Sports Medicine

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-019-01072-2

REVIEW ARTICLE

Training Considerations for Optimising Endurance Development:

An Alternate Concurrent Training Perspective
Kenji Doma1   · Glen B. Deakin2 · Mortiz Schumann3 · David J. Bentley4

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Abstract
Whilst the “acute hypothesis” was originally coined to describe the detrimental effects of concurrent training on strength
development, similar physiological processes may occur when endurance training adaptations are compromised. There is a
growing body of research indicating that typical resistance exercises impair neuromuscular function and endurance performance
during periods of resistance training-induced muscle damage. Furthermore, recent evidence suggests that the attenuating
effects of resistance training-induced muscle damage on endurance performance are influenced by exercise intensity, exercise
mode, exercise sequence, recovery and contraction velocity of resistance training. By understanding the influence that training
variables have on the level of resistance training-induced muscle damage and its subsequent attenuating effects on endurance
performance, concurrent training programs could be prescribed in such a way that minimises fatigue between modes of training
and optimises the quality of endurance training sessions. Therefore, this review will provide considerations for concurrent train-
ing prescription for endurance development based on scientific evidence. Furthermore, recommendations will be provided for
future research by identifying training variables that may impact on endurance development as a result of concurrent training.

1 Introduction
Key Points 
Whilst the application of optimal physiological stress
The stress induced by a bout of resistance training may is essential to progressively adapt to increasing training
impair the quality of subsequent endurance training ses- loads, this process may be hindered by inadequate recov-
sions for several days post-exercise. ery, which may ultimately compromise training adaptation
Continually undertaking endurance training under resist- [1]. Thus, establishing a balance between physiological
ance training-induced stress may impede chronic endurance stress and recovery is critical, particularly when combin-
development, also referred to as resistance training-induced ing resistance and endurance training in the one training
suboptimisation on endurance performance (RT-SEP). program, known as concurrent training. From an acute
post-exercise standpoint, neuromuscular fatigue induced
The RT-SEP phenomenon could be minimised by by a typical resistance training session may last for several
accounting for a recovery period between resistance and days irrespective of training background [2–5], as opposed
endurance training sessions, resistance training volume to recovery of neuromuscular properties within 60–90 min
and intensity, endurance training intensity, mode of following a typical endurance training session [6, 7]. In
endurance exercise, exercise sequence and resistance addition, several studies have reported that determinants
training contraction velocity. of endurance performance (e.g. movement economy, time
to exhaustion and time-trial performance) are impaired
* Kenji Doma 24–72 h following a single lower body resistance training
[email protected]
bout for both resistance-untrained and resistance-trained
1
James Cook Drive, Rehab Sciences Building (DB‑43), James individuals [8–14]. In a recent review [15], we referred to
Cook University, Townsville, QLD 4811, Australia the concept of resistance training-induced sub-optimisa-
2
James Cook University, Cairns, QLD, Australia tion on endurance performance (RT-SEP). The underlying
3 theory of this phenomenon suggested that residual neural
German Sport University, Cologne, QLD, Germany
4
and metabolic effects of previous resistance training ses-
Flinders University, Social Health Sciences, Adelaide, SA,
sions may compromise the ability to perform optimally
Australia

Vol.:(0123456789)
 K. Doma et al.

during subsequent endurance training sessions and pos- 2 Time Between Resistance and Endurance
sibly limit training stimuli to maximise endurance adapta- Training Sessions
tion. Several physiological processes were highlighted to
explain potential causes of the compromise in the quality Designing exercise programs comprising of both resist-
of endurance training sessions during a typical concurrent ance and endurance training may appear to be a chal-
training program (Fig. 1). These included: (1) impaired lenging task given that variation in recovery between the
neural recruitment patterns; (2) attenuated movement modes of exercise would influence recovery dynamics and
efficiency due to perturbation in kinematics of endurance impact on the severity of interference in chronic training
exercises and increased energy expenditure; (3) delayed adaptation [16]. The following section discusses the influ-
onset of muscle soreness; and (4) reduced muscle glycogen ence that between-session recovery periods may have on
stores [15]. endurance development during concurrent training, and
We further suggested that the level of acute interfer- the implications of impaired quality of endurance training
ence in the quality of endurance training could depend on sessions as a result of inadequate recovery from resistance
the intensity, volume, training order, frequency of training training.
and recovery periods between resistance and endurance
training sessions [15]. However, as our previous review
[15] focused on describing the potential mechanisms of 2.1 Chronic and Acute Changes in Endurance
RT-SEP, the practical implications of RT-SEP were not Performance with Different Recovery Periods
thoroughly considered. Thus, the purpose of this review
was to explore studies that have examined the acute effects Studies on the chronic effects of concurrent training thus
of resistance training on endurance performance that have far have incorporated various recovery periods between
utilised various training methods. Findings from such resistance and endurance training sessions. For example,
studies will assist in determining the impact that training concurrent training studies with durations of 10–15 min
variables have on RT-SEP and in developing recommenda- [17–19] to 5–6 h [20] between resistance and endurance
tions for coaches to minimise residual carry-over effects training sessions have all shown sub-optimal endurance
of fatigue from resistance to endurance training sessions development. However, few studies have systematically
during a typical concurrent training program. compared the magnitude of interference in training adap-
tation when manipulating recovery periods between

