0363-5465/100/2828-0626$02.

00/0
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, Vol. 28, No. 5
© 2000 American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine

Influence of Resistance Training Volume

and Periodization on Physiological and
Performance Adaptations in Collegiate
Women Tennis Players
William J. Kraemer,*† PhD, Nicholas Ratamess,* MS, Andrew C. Fry,‡ PhD,
Travis Triplett-McBride,‡ PhD, L. Perry Koziris,‡ PhD, Jeffrey A. Bauer,‡ PhD,
James M. Lynch,‡ MD, and Steven J. Fleck,§ PhD

From the ‡Laboratory for Sports Medicine, The Pennsylvania State University, University
Park, Pennsylvania, *The Human Performance Laboratory, Ball State University, Muncie,
Indiana, and the §Department of Sport Science, Colorado College, Colorado Springs, Colorado

ABSTRACT circuit group. These data demonstrate that sport-spe-

Few data exist on the long-term adaptations to heavy
resistance training in women. The purpose of this in-
vestigation was to examine the effect of volume of
resistance exercise on the development of physical
performance abilities in competitive, collegiate
women tennis players. Twenty-four tennis players
were matched for tennis ability and randomly placed
into one of three groups: a no resistance exercise
control group, a periodized multiple-set resistance
training group, or a single-set circuit resistance training
group. No significant changes in body mass were ob-
served in any of the groups throughout the entire train-
ing period. However, significant increases in fat-free
mass and decreases in percent body fat were ob-
served in the periodized training group after 4, 6, and 9
months of training. A significant increase in power
output was observed after 9 months of training in the
periodized training group only. One-repetition maxi-
mum strength for the bench press, free-weight shoul-
der press, and leg press increased significantly after 4,
6, and 9 months of training in the periodized training
group, whereas the single-set circuit group increased
only after 4 months of training. Significant increases in
serve velocity were observed after 4 and 9 months of
training in the periodized training group, whereas no
significant changes were observed in the single-set
† Address correspondence and reprint requests to William J. Kraemer,
PhD, The Human Performance Laboratory, Ball State University, Muncie, IN
47306.
No author or related institution has received any financial benefit from
research in this study. See “Acknowledgments” for funding information.
cific resistance training using a periodized multiple-set
training method is superior to low-volume single-set
resistance exercise protocols in the development of
physical abilities in competitive, collegiate women ten-
nis players.
Resistance training is one of the primary conditioning
modalities that has been shown to be effective in mediat-
ing neuromuscular adaptations important for injury pre-
vention and improved sport performance.11–13, 32 How-
ever, few studies have examined long-term training
programs (that is, 6 months or greater), especially in wom-
en.37, 38 With the increasing time demands placed on com-
petitive intercollegiate athletes due to National Collegiate
Athletic Association (NCAA) restrictions on the amount of
time allowed for supervised strength and conditioning
during both the in- and off-season programs, low-volume
training sessions may reduce training time. However, the
efficacy of low-volume heavy-resistance circuit training
protocols remains unclear in women athletes.7
These low-volume programs have been characterized by
the use of a single set for a group of exercises. The single-
set system is one of the oldest systems, dating back to
1925 when first described by Liederman.23 With the use of
such a training system, increases in strength have been
observed over short-term periods (for example, 7 to 14
weeks) that are comparable with those of high-volume mul-
tiple-set programs in untrained subjects.4, 15, 24, 29, 31, 34, 36
However, such studies have not typically compared such
low-volume programs with a properly periodized resis-
tance training program over a long-term training period.

626
Vol. 28, No. 5, 2000
A recent study demonstrated no significant differences in
isometric torque values for knee extension and flexion at
different joint angles after 14 weeks of training with ei-
ther one or three sets of dynamic strength training in
untrained men and women.36 However, the effect of using
such a training system in younger athletes over a longer
period of training (for example, an entire academic year)
remains unknown. Other studies in men have demon-
strated that the use of high-volume multiple-set systems
may result in superior strength gains in both untrained
subjects1, 3, 33, 39, 41 and resistance-trained athletes.16, 17 In
addition, most athletes using multiple-set protocols now
periodize their training to avoid overtraining, eliminate
boredom in the training routine, and optimize recovery,
which is of great importance in improving performance
and reducing the risk of injury.17, 40, 42
Understanding the effects of using periodized resistance
training protocols with athletes may provide insights for
enhancing performance and preventing injury. The pri-
mary purpose of this study was to compare a high-volume,
periodized, multiple-set strength training program to a
low-volume, heavy-resistance circuit program over 9
months of training in competitive women tennis players.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Experimental Design and Approach to the Question
In this study a prospective, longitudinal study was under-
taken to examine the effect of exercise volume on the
physical performance of highly skilled tennis players. A
control group and two training cohorts were used to ex-
amine this question over the course of 9 months of train-
ing and tennis competition. This approach allowed us to
directly control and carefully monitor the training and
status of each subject in the study to gain insights into
this exercise prescription question. The context of the data
can be generalized only to the type of population examined
in the world of competitive tennis.
