenbaum, AD, Mangine, GT, Hoffman, JR, and
Kang, J. Acute muscular strength assessment using free weight bars
of different thickness. J Strength Cond Res 21: 240244, 2007.
24. Ratamess, NA, Falvo, MJ, Mangine, GT, Hoffman, JR,
Faigenbaum, AD, and Kang, J. The effect of rest interval length on
metabolic responses to the bench press exercise. Eur J Appl Physiol
100: 117, 2007.
25. Ratamess, NA, Alvar, BA, Evetovich, TK, Housh, TJ, Kibler, WB,
Kraemer, WJ, and Triplett, NT. American College of Sports
Medicine position stand: Progression models in resistance training
for healthy adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc 41: 687708, 2009.
26. Ratamess, NA, Rosenberg, JG, Kang, J, Sundberg, S, Izer, KA,
Levowsky, J, Rzeszutko, C, Ross, RE, and Faigenbaum, AD. Acute
oxygen uptake and resistance exercise performance using different
rest interval lengths: The influence of maximal aerobic capacity and
exercise sequence. J Strength Cond Res 28: 18751888, 2014.
27. Robergs, RA, Gordon, T, Reynolds, J, and Walker, TB. Energy
expenditure during bench press and squat exercises. J Strength Cond
Res 21: 123130, 2007.
Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com
28. Saeterbakken, AH and Fimland, MS. Muscle force output and
electromyographic activity in squats with various unstable surfaces.
J Strength Cond Res 27: 130136, 2013.
29. Scala, D, McMillan, J, Blessing, D, Rozenek, R, and Stone, M.
Metabolic cost of a preparatory phase of training in weight lifting:
A practical observation. J Appl Sports Sci Res 1: 4852, 1987.
30. Siri, WE. Gross composition of the body. In: Advances in Biological
and Medical Physics, IV. J.H. Lawrence and C.A. Tobias, eds. New
York, NY: Academic Press, 1956.
31. Wahl, MJ and Behm, DG. Not all instability training devices
enhance muscle activation in highly resistance-trained individuals.
J Strength Cond Res 22: 13601370, 2008.
32. Willoughby, DS, Chilek, DR, Schiller, DA, and Coast, JR. The
metabolic effects of three different free weight parallel squatting
intensities. J Hum Mov Stud 21: 5367, 1991.
33. Wilmore, JH, Parr, RB, Ward, P, Vodak, PA, Barstow, TJ, Pipes, TV,
Grimditch, G, and Leslie, P. Energy cost of circuit weight training.
Med Sci Sports 10: 7578, 1978.
VOLUME 29 | NUMBER 1 | JANUARY 2015 | 57