Fig. 1  Schematic representation of the detrimental effects of resist- chronic endurance development over weeks and months. VO2max max-
ance training-induced muscular fatigue on the quality of endurance imal oxygen consumption
training sessions during concurrent training and its implications on
Optimising Endurance Via Alternate Concurrent Training Perspective

individual resistance and endurance training sessions [8, 26] in previously resistance-trained participants. How-
within the one study. Sale et al. [21] was one of the first ever, attenuation in running performance has been reported
research groups to experiment with this system by com- when measured at maximal effort 24 h post resistance train-
paring resistance and endurance development for same- ing in resistance-trained individuals [8, 27]. Accordingly, the
day versus alternate-day concurrent training methods. The period of recovery required between resistance and endur-
results showed that cycling maximal oxygen consumption ance training sessions appears to be strongly dependent on
­(VO2max) was similar between the two groups, suggesting a variety of variables. Therefore, the following sections
that variation in recovery periods between each mode of discuss the impact that training training variables have on
training did not affect endurance development. RT-SEP, with practical recommendations to optimise the
A more recent study by Robineau and colleagues [22] quality of endurance training sessions.
compared groups that undertook resistance training fol-
lowed by endurance training in the same session (R–E0 h),
on the same day with 6 h0 of recovery (R–E6 h) and on 3 Resistance and Endurance Training
alternate days with 24 h of recovery (R–E24 h). The results Intensities
showed that the magnitude of increase in peak oxygen con-
sumption ­(VO2peak) was greater for R–E24 h than for both 3.1 Acute Effect of Resistance Training Intensity
R–E0 h and R–E6 h, suggesting an interference effect on on Endurance Performance
endurance development for groups that undertook resist-
ance and endurance training on the same day. Resistance and endurance training intensity and volume are
The discrepancies in findings between Sale et al. [21] continually manipulated during the course of a concurrent
and Robineau et al. [22] may be attributed to a number training program to optimise training adaptation [28]. Dur-
of factors. Firstly, Sale and colleagues [21] altered the ing the course of a resistance training program, exercises
sequence of the mode of training for each training session prescribed at heavier loads and lower volumes typically
whereas Robineau et al. [22] always had participants per- result in augmented muscular strength whilst higher volumes
form resistance before endurance training. Interestingly, and moderate loads are associated with muscular hypertro-
Chtara et al. [23] reported that endurance development phy [29]. This phenomenon occurs as distinct physiologi-
is sub-optimal following 12 weeks of concurrent training cal and neuromuscular stresses are induced when resistance
with the R–E sequence compared to the E–R sequence, training intensity and volume are altered [30]. Thus, it can
and attributed these findings to accumulation of residual be speculated that the magnitude and duration of fatigue
fatigue from resistance to endurance training sessions. We induced by a bout of resistance exercises may be influenced
also confirmed this phenomenon from an acute standpoint by both training intensity and volume. In fact, several recent
[10], where the R–E sequence performed on the same day studies have shown that resistance training intensity and vol-
induced greater neuromuscular fatigue the following day, ume alter acute physiological and neuromuscular responses
and therefore impaired running performance to a greater for several days post-exercise. For example, Abboud et al.
extent than the E–R sequence. Had Sale et al. [21] consist- [31] compared acute responses between greater volume (i.e.
ently incorporated resistance prior to endurance training, 20,000 kg) and lower volume (i.e. 10,000 kg) of resistance
or if endurance training had been consistently prescribed exercise bouts after adjusting for training loads in resist-
during periods of resistance training-induced fatigue, con- ance-trained men. The results showed the higher volume
current training may have induced sub-optimal endurance resistance training bout induced greater creatine kinase (CK)
adaptations, although further research is necessary to con- and delayed-onset of muscle soreness (DOMS) levels than
firm this. the lower volume resistance training bout for up to 48 h
The second point explaining the disparity in findings post-exercise with moderate effect size (ES = 0.61–0.79). It
between Sale et al. [21] and Robineau et al. [22] may be is important to note that Abboud et al. [31] still reported
the intensity of endurance training sessions. Sale et al. [21] increased CK and DOMS levels for up to 24 h following the
incorporated moderate-to-high intensity endurance train- lower volume resistance exercise bout (i.e. 10,000 kg) with
ing sessions (i.e. at or below the power output measures moderate effects (ES = 0.59–1.03). Interestingly, Morán-
obtained at cycling V­ O2max) whereas Robineau et al. [22] Navarro et al. [32] reported significantly greater CK levels
prescribed endurance training sessions at supra-maximal 24 h following a resistance training bout performed to fail-
running intensities (i.e. 120% of maximal aerobic velocity). ure in each set (three sets of ten repetitions), compared to
Indeed, resistance training has been reported to impair sub- sets performed not to failure with equal load-volume (six
maximal cycling and running performance several hours sets of five repetitions). Using equivalent training volume,
post-exercise (i.e. on the same day) [9, 10, 24, 25] without Weakley et al. [33] also reported that two separate resist-
having the same effect the following day (i.e. alternate days) ance exercises performed in the one set (i.e. superset, e.g.
 K. Doma et al.