Subjects
Twenty-four collegiate women tennis players were
matched for tennis ability (that is, years of play, compet-
itive level, and United States Tennis Association [USTA]
ranking) and randomly placed into one of three groups. All
groups participated in all activities associated with com-
petitive collegiate tennis over 9 months, but the control
group (N ⫽ 8) participated in no resistance training, the
periodized training group (N ⫽ 8) participated in a peri-
odized resistance training program, and the single-set
group (N ⫽ 8) participated in a single-set circuit resis-
tance training program. No significant differences were
observed between the subject characteristics at the onset
of the study (Table 1). Subjects reported a mean of 7.8 ⫾
2.4 years of tennis experience with no differences between
groups. Each of the subjects was informed of the benefits
and risks of the investigation and subsequently signed an
Volume Effects on Resistance Training for Women Tennis Players 627
TABLE 1
Descriptive Characteristics for the Three Study Groups
(Means ⫾ SD)
Group
Characteristic Periodized Single-set
Control
training training
Age (years) 19.8 ⫾ 1.7 19.0 ⫾ 0.9 18.9 ⫾ 1.2
Height (cm) 167 ⫾ 5.1 168 ⫾ 4.2 167.5 ⫾ 5.2
Body mass (kg) 58.9 ⫾ 7.8 60.4 ⫾ 7.6 60.8 ⫾ 7.7
approved consent form in accordance with the guidelines
of the university Institutional Review Board for use of
human subjects. All subjects were medically screened be-
fore the investigation and none had any medical or ortho-
paedic problems that would compromise her participation
and performance in the study. In addition, none of the
subjects were taking any medications that would confound
the data during this study.
Testing Protocols
All tests were performed at the same time of day for each
subject to reduce the effect of any diurnal variations. Sub-
jects were instructed to keep similar dietary and activity
profiles for each testing phase by keeping a diary. In
addition, subjects were instructed to refrain from exercise
for 24 hours before testing and to refrain from eating
within 6 hours of testing. Water was allowed ad libitum.
Actual experimental testing after preliminary familiariza-
tion and test-retest evaluations was performed on four
occasions: in August (pretraining), December (4 months),
February (6 months), and May (9 months) for all groups.
All subjects were carefully familiarized with all testing
and training protocols and procedures before initiation of
the study. The importance of removing the random “learn-
ing effects” in strength training studies has been verified
by Dudley et al.6 and, thus, we tried to eliminate the
influence of acute learning effects on the absolute magni-
tude of changes in the test variables. A familiarization
period (consisting of at least three sessions) that included
instruction on proper technique was used for all testing
procedures.6
Body Composition. Body composition was estimated us-
ing three skinfold measurements obtained with a Lange
skinfold caliper (Country Technology, Gays Mills, Wiscon-
sin) according to the methods described by Jackson et al.14
The three sites consisted of the triceps, suprailiac, and
thigh. Percent body fat was estimated using the equation
of Siri.35 The same investigators performed all tests. Body
mass was measured on a calibrated physician’s scale.
Anaerobic Power. A Wingate cycle ergometer test proto-
col was used to determine peak power output for each
subject. Subjects were seated on a Monark cycle ergometer
(Recreation Equipment Unlimited, Inc., Pittsburgh, Penn-
sylvania) with the seat adjusted to a corresponding knee
angle of approximately 10° when one leg was in the ex-
tended position. A 2-minute warm-up was allowed using
minimal or no resistance. The ergometer load setting was
determined by the product of the subject’s body weight
628 Kraemer et al.
and a factor of 0.075. Load was applied to the ergometer
after subjects attained the fastest possible pedaling rate.
