Comparison of Strength Development in Traditional Set-Repetition Configuration Versus Accentuated Eccentric Loading Training over a 4-Week Strength-Endurance Block.

Abstract: McDowell, K, Long, A, Chae, S, Nelson, A, Goode, N, Lis, R, Mizuguchi, S, Baur, M, Duca, M, Wagle, JP, Fry, AC, Daniel, G, and Stone, MH. Comparison of strength development in traditional set-rep configuration vs. accentuated eccentric loading training over a 4-week strength-endurance block. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2025-This study investigated the chronic effects of accentuated eccentric loading (AEL) paired with cluster sets (CS) on strength. Seventeen (11 men and 6 women) recreationally active subjects (23.18 ± 4.15 years, 1.72 ± 0.1 m, 81.29 ± 22.18 kg) were randomly assigned to AEL (n = 9) and traditional (TRAD) (n = 8) groups. During 4 weeks of training, AEL group performed 3 sets of (5 × 2) repetitions of back squat and bench press using weight releasers and CS, whereas TRAD group performed the same total sets and reps and exercises using traditional loading and set structures. Dynamic (back squat and bench press 1 repetition maximum [1RM]) and isometric (midthigh pull peak force and rate of force development) strength were tested before and after training and analyzed using a 2-way analysis of variance. There was a main effect of time for back squat 1RM (p = 0.008; 125.0 ± 42.4-131.0 ± 42.2 kg) and back squat + bench press 1RM (p = 0.02; 213.0 ± 74.6-220.0 ± 75.3 kg). No significant interaction effects were observed in any variables posttraining (p > 0.05). Although the isometric rate of force development decreased in both groups, TRAD showed a shaper decline than AEL after training (-20.57% [g = -0.33] vs. -0.93% [g = -0.01]). The benefit of AEL paired with CS in maximum dynamic strength may not outweigh its logistical burden. However, practitioners may consider this method in maintaining the isometric rate of force development during high-volume training.