combining bench press and squat in the one set) resulted in A number of studies have in fact examined the acute
higher CK levels than traditional sets where each set con- effects of altering resistance training loads whilst adjusting
sisted of one type of resistance exercise for up to 24 h post- for volume of work on endurance performance measures [12,
exercise. These findings collectively suggest that a bout of 24, 36]. For example, Deakin [24] investigated the effects
greater resistance training load-volume, a bout of resistance of different intensities of resistance training on cycling per-
training with sets performed to failure or a bout of resistance formance in resistance-trained men. The participants in the
training with multiple exercises performed in one set induce study either performed a session consisting of heavy-load
greater physiological strain for at least 24 h post-exercise. (6RM, or ~ 80% of 1RM) or light-load (20 repetitions with
Thus, from a concurrent training standpoint, results from work equated to the heavy load session) resistance training
these acute studies may have implications for the amount exercises (i.e. leg press, bench press and lat-pull down) and
of recovery required following a bout of resistance train- a cycling efficiency test conducted 3 h after each resistance
ing prior to undertaking an endurance training session when training session. The results showed a greater physiological
manipulating resistance training load-volume. However, the cost during the cycling efficiency test following the heavy-
practicality of these findings could be further improved by load session compared to the lighter-load session. Similarly,
examining the acute effects of resistance training load-vol- we [12] reported attenuation in running time to exhaustion
ume on endurance performance measures, rather than solely measures 6 h following a heavy resistance training session
on indirect muscle damage markers. (i.e. 6RM, or ~ 80% of 1RM), although such results were
In contrast to resistance training load-volume, studies not found following a resistance training session (i.e. leg
have also examined the acute responses of varying resist- press, leg extension and leg curls) with lighter loads (i.e. 20
ance training intensities. For example, Hasenoehrl et al. [34] repetitions with work equated to the heavy-load session) in
compared the acute responses of eccentric biceps curl exer- resistance-trained men. Furthermore, Freitas and colleagues
cises using heavy load (i.e. 1RM concentric contraction) and [36] reported impaired performance measures in repeated
light load (i.e. 50% of 1RM concentric contraction) appli- sprint ability and agility immediately following a heavy load
cations performed to failure. The results showed that the of circuit training, although no differences were observed in
heavy-load condition increased CK, DOMS and upper arm these measures following a lighter load of circuit training
circumference to a greater extent than the light-load condi- when work was equated in resistance-trained men. Collec-
tion for 96 h post-exercise. Interestingly, these findings were tively, resistance training sessions undertaken with heavier
despite greater total work performed by the light load condi- loads (i.e. ≥ 80% of 1RM) may increase susceptibility to
tion than the heavy load condition, demonstrating that resist- RT-SEP more than that with lighter loads with equated work
ance training load was the primary variable that induced volumes.
changes in acute responses, rather than resistance training
load-volume. In addition, the participants were introduced 3.2 Acute Effect of Resistance Training
to a ‘wash out’ period, whereby they were exposed to the on the Intensity of Endurance Performance
resistance exercise bout prior to trial commencement. These
findings indicate that heavy-load resistance training bouts In the previous section, we presented results from our previ-
may induce greater stress than light-load conditions for those ous studies [12, 24], demonstrating how resistance training
previously exposed to resistance training. Confirming these intensity may acutely impact on endurance performance.
findings, Draganidis and colleagues [35] also showed that However, RT-SEP could also be augmented if an endur-
a heavy-load resistance exercise bout (85–90% of 1RM) ance training bout acutely following a resistance training
induced greater CK and DOMS values whilst also impair- bout is performed at higher intensities. For example, we
ing strength measures compared to a light-load resistance [12] reported significant reductions in both running time to
exercise bout (65–70%) for 48 h post-exercise in resistance exhaustion at maximal effort [i.e. above anaerobic thresh-
trained athletes. Similar to the results from Hasenoehrl et al. old (AT)] and knee extensor torque 6 h following a bout of
[34], total volume of work was greater for the light-load moderate- to high-intensity resistance training (i.e. 6RM),
resistance training bout compared to the heavy-load resist- although running economy (RE) measures (i.e. 70% and 90%
ance training bout. Whilst the findings of both Hasenoehrl of AT) were unaffected in resistance-trained men. In addi-
et al. [34] and Draganidis et al. [35] demonstrate that heavier tion, we [8] showed a reduction in running time-to-exaustion
resistance training bouts cause greater acute physiological (i.e. above AT) and knee extensor torque with a concomitant
stress for several days post-exercise than lighter load resist- increase in DOMS 24 h following a resistance training ses-
ance training bouts, the outcome measures were limited to sion despite no differences observed in RE measures (i.e.
indirect muscle damage markers only and training volume 90% of AT) in men and women with previous resistance
was not adjusted for. training exposure. Similar findings were also observed by
us [37] in resistance-untrained men, in whom a bout of
Optimising Endurance Via Alternate Concurrent Training Perspective