Each subject maintained her maximal pedaling rate
throughout the 30-second test. Pedal revolutions were dig-
itally determined via a sensor on the flywheel interfaced
to a computer throughout the 30-second test and recorded
at each 5-second period. Power values were then calcu-
lated according to previously established methods.21
Maximal counter-movement vertical jump height was
determined using a Vertec measurement device (Sports
Imports, Columbus, Ohio). Each subject was allowed one
practice trial, rested, and then was given three trials with
approximately 2 to 3 minutes of rest between trials. The
highest jump was recorded for analysis. Each score was
measured as the difference between the jump height and
the standing vertical reach of the subject on the Vertec
system.
Dynamic Muscular Strength Assessments. One-repeti-
tion maximum strength was determined for the seated
machine leg press, the free-weight shoulder press, and the
bench press exercises according to methods previously
described by Kraemer and Fry.19 A warm-up set of 5 to 10
repetitions was performed using 40% to 60% of the per-
ceived maximum strength. After a 1-minute rest period, a
set of 3 to 5 repetitions was performed at 60% to 80% of the
perceived one-repetition maximum strength. Subse-
quently, 3 to 4 maximal trials (one-repetition sets) were
performed to determine the one-repetition maximum
strength. Rest periods between trials were 3 to 5 minutes.
A complete range of motion and proper technique were
required for each successful trial.
Maximal Serve Velocity. The methods used to analyze
the serve velocity have been previously described in de-
tail.22 Two Panasonic 60 Hz model AG-450 video cameras
(Panasonic, Tokyo, Japan) were positioned facing each
other along the baseline of the testing court. Each camera
filmed all serves, producing a front and back view of all
the subjects. After a warm-up period, each subject was
instructed to hit the ball as hard as possible until 10
acceptable serves were filmed. An acceptable shot was
accomplished by hitting a ball into the deuce court for
right-handed players and into the ad court for left-handed
players. Ball velocity was determined by digitizing trials
and frame-by-frame analysis with the Peak Performance
2-D Motion Analysis system (Peak Performance Technol-
ogies, Englewood, Colorado). The data were expanded to
represent collection at 240 Hz using a cubic spline inter-
polation routine with no smoothing. Both displacement
and flight time of the ball were determined and were used
to calculate the velocity. Flight time of the ball was de-
fined as the time frame between immediate (approximate-
ly 17 msec) contact with the racket and contact within the
service box during the digitized trials. The mean of the top
three trial velocities for the serves was used for analysis
as this gave the highest test-retest reliability.
Training Programs
The resistance training protocols are overviewed in Table
2. Both groups trained 2 to 3 days per week depending on
American Journal of Sports Medicine
TABLE 2
Resistance Training Exercise Protocols
Resistance:
Single-Set Circuit: 8 to 10 repetition maximum for all
exercises.
Periodized: Resistances were varied within a week between 4
to 6, 8 to 10, and 12 to 15 repetition maximum for the
exercises marked with an asterisk. All other exercises used
a constant resistance of 8 to 10. Number of sets varied
from 2 to 4.
Rest Periods
1 to 2 minutes for 12 to 15 and 8 to 10 repetition
maximum resistance, and 2 to 3 minutes for 4 to 6
repetition maximum resistance.
Resistance Exercises
Leg press (machine)
Bench press (barbells)
Single leg curls (machine)
Bent-over-rows (dumbbell)
Dumbbell lunge (dumbbell)
Split squats (barbell)
Military press (barbell)
Single knee extensions (machine)
Front pull downs (machine)
Back extensions (dumbbell)
Internal/external rotations (dumbbell)
Sit-ups/crunches
Hip tucks
Wrist extension/curls/hammers (dumbbell)
match schedules for 9 months (totaling 100 workouts,
100% compliance). Training started in September and was
completed in May. Both resistance training groups per-
formed the same exercises (Table 2). The resistance used
for each exercise was based on the ability of the individual
athlete. The athlete adjusted the resistance for a given
exercise to allow only the set number of repetitions to be
performed. The single-set group used an 8 to 10 repetition
loading protocol for one set, whereas the periodized train-
ing group rotated each workout using either 4 to 6 repe-
titions (heavy resistance), 8 to 10 repetitions (moderate
resistance), or 12 to 15 repetitions (light resistance) for 2
to 4 sets of each exercise. This nonlinear periodization
program was designed to permit variation of both inten-
sity and volume, which is more practical for a sport like
tennis where match play and practice are year-round. In
addition, this model is specific for the sport of tennis and
conducive to the type of time constraints placed on the
tennis player over the course of a year (in-season and
off-season). All workouts were completed within 90 min-
utes or less, with the single-set circuit being shorter in
duration than the periodized program. Each workout was
individually supervised and workouts were recorded for
both resistance training groups. The control group took
part in all of the tennis-specific training and conditioning
drills but did not participate in the resistance training
segment of this investigation.