resistance exercises caused no changes in RE measures (i.e. of multiple, successive endurance training sessions during
90% of AT), although running time to exhaustion (i.e. above concurrent training may be dependent on the mode of endur-
AT) was reduced for up to 48 h post-exercise. These find- ance exercise. Gergley et al. [48] pioneered this approach,
ings also confirm the work of others in untrained individuals comparing training adaptations in a group that combined
with greater attenuation of running performance measures resistance training with cycling with those in a group that
at higher running intensities in conjunction with impaired combined resistance training with inclined walking in
measures of muscular contractility (e.g. knee extensor iso- healthy untrained individuals. The results showed greater
metric torque, vertical jump) and increased DOMS during strength gains with cycling than when inclined walking was
periods of exercise-induced muscle damage (EIMD) [10, combined with resistance training. The authors [48] pos-
11, 38, 39]. It has been speculated that the acute effects tulated that walking may have generated a greater level of
of resistance training may have greater deleterious effects physiological stress due to the eccentric contractions that
on endurance performance measures at higher intensities are not typically present during cycling, thereby compro-
since fast twitch muscle fibres have greater susceptibility mising the quality of resistance training sessions. This is
to muscle damage and glycogen depletion [40] and are also further supported by the evidence that eccentric contractions
predominantly recruited when exercising above the AT [41]. induce greater muscle damage and fatigue than concentric
contractions [49]. Using a similar approach, Silva and col-
leagues [50] compared strength development in individuals
4 Different Modes of Endurance Training who combined resistance training and running with that in
individuals who participanted in cycling only. Interestingly,
4.1 Interference in Endurance Adaptation no differences in strength measures were found between
by Different Modes of Endurance Exercises groups. The authors speculated that the differences in their
findings compared with those of Gergley et al. [48] may have
In addition to intensity and volume, the degree of endur- been due to differences in training volume, given that resist-
ance adaptation is highly dependent on the mode of endur- ance and endurance training sessions were undertaken twice
ance exercise. Indeed, physiological responses have been a week in the study by Silva et al. [50], whereas Gergley
reported to vary at comparable intensities between different et al. [48] incorporated each mode of training three times
modes of endurance exercise (e.g. running, cycling, ski- per week. Overall, research on the adaptation of concurrent
ing and rowing) [42–45]. For example, Thomas and col- training with various modes of aerobic exercise is limited
leagues [45] reported greater oxygen cost during running and appears equivocal possibly due to different training
and stationary skiing compared to stationary cycling and protocols.
rowing during a 20 min exercise bout at equivalent rating of Whilst Gergley et al. [48] only compared cycling and
perceived exertion (RPE). The authors postulated that run- walking, given that running produces greater mechanical
ning and skiing induced greater physiological strain due to stress and consequently higher eccentric loading than walk-
these modes of exercises being weight-bearing as opposed ing [51], the interference in training adaptation could be
to the non-weight-bearing modes of exercise, such as cycling assumed to be more pronounced if running was incorporated
and rowing. Hill and colleagues [46] also reported greater instead of walking. In support of this hypothesis, Dolezal
anaerobic capacity, as measured by accumulated oxygen et al. [52] and Glowacki et al. [53] used running for the
deficit, during running compared to cycling, suggesting that endurance training sessions, and, to date, these have been
running may depend on a larger anaerobic component for the only studies that have shown sub-optimal development
performance than cycling. More recently, Casuso et al. [47] in both strength and endurance adaptations. Furthermore,
showed greater metabolic stress markers (i.e. interleukin-6 concurrent training studies that have reported sub-optimal
and cortisol) 2 h following sprint interval running compared endurance development have primarily incorporated running
to sprint interval swimming in athletes regularly involved (e.g. running V­ O2max [19, 52–55], RE [56, 57], 1–4 km run-
in both endurance modes of exercise. According to Casuso ning trial [23, 58, 59] and running time to exhaustion [59])
et al. [47], running may have induced greater physiologi- with fewer studies of cycling (e.g. cycling ­VO2max [60] and
cal stress due to higher eccentric loading involved with this 1 km cycling sprint [61]) and rowing (e.g. 2000 m rowing
mode of exercise compared to swimming. performance [18]). Subsequently, greater recovery may be
In light of the above, there appears to be a trend whereby required following resistance training if undertaking endur-
modes of endurance exercise with greater loading of the ance training sessions that comprise eccentric contractions
body mass and/or higher eccentric loading cause greater with greater loading of the body mass (e.g. running) than
physiological stress (e.g. cycling and swimming with less endurance training sessions that are primarily performed
loading vs. running with greater loading). Thus, the extent to with concentric contractions with less loading (e.g. cycling,
which resistance training-induced fatigue impairs the quality rowing and swimming). This phenomenon is particularly
 K. Doma et al.