Statistical Analyses
The statistical evaluation of the data were accomplished
with an analysis of variance (3 groups by 4 time points)
with repeated measures. When appropriate, Tukey’s post
hoc tests were used for pairwise comparisons. The subjects
Vol. 28, No. 5, 2000 Volume Effects on Resistance Training for Women Tennis Players
were familiarized with each test over a 2-week period and
repeat testing established a baseline. This was followed by
two separate testing times where the same test was ad-
ministered under the same conditions with the same in-
vestigators or technicians who would perform the tests in
the study. This resulted in test-retest reliability of the
measures to demonstrate good stability in the measures
with intraclass correlation coefficients of r ⱖ 0.95. The
control group was used to examine the stability of the
measures over time. Nevertheless, in calculating intra-
class correlations in the control group the r values were
ⱖ0.90, again showing solid stability over time in the de-
pendent measures. Prior work also demonstrated a good
test-retest reliability for the measures used.22 Using the
nQuery Advisor software (Statistical Solutions, Saugus,
Massachusetts), we found the statistical power for the n
size used ranged from 0.79 to 0.92. Statistical significance
was chosen as P ⱕ 0.05.
RESULTS
The results for this study are presented in the subsequent
sections. Compliance for this study was 100% for all sub-
jects who were placed into a resistance training group.
Therefore, all women in the single-set and periodized
training groups completed 100 workouts.
Anthropometrics
No significant differences in body mass from pretraining
values were observed in any group over the 9-month train-
ing/competition period. However, significant increases in
fat-free mass and decreases in percent body fat were ob-
served in the periodized training group at 4, 6, and 9
Figure 1. The effects of low-volume and high-volume, peri-
odized resistance training on percent body fat. *, significant
decrease from pretraining. @, significant decrease from pre-
training, 4 months, and 6 months. Significant decreases were
observed only in the periodized training group. P, periodized
training group; SSC, single-set circuit group; Con, control
group.
629
months (percent body fat data are shown in Fig. 1). No
significant differences were observed in either the single-
set or the control groups.
Anaerobic Power
Changes in the peak power for the Wingate cycle ergome-
ter power test are shown in Figure 2A. A significant in-
crease in power output was observed at 9 months for the
periodized training group. No significant differences were
observed for the single-set or control groups. Changes in
the counter-movement vertical jump height are presented
in Figure 2B. Significant increases above pretraining val-
ues were observed at 4, 6, and 9 months for the periodized
training group. No significant differences were observed
for the single-set or control groups at any time point.
Dynamic Muscular Strength
Changes in one-repetition maximum strength for the
bench press, free-weight shoulder press, and leg press can
be seen in Figure 3. The periodized training group signif-
Figure 2. The effects of low-volume and high-volume, peri-
odized resistance training on muscular power. Panel A indi-
cates differences in the Wingate anaerobic power perfor-
mance test. Panel B indicates differences in vertical jump
performance. *, significant increase from pretraining. @, sig-
nificant increase from pretraining, 4 months, and 6 months.
Significant increases were observed only for the periodized
training group. See the legend at Figure 1 for abbreviations.
630 Kraemer et al.
Figure 3. The effects of low-volume and high-volume, peri-
odized resistance training on muscular strength. Panel A
indicates differences in bench press. Panel B indicates dif-
ferences in free-weight shoulder press. Panel C indicates
differences in leg press. *, significant increase from pretrain-
ing. #, significant increase from pretraining and 4 months. @,
significant increase from pretraining, 4 months, and 6
months. See the legend at Figure 1 for abbreviations.
icantly increased their one-repetition maximum strength
at 4, 6, and 9 months for all of the exercises. The single-set
group significantly increased strength only at 4 months
for all exercises. No further changes were observed beyond
this point. No difference in strength for any exercise was
observed in the control group.
Serve Velocity
Changes in serve velocity are shown in Figure 4. A signif-
icant increase above pretraining values in serve velocity
was observed at 4, 6 and 9 months in the periodized
training group. No significant changes were observed in
either the single-set or control groups.
American Journal of Sports Medicine
Figure 4. The effects of low-volume and high-volume, peri-
odized resistance training on tennis serve velocity. *, signif-
icant increase from pretraining. #, significant increase from
pretraining and 4 months. A significant increase was ob-
served only in the periodized training group. See the legend
at Figure 1 for abbreviations.
DISCUSSION
Few data exist concerning the long-term resistance train-
ing adaptations in women.37 The primary findings of this
investigation were that a high-volume, periodized, multi-
ple-set resistance training program elicited superior
1) increases in upper and lower body maximal strength,
2) increases in muscular power, 3) increases in lean body
mass, 4) decreases in percent body fat, and 5) increases in
tennis serve velocity when compared with a low-volume,
single-set circuit program in competitive collegiate women
tennis players during 9 months of training. A secondary
finding of interest was that both groups increased muscu-
lar strength during the first 4 months of training, but only
the periodized training group continued to improve signif-
icantly beyond this point. Of particular importance for
women tennis players was the finding that the periodized
training group was the only group to see sport-specific
changes in the maximal ball velocity in the tennis serve.
These findings may significantly affect program design
and long-term prescription of resistance training pro-
grams for women tennis players. It appears that a volume
of exercise threshold may be vital for some parameters to
continue to change over time and be integrated within the
athlete’s physiologic profile as it relates to performance.
Our data demonstrated a distinct difference in the pro-
gression of maximal strength over the 9-month training
period. The group undergoing periodized training had a
significantly different pattern of change when compared
with the low-volume single-set group after the first 4
months. Our data indicate that program differentiation
may take longer than a few months in women tennis
players because of the rapid increases observed in the
early phase of training (that is, first several months) to
almost any overload.37, 38 Such separation may be very
volume-specific. Direct comparisons of single- and multi-
Vol. 28, No. 5, 2000 Volume Effects on Resistance Training for Women Tennis Players
ple-set protocols have produced conflicting results. Sev-
eral studies have reported superior increases in maximal
strength and vertical jump performance when multiple-
set protocols were used with untrained subjects.1, 3, 33, 39, 41
In addition, the increases observed in groups who trained
with multiple sets were significantly greater when vol-
ume and intensity were periodized.33, 41 In contrast,
several studies have reported similar strength increases
using both single- and multiple-set protocols in un-
trained subjects.3, 4, 15, 24, 29, 31, 34, 36 To date, no study
has reported superior performance enhancement using
single-set programs in untrained or trained subjects.
However, from a practical perspective not all exercises
have to be performed for the same number of sets, and
thus the key factor appears to be the volume of exercise
performed for a given joint’s musculature as the number
of sets only contributes to that volume equation (sets ⫻
repetitions ⫻ intensity).
Limited data are available comparing single- and mul-
tiple-set programs in athletes. The results of the present
study support previous findings in trained men where
high-volume, periodized, multiple-set resistance training
programs were superior to low-volume, single-set pro-
grams for increasing muscular strength16, 17 and fat-free
mass.17 In the present study, muscular strength increased
significantly in both groups during the first 4 months of
training. However, only the periodized training group
showed further improvement beyond this point. These
findings have direct implications for resistance training
exercise prescription oriented toward long-term progres-
sion in training tennis players with the goal of improve-
ment in these parameters. Kraemer17 reported greater
increases in muscular strength, power, endurance, and
lean body mass when multiple-set programs were used in
collegiate football players versus nonperiodized low-vol-
ume programs. Kramer et al.16 reported significantly
greater increases in one-repetition maximum squat using
multiple-set programs in resistance-trained college men.
In contrast, Ostrowski et al.28 reported no significant dif-
ferences in maximal strength between training with ei-
ther one, two, or four sets per exercise in moderately
trained men. Considering that continued improvement in
weight training becomes more difficult with experience,10
it appears that multiple-set, high-volume resistance exer-
cise protocols are most effective for long-term performance
enhancement in athletes. These findings may also support
the use of greater time commitments for resistance train-
ing in athletes.