important for athletes involved in multiple aerobic events and DOMS. Given that symptoms of EIMD are observed fol-
(e.g. triathletes), rather than single-mode endurance athletes lowing typical resistance exercises for up to 48 h post-exercise
who are highly familiarised and trained in a particular mode in both resistance-trained [70, 71] and -untrained [13, 62, 63]
of aerobic exercise (e.g. cyclists, runners or swimmers). individuals, it is reasonable to assume that typical resistance
More research is needed to systematically compare differ- exercises may impair various modes of endurance exercise for
ent modes of endurance development (e.g. running, cycling, several days post-exercise. Taken together, these findings sug-
rowing, swimming) when combined with resistance training gest that appropriate recovery should be prioritised following
in a variety of endurance athletes, which will assist coaches resistance training bouts to optimise the quality of the sub-
to select exercises that minimise the interference effect on sequent endurance training session, irrespective of the mode
endurance development. of endurance exercise. However, resistance training-induced
stress may further compromise the quality of an endurance
4.2 Acute Effects of Resistance Training on Different training session consisting of exercises that involve greater
Modes of Endurance Performance body mass loading and eccentric contractions (e.g. running)
during periods of EIMD for athletes involved in multiple aero-
In addition to long-term endurance development, the influence bic events (e.g. triathletes or those undertaking cross training).
that the mode of endurance exercises has on RT-SEP could be
determined by systematically examining the acute effects of
resistance training on the performance of different endurance 5 Effect of Squence of Mode of Training
modes (e.g. the physiological cost of running, cycling and row- on Endurance Performance
ing when equated for relative intensity and duration). To date,
the majority of studies that have examined the acute effects of 5.1 Chronic Effects of Training Sequence
a bout of typical resistance training on endurance performance
have been based on determinants of running performance. For The extent of adaptation induced by concurrent training is
example, a bout of resistance training consisting of lower body highly dependent on the interaction between resistance and
exercises (e.g. squats, leg press, leg extension and leg curls) endurance training sessions [72, 73]. Thus, the sequence of
has been reported to impair RE 8, 24 and 48 h post-exercise resistance and endurance training session may be critical
[25, 62, 63] and running time to exhaustion 6 and 24 h post- for optimising endurance development given that the acute
exercise [8, 10, 12, 13]. Some studies have reported attenuation physiological responses are distinct between each mode of
in cycling efficiency 3 h following lower body resistance exer- exercise [15]. The classical work that investigated endur-
cises [24], reduced cycling power output 48 h following lower ance adaptations following different sequences of the mode
body resistance exercises [64], lower power output during of training was conducted by Collins and Snow [74]. The
2000 m rowing time-trial test 24 h following upper and lower participants in this study were allocated to groups that per-
body resistance exercises [14], and reduced time to exhaustion formed resistance prior to endurance training (R–E) and
during arm crank ergometry test 48 h following upper body groups that performed endurance prior to resistance training
resistance exercise [65]. All of these studies have also shown (E–R) on separate days. Seven weeks following the com-
increases in CK levels, DOMS and/or impaired muscle force mencement of concurrent training, the participants’ ­VO2max
generation capacity measures, suggesting that indirect markers significantly increased for both groups (R–E and E–R);
of muscle damage and/or fatigue induced by typical resistance however, there were no significant differences between the
training may in part have contributed to attenuation of various groups. Accordingly, Collins and Snow [74] concluded
modes of endurance performance. that training sequence had minimal impact on endurance
Whilst research on the acute effects of a typical bout of adaptation.
resistance training has primarily been focused on running, sev- More recently, Eddens and colleagues [75] reported no
eral studies have shown that EIMD caused by other exercise differences on measures of ­VO2max between R–E and E–R
protocols impairs various modes of endurance performance sequences based on a meta-analysis of seven studies, which
measures. For example, eccentric-emphasised exercises via confirmed the findings of Collins and Snow [74]. How-
isokinetic contractions have been reported to elevate the oxy- ever, whilst maximal aerobic capacity is typically used to
gen cost of cycling for up to 48 h post-exercise in untrained report on chronic endurance adaptation, this variable is not
males [66] and cycling time to exhaustion for up to 48 h post- an appropriate measure of endurance performance per se
exercise in untrained females [67], with elevated levels of CK [76]. Testing protocols that measure the physiological cost
and DOMS and impaired neuromuscular performance meas- of running, time to reach exhaustion at a given workload,
ures. Plyometric-based exercises have also been reported to or self-paced time-trial performance are endurance-perfor-
augment the oxygen cost of cycling for up to 48 h post-exercise mance measures that better replicate task constraints during
in untrained men [62, 68, 69], also with increased levels of CK a race [77, 78]. Interestingly, Psilander et al. [60] reported
Optimising Endurance Via Alternate Concurrent Training Perspective