Our data demonstrate limited transfer of the training to
power and maximal ball velocity in the tennis serve with
the single-set circuit program. Previously, Kraemer17 also
reported limited improvements in various muscular per-
formance variables between the 3rd and 6th months of
training using a single-set program in football players.
This may have been due to either a lack of variation in
program design16, 17, 40 or inadequate volume needed to
produce further increases that transfer to the skills be-
yond that of the initial adaptations.16, 17 It could also be
due to the speed of movement used in the exercise. Mul-
tiple-set periodized programs have demonstrated superior
631
long-term performance improvements compared with sin-
gle-set17, 33 and nonperiodized multiple-set programs.42
Therefore, these data demonstrate that short-term im-
provements in muscular strength may be attained with
either single- or multiple-set programs during the first
few months. However, periodized multiple-set programs
are superior for transfer specificity in the carryover to
long-term performance enhancements of multiple-joint,
whole-body, closed kinetic chain activities in women ten-
nis athletes.
Fat-free mass increased significantly at 4, 6, and 9
months for the periodized training group, but no changes
were observed for the single-set group. Kraemer17 re-
ported similar results in football players who trained with
either a single-set or periodized multiple-set training pro-
gram. Muscular hypertrophy in women, as a result of
resistance training, has been reported in previous stud-
ies.37, 38 These studies used multiple-set programs during
resistance training. Limited data exist examining differ-
ences in fat-free mass resulting from single- versus mul-
tiple-set training in women. A possible explanation is al-
terations in hormonal concentrations conducive to
anabolism. Acute increases in growth hormone have been
reported during high-volume resistance exercise.18, 20 In
particular, multiple-set programs were shown to be supe-
rior for rapid increases in growth hormone and decreases
in cortisol in women.26 Therefore, it appears that the
volume of resistance exercise may be significant for hor-
monal alterations and, consequently, increases in fat-free
mass in women.
A significant difference between groups was also ob-
served for lower-body power. The periodized training
group significantly increased in the nonspecific Wingate
power output test at 9 months and in vertical jump height
at 4, 6, and 9 months, whereas no significant differences
were observed for the single-set group for either anaerobic
power test. Part of this variance may be accounted for by
total training volume. Kraemer17 and Stone et al.39 re-
ported significantly greater increases in muscular power
and vertical jump performance when high-volume, multi-
ple-set programs were used. Sanborn et al.33 reported an
11% increase in vertical jump after 8 weeks of training
with multiple sets compared with a 0.3% increase ob-
served in a single-set group. Interestingly, Ostrowski et
al.28 reported an insignificant decrease for the vertical
jump after 10 weeks of single-set training. In addition, a
large percentage of this variance may be accounted for by
repetition velocity. The periodized training group per-
formed their repetitions with moderate-to-explosive mus-
cle actions and velocities whereas the single-set group
performed each repetition in a slow, controlled manner.
Proponents of low-volume training typically prescribe one
set of 8 to 12 repetitions performed to momentary muscu-
lar failure at a slow velocity for predominantly single-joint
exercises.29, 36 Thus, the single-set group performed each
repetition in accordance with this training approach. It
has been reported that fast contraction velocities are most
effective for increasing muscular power.5, 25, 27 Therefore,
training solely with slow movements may have limited
power development in the single-set group, but explosive
632 Kraemer et al.
lifting is typically not supported by low-volume training
theories.
Perhaps the most significant finding was that the peri-
odized training group significantly increased their serve
velocity at 4 and 9 months, whereas the single-set group
showed no significant changes. The women who partici-
pated in this study were competitive collegiate tennis
players matched for tennis playing ability. Tennis is a
physiologically demanding sport2 that requires power,
speed, balance, agility, coordination, flexibility, and car-
diovascular endurance.8, 9, 30 Thus, increasing tennis-spe-
cific fitness components beyond typical tennis practice
gains was the goal of the resistance training program.
Both upper and lower body power are essential compo-
nents of tennis.8 Testing maximal serve velocity was used
as an indicator variable for the efficacy of the training
programs on tennis performance ability. Therefore, the
periodized, multiple-set resistance training program was
most effective for increasing aspects of tennis performance
above pretraining values at 4, 6, and 9 months. It appears
a threshold of volume is needed to affect performance
changes. This has obvious value to tennis players and
coaches. Furthermore, these gains were maintained over
the duration of the study through a competitive tennis
season.
In summary, a higher-volume, periodized, multiple-set
resistance training program produced superior increases
in muscular strength, power, lean body mass, tennis per-
formance (as measured maximal serve velocity), and pro-
duced a superior decrease in percent body fat over a
9-month training period. A finding of interest was that
only the periodized training group showed continued im-
provement beyond that of the initial 4 months of training.
These findings have direct implications for program de-
sign for collegiate women tennis players where training
goals are related to long-term continued improvement in
such training variables. Based on our data, it appears that
periodized, multiple-set, resistance training programs are
most effective for long-term performance increases in
these collegiate athletes.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This study was supported in part by a grant from United
States Tennis Association, Key Biscayne, Florida. We
thank all of the athletes and coaches who supported this
sport science project. In addition, we thank all of the
laboratory staff and trainers who helped with the testing
and training of these subjects and Coach Sue Whiteside
for her support.
REFERENCES
1. Berger R: Comparative effects of three weight training programs. Res Q
34: 396 –398, 1963
2. Bergeron MF, Maresh CM, Kraemer WJ, et al: Tennis: A physiological
profile during match play. Int J Sports Med 12: 474 – 479, 1991
3. Capen EK: Study of four programs of heavy resistance exercises for
development of muscular strength. Res Q 27: 132–142, 1956
American Journal of Sports Medicine
4. Coleman AE: Nautilus vs Universal gym strength training in adult males.
Am Correct Ther J 31: 103–107, 1977
5. Coyle EF, Feiring DC, Rotkis TC, et al: Specificity of power improvements
through slow and fast isokinetic training. J Appl Physiol 51: 1437–1442,
1981
6. Dudley GA, Tesch PA, Miller BJ, et al: Importance of eccentric actions in
performance adaptations to resistance training. Aviat Space Environ Med
62: 543–550, 1991
7. Fleck SJ, Kraemer WJ: Designing Resistance Training Programs. Second
edition. Champaign, IL, Human Kinetics, 1997
8. Groppel JL, Roetert EP: Applied physiology of tennis. Sports Med 14:
260 –268, 1992
9. Hageman CE, Lehman RC: Stretching, strengthening, and conditioning
for the competitive tennis player. Clin Sports Med 7: 211–228, 1988
10. Häkkinen K: Factors affecting trainability of muscular strength during
short-term and prolonged training. NSCA Journal 7: 32–37, 1985
11. Häkkinen K, Alen M, Komi PV: Changes in isometric force- and relaxation-
time, electromyographic and muscle fibre characteristics of human skel-
etal muscle during strength training and detraining. Acta Physiol Scand
125: 573–585, 1985
12. Häkkinen K, Pakarinen A, Alen M, et al: Relationships between training
volume, physical performance capacity, and serum hormone concentra-
tions during prolonged training in elite weight lifters. Int J Sports Med 8
(suppl): 61– 65, 1987
13. Häkkinen K, Pakarinen A, Kyröläinen H, et al: Neuromuscular adaptations
and serum hormones in females during prolonged power training. Int
J Sports Med 11: 91–98, 1990
14. Jackson AS, Pollock ML, Ward A: Generalized equations for predicting
body density of women. Med Sci Sports Exerc 12: 175–182, 1980
15. Jacobson BH: A comparison of two progressive weight training techniques
on knee extensor strength. Athletic Training 21: 315–318, 1986
16. Kramer JB, Stone MH, O’Bryant HS, et al: Effects of single vs. multiple
sets of weight training: Impact of volume, intensity, and variation. J
Strength Cond Res 11: 143–147, 1997
17. Kraemer WJ: A series of studies: The physiological basis for strength
training in American football: Fact over philosophy. J Strength Cond Res
11: 131–142, 1997
18. Kraemer WJ, Fleck SJ, Dziados JE, et al: Changes in hormonal concen-
trations after different heavy-resistance exercise protocols in women.