no additional benefits when incorporating resistance train- effort the following day irrespective of training sequence.
ing following endurance training (i.e. E–R sequence), with Deakin [24] also investigated the acute effects of resistance
greater adaptations for endurance performance based on and endurance training sequence on sub-maximal cycling
cycling time to exhaustion for the group that undertook performance. In this study, the participants undertook either
endurance training only. Whilst these findings suggest that resistance training prior to cycling (R–E) or cycling prior to
the addition of resistance training to an endurance training resistance training (E–R). Results of the cycling efficiency
program may induce sub-optimal endurance development test revealed greater metabolic cost following the R–E com-
when compared to endurance training alone, the authors pared to the E–R sequence, suggesting that strength and
neglected to include a group that undertook concurrent train- endurance performance was impaired to a greater extent
ing using the reverse sequence (i.e. R–E sequence). Chtara with the R–E compared to the E–R sequence.
et  al. [23] examined the effect of a 12  week concurrent The significant increase in the metabolic cost of running
training program on 4 km running time-trial performance and cycling during the R–E sequence [10, 24] suggests that
between R–E and E–R groups by combining both resistance resistance training may be the primary mode of exercise con-
and endurance exercises within the same session (i.e. intra- tributing to the accumulation effect of fatigue responsible for
session) in trained men. The results showed significantly impaired endurance performance. In practice, the increase in
greater improvement in 4 km running time trial performance metabolic cost of aerobic exercise tends to suggest that ath-
for the E–R group compared to the R–E group. Chtara and letes may have difficulty covering particular distances, main-
colleagues [23] speculated that the R–E sequence may taining optimal pacing or sustaining power output (e.g. inter-
induce sub-optimal endurance performance when compared val training) to meet session goals, suggesting sub-optimal
to the E–R sequence, as carry-over effects of fatigue from adaptation to race-specific training [79]. Subsequently, train-
each resistance training session may interfere with the qual- ing intensity and/or volume may have to be reduced during
ity of a subsequent endurance training session if appropriate periods of resistance training-induced fatigue to complete an
recovery is not allowed. As mentioned previously (Sect. 1), endurance training session. The chronic effects of undertak-
this concept is consistent with RT-SEP, whereby compro- ing endurance training sessions consistently under fatigue
mise in the quality of successive endurance training ses- are presently unknown and thus warrant further research to
sions due to resistance training-induced fatigue during the bridge the gap in our knowledge of acute and chronic effects
course of concurrent training may limit optimal endurance of resistance training on endurance development.
development [15]. To confirm the potential mechanisms con-
tributing to the effects of resistance and endurance training
sequence on endurance development, an effective approach 6 Strength Training Contraction Velocity
is to examine the acute effects of resistance and endurance
training sequence on indices of endurance performance. The contraction velocity during a resistance training session
is an important training variable to consider [29]. This is
5.2 Acute Effects of Training Sequence because alterations in contraction velocity have been associ-
ated with chronic changes in neural [80], hypertrophic [81]
There is a growing body of evidence suggesting that resist- and metabolic [82] responses following several weeks of
ance and endurance training sequence acutely affects deter- resistance training. The slow contraction velocities can be
minants of endurance performance. For example, we [11] defined by two models during the performance of resist-
examined the acute effects of resistance and endurance ance exercises: (1) unintentional and (2) intentional slow
training sequence on running performance and muscle contractions [29]. The unintentional slow contractions are
force generation capacity (MFGC). The participants in this executed due to an inability to perform fast contractions per-
study either performed resistance prior to running (R–E) formed against heavy resistance (load). This notion follows
or running prior to resistance training (E–R) on the same the force/velocity curve characteristics (i.e. load and veloc-
day separated by 6 h in random order with running perfor- ity are inversely related), thereby preventing muscles from
mance and MFGC examined the following day. The results contracting at high speeds during heavy-load resistance exer-
showed that RE was impaired with a concomitant reduction cises, which necessitates greater muscular force production.
in MFGC following the R–E sequence although the E–R Conversely, slow contraction velocities can be intentional by
sequence had no effect on these measures. Whilst RE was deliberately slowing the execution of a movement against an
impaired as a result of the R–E sequence, running time to external load. The unintentional slow contractions occur as
exhaustion was significantly reduced the day following both a consequence of heavy resistance loading and are typically
training sequences, suggesting that residual fatigue from used to increase muscular strength. Contrarily, intentional
resistance and endurance training sessions performed on slow contractions are used to increase time-under-tension,
the same day will impair running performance at maximum
 K. Doma et al.

particularly to induce adequate physiological stress for train- Dolezal et  al. [93] were one of the first groups of
ing adaptation with lighter loads [83, 84]. researchers to examine the acute effects of fast concentric
(i.e. 1 s) and slow eccentric (i.e. 4 s) contractions on indirect
6.1 Effect of Contraction Velocities on Chronic muscle damage markers in resistance-trained and -untrained
Strength Development individuals, using traditional resistance exercises (i.e. leg
press). The results showed that CK and DOMS levels were
Kraemer et al. [29] suggested that sub-maximal loads are significantly elevated for up to 48 h post-exercise for both
used during the performance of resistance exercises with groups, although these values were greater for the untrained
slow contractions in order to obtain greater control of body individuals. Similarly, Hackney et al. [94] reported elevated
movement velocity. Indeed, a study has shown that concen- levels of CK and DOMS in both resistance-trained and
tric force production was significantly less during a bench -untrained individuals for up to 48 h following both upper
press exercise performed with intentionally slow contrac- and lower body resistance exercises performed with fast
tions when compared to contractions performed more explo- concentric (i.e. 1 s) and slow eccentric (i.e. 3 s) contraction
sively [85]. However, Keeler et al. [86] reported significantly using exercise machines. Thus, these findings suggest that
less strength gains after 10  weeks of training following physiological stress is induced following traditional resist-
training with super-slow contractions (10 s concentric:5 s ance exercises with fast concentric and slower eccentric con-
eccentric) compared to slow contractions (2 s concentric:4 s tractions, possibly due to the increased time under tension
eccentric). The authors suggested that this may have been during the eccentric phase. However, the measures reported
due to lower training stimuli, given that a 30% reduction in by both Dolezal et al. [93] and Hackney et al. [94] were
training load was required during the super slow compared limited to indirect muscle damage markers.
with the slow training method. Thus, whilst resistance train- Adapting the method used by previous studies [93, 94],
ing sessions with slow concentric and eccentric contractions we [12] examined the impact of traditional resistance train-
may limit residual effects of fatigue on subsequent endur- ing at 6RM with fast concentric (i.e. 1 s) and slow eccentric
ance training sessions during concurrent training, optimum (i.e. 4 s) contractions on RE, running time to exhaustion and
strength gains may not occur due to insufficient resistance knee extensor torque in trained and moderately trained run-
training stimuli. ners. Interestingly, the findings showed that the resistance
training bout did not affect RE and knee extensor torque
6.2 Acute Effects of Fast Concentric and Slow 6 h post-exercise although running time to exhaustion was
Eccentric Contractions on Neuromuscular impaired. We [10] conducted a further study to examine the
and Endurance Performance Measures acute effects of a resistance training bout at 6RM on RE,
running time to exhaustion and knee extensor torque per-
Performing resistance exercises with fast concentric (e.g. formed with 1 s concentric and 1 s eccentric contractions.
1 s) and slow eccentric contractions (e.g. 4 s) compared to The authors reported significant increases in the physiologi-
slow concentric and eccentric contractions may provide cal cost of submaximal running 6 h after with a concomitant
greater training stimuli for strength development whilst reduction in running time to exhaustion and knee extensor
limiting its attenuating effect on the quality of subsequent torque. According to the discrepancies in findings between
endurance training sessions. The morphological properties these two studies [10, 12], traditional resistance exercises
of the muscle have greater susceptibility to neuromuscu- performed with faster eccentric contractions may induce
lar fatigue and muscle damage during eccentric compared greater neuromuscular fatigue and consequently impair sub-
to concentric contractions [87, 88]. It has been suggested maximal and maximal running performance several hours
that the lengthening of muscle contractile properties causes post-exercise. Conversely, several hours of recovery fol-
damage to sarcomeres and components of excitation–con- lowing traditional resistance exercises performed with slow
traction coupling [89, 90]. In light of this hypothesis, Chap- eccentric contractions does not seem to perturb sub-maximal
man et al. [91, 92] showed that DOMS and CK levels were running performance post-exercise, although maximal effort
significantly greater whilst maximal voluntary contraction running performance is impaired.
(MVC) was significantly lower following fast compared to
slow eccentric contractions for up to 7 days after. Accord-
ingly, slow eccentric contractions appear to limit factors that 7 Accumulation Effect of Resistance
impair muscle function to a greater extent than fast eccen- and Endurance Training
tric contractions. However, exercises evaluated by Chapman
et al. [91, 92] did not consist of concentric contractions and Whilst research examining the impact of concurrent train-
were performed using isokinetic devices, which are not typi- ing has found that the level and type of adaptation may vary
cal methods of traditional resistance training. depending on the mode of exercise and training variables
Optimising Endurance Via Alternate Concurrent Training Perspective

employed [18, 19, 53, 95], the acute responses during a the endurance training group undertook running sessions
typical concurrent training program have not been exten- across three consecutive days.
sively explored. Given that training adaptation is ultimately For the concurrent training group, no differences were
dependent on the accumulation of responses generated over found in RE although running time to exhaustion and MFGC
successive training sessions [96], the mechanisms associated were significantly reduced with a concomitant increase in
with the type and extent of training adaptation cannot be muscle soreness over the 6-day period. No differences in
determined simply by monitoring training responses prior MFGC and muscle soreness were found for the resistance
to, mid and following a concurrent training program. One training group and endurance training group. These find-
approach to gaining a better understanding of physiological ings exemplify the cumulative fatiguing effects of successive
processes that impact upon adaptations to concurrent train- training sessions that could be observed during a microcycle
ing would be to systematically examine the acute responses of a concurrent training program if resistance exercises for
across a number of individual resistance and endurance the same muscle groups were performed on alternate days
training sessions using various performance and physiologi- (i.e. 48 h of recovery between each resistance training ses-
cal outcome measures. sion) and running sessions on consecutive days (i.e. 24 h of
In one study, Drummond et al. [97] compared excess recovery between each running session).
post-exercise oxygen consumption (EPOC) following a
combined session consisting of resistance (70% of 1RM of
upper and lower body exercises) and endurance (running for 8 Conclusion
25 min at 70% of V­ O2max) exercises to resistance and endur-
ance exercises performed in isolation. The results showed According to the findings from the studies investigating out-
that EPOC was greater following the combination of resist- comes of chronic and acute concurrent training thus far, the
ance and endurance exercises. Drummond and colleagues level of interference in endurance performance, and pos-
[97] suggested that the combination of resistance and endur- sibly on subsequent chronic endurance adaptation, appears
ance exercises may have generated a greater physiological to be dependent on the mode of exercise, training intensity,
burden due to a large volume of work compared to either sequence of the mode of training, contraction velocity and
modes of exercise performed in isolation. However, EPOC recovery periods employed between each mode of train-
is measured at rest and hence is a basal metabolic indica- ing session. Flowcharts providing practical applications
tor. Examining acute responses of combining resistance and to improve concurrent training prescription and optimise
endurance training sessions on performance (e.g. endurance endurance development have been provided when under-
and/or strength performance measures) would better repli- taking resistance and endurance training on the same day
cate conditions experienced during concurrent training and (Fig. 2), endurance training the day after a bout of resistance
allow exercise prescription that minimises cumulative effects training (Fig. 3), and endurance training the day after resist-
of fatigue across different modes of training sessions. ance and endurance training sessions performed on the same
We used this approach [8] to examine the cumulative day (Fig. 4). In summary, the general practical applications
effect of alternate-day resistance training combined with include the following:
consecutive-day endurance training on RE, running time to
exhaustion, MFGC and muscle soreness over 6 days (i.e. a • The level of fatigue should be monitored between resist-
typical microcycling of concurrent training). Specifically, ance and endurance training using physical performance
moderately endurance-trained individuals with prior expo- measures (e.g. heart rate and RPE at predetermined train-
sure to resistance training were randomly separated into a ing intensities, changes in completion times of endurance
concurrent training group, a resistance training group and exercises, sprint times etc.) particularly when combining
an endurance training group. The concurrent training group resistance training sessions at moderate-to-high inten-
undertook high-intensity lower body resistance training sity (i.e. 1–6RM or ≥ 80% of 1RM) with high-intensity
(i.e. 6RM) on alternate days in conjunction with moder- endurance training (i.e. above AT) in the same training
ate- to high-intensity running (i.e. below and above AT) on week.
consecutive days for 6 days. On days when resistance and • If performance decrements are observed during a moder-
running sessions were combined for the concurrent train- ate- to high-intensity endurance training session (i.e. at
ing group, a 9 h recovery period was incorporated between or above AT) caused by residual fatigue from a bout of
each mode of training session to replicate a typical concur- resistance exercises, modifications should be made by
rent training schedule (i.e. resistance training in the morning reducing the intensity and/or volume of endurance exer-
and endurance training in the afternoon, or vice versa). The cises.
resistance training group undertook three resistance training • Greater recovery periods may be required follow-
sessions on alternate days without running sessions whilst ing resistance training when undertaking subsequent
 K. Doma et al.