J Appl Physiol 75: 594 – 604, 1993
19. Kraemer WJ, Fry AC: Strength testing: Development and evaluation of
methodology, in Maud PJ, Foster C (eds): Physiological Assessment of
Human Fitness. Champaign, IL, Human Kinetics, 1995, pp 115–138
20. Kraemer WJ, Gordon SE, Fleck SJ, et al: Endogenous anabolic hormonal
and growth factor responses to heavy resistance exercise in males and
females. Int J Sports Med 12: 228 –235, 1991
21. Kraemer WJ, Patton JF, Gordon SE, et al: Compatibility of high intensity
strength and endurance training on hormonal and skeletal muscle adap-
tations. J Appl Physiol 78: 976 –989, 1995
22. Kraemer WJ, Triplett NT, Fry AC, et al: An in-depth sports medicine profile
of women college tennis players. J Sport Rehabil 4: 79 –98, 1995
23. Liederman EE: Secrets of Strength. New York, E. Liederman, 1925
24. Messier SP, Dill ME: Alterations in strength and maximal oxygen uptake
consequent to Nautilus circuit weight training. Res Q Exerc Sport 56:
345–351, 1985
25. Morrissey MC, Harman EA, Frykman PN, et al: Early phase differential
effects of slow and fast barbell squat training. Am J Sports Med 26:
221–230, 1998
26. Mulligan SE, Fleck SJ, Gordon SE, et al: Influence of resistance exercise
volume on serum growth hormone and cortisol concentrations in women.
J Strength Cond Res 10: 256 –262, 1996
27. Newton RU, Kraemer WJ: Developing explosive muscular power: Impli-
cations for a mixed methods training strategy. J Strength Cond 16: 20,
1994
28. Ostrowski KJ, Wilson GJ, Weatherby R, et al: The effect of weight training
volume on hormonal output and muscular size and function. J Strength
Cond Res 11: 148 –154, 1997
29. Pollock ML, Graves JE, Bamman MM, et al: Frequency and volume of
resistance training: Effect on cervical extension strength. Arch Phys Med
Rehabil 74: 1080 –1086, 1993
30. Powers SK, Walker R: Physiological and anatomical characteristics of
outstanding female junior tennis players. Res Q Exerc Sport 53: 172–175,
1982
31. Reid CM, Yeater RA, Ullrich IH: Weight training and strength, cardiore-
spiratory functioning and body composition of men. Br J Sports Med 21:
40 – 44, 1987
32. Sale DG: Neural adaptation to strength training, in Komi PV (ed): Strength
and Power in Sport. Boston, Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1991, pp
249 –265
Vol. 28, No. 5, 2000 Volume Effects on Resistance Training for Women Tennis Players
33. Sanborn K, Boros R, Hruby J, et al: Performance effects of weight training
with multiple sets not to failure versus a single set to failure in women. J
Strength Cond Res 14(2): 328 –331, 2000
34. Silvester LJ, Stiggins C, McGown C, et al: The effect of variable resistance
and free-weight training programs on strength and vertical jump. NSCA
Journal 3: 30 –33, 1982
35. Siri WE: Gross composition of the body, in Lawrence JH, Tobias CA (eds):
Advances in Biological and Medical Physics. Volume IV. New York, Aca-
demic Press, 1956
36. Starkey DB, Pollock ML, Ishida Y, et al: Effect of resistance training
volume on strength and muscle thickness. Med Sci Sports Exerc 28:
1311–1320, 1996
37. Staron RS, Leonardi MJ, Karapondo DL, et al: Strength and skeletal
muscle adaptations in heavy-resistance-trained women after detraining
and retraining. J Appl Physiol 70: 631– 640, 1991
633
38. Staron RS, Malicky ES, Leonardi MJ, et al: Muscle hypertrophy and fast
fiber type conversions in heavy resistance-trained women. Eur J Appl
Physiol 60: 71–79, 1990
39. Stone MH, Johnson RL, Carter DR: A short term comparison of two
different methods of resistance training on leg strength and power. Athletic
Training 14: 158 –160, 1979
40. Stone MH, Plisk SS, Stone ME, et al: Athletic performance development:
Volume load - 1 set vs. multiple sets, training velocity and training varia-
tion. Strength Conditioning 20: 22–31, 1998
41. Stowers T, McMillian J, Scala D, et al: The short-term effects of three
different strength-power training methods. NSCA Journal 5: 24 –27,
1983
42. Willoughby DS: Training volume equated: A comparison of periodized and
progressive resistance weight training programs. J Hum Mov Studies 21:
233–248, 1991