running sessions compared to other modes of endur- resistance training session with a greater volume load
ance training that are primarily concentric-based (e.g. (> 10,000  kg), resistance exercises undertaken as
cycling, rowing, swimming), particularly for endur- super-sets or to failure in each set.
ance athletes in triathlons or duathlons (e.g. running • Several hours of recovery are required when undertak-
vs. cycling and swimming). ing moderate-intensity endurance training (i.e. below
• When undertaking moderate intensity endurance train- AT) after resistance exercises with slow eccentric con-
ing (i.e. below AT) after resistance exercises with fast tractions and fast concentric contractions, and at least
concentric and eccentric contractions, at least 1 day of 1 day of recovery is required with high intensity endur-
recovery is required, although greater recovery periods ance training (i.e. above AT).
may be required if undertaking high intensity endur- • If the combination of resistance and endurance training
ance training (i.e. above AT). sessions on the same day is unavoidable, endurance
• More than 1  day (> 24  h) may be necessary when training sessions should be prescribed prior to resist-
undertaking an endurance training session after a ance training irrespective of the type of resistance and

Fig. 2  Flow chart with recommendations to minimise fatigue and optimise quality of endurance training sessions, either above or below anaero-
bic threshold (AT), when undertaking endurance training (ET) sessions on the same day as resistance training (RT)

Fig. 3  Flow chart with recommendations to minimise fatigue and sessions several days after a single bout of resistance training (RT).
optimise quality of endurance training sessions, either above or below RM repetition maximum
anaerobic threshold (AT), when undertaking endurance training (ET)
Optimising Endurance Via Alternate Concurrent Training Perspective

Fig. 4  Flow chart with recommendations to minimise fatigue and and resistance training (RT) sessions several days after a single bout
optimise quality of endurance training sessions, either above or below of resistance training (RT)
anaerobic threshold (AT), when undertaking endurance training (ET)

endurance training variables with at least half a day of Firstly, the majority of studies that have examined the
recovery in-between training sessions. acute effects of a bout of resistance training have focused
• When undertaking moderate- to high-intensity resist- on determinants of running performance (e.g. RE, run-
ance training sessions (i.e. 1–6RM or ≥ 80% of 1RM) ning time-trial or running time to exhaustion). Secondly,
on alternate days and moderate to high-intensity endur- whilst there is evidence to suggest that manipulation of
ance training sessions (i.e. ≥ AT) on consecutive days, resistance training-load volume alters acute physiological
sequencing the mode of training by performing endur- responses for several days post-exercise, these measures
ance training sessions half a day prior to resistance have been limited to indirect muscle damage markers (i.e.
training sessions will limit cumulative effects of fatigue CK, DOMS and vertical jump performance). However, it
during a typical micro-cycle of concurrent training. is important to note that indirect muscle damage markers
• Muscle strength and endurance development attained are strong determinants of impaired endurance perfor-
in a preceding prepatory concurrent training period has mance, and coaches should therefore be cautious about
been shown to be preserved for 12 weeks with as little incorporating high-intensity endurance training sessions
as one resistance training session per week in endur- during periods of EIMD. Third, the majority of studies
ance athletes [98]. Thus, concurrent training should that have reported on the acute effects of resistance exer-
primarily be periodised to minimise resistance training- cises on endurance performance have only incorporated
induced stress using the recommendatons mentioned one resistance training bout, despite growing evidence
above, so that endurance training load could be max- indicating an accumulation effect of fatigue induced by
imised whilst previously developed gains in muscle multiple bouts of resistance and endurance training. Thus,
strength are maintained. However, resistance training further research examining the effects of multiple bouts
adaptation is also an essential component for endurance of resistance training, whilst manipulating resistance
development. Therefore, certain aspects of concurrent training-load volume, on various modes of endurance
training cycles may also require increased resistance performance measures is warranted.
training load, or frequency, for further muscle strength
development at the expense of more extensive endur- Compliance with Ethical Standards 
ance training.
Funding  No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation
of this article.
Although these recommendations are aimed at mini-
mising RT-SEP to optimise the benefit of resistance train-
Conflict of Interest  Kenji Doma, Glen Deakin, Mortiz Schumann and
ing for endurance athletes, it is important to note that David Bentley declare that they have no conflicts of interest relevant to
there are some limitations inherent in the practicality of the content of this review.
current evidence, and more research is necessary to fur-
ther improve the recommendations provided in this paper.
 K. Doma et al.

References development. J Strength Cond Res. 2008;22(4):1037–45. https​

://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013​e3181​6a441​9.
18. Gravelle BL, Blessing DL. Physiological adaptation in women
1. Fry RW, Morton AR, Keast D. Periodisation of training stress: a
concurrently training for strength and endurance. J Strength
review. Can J Sport Sci. 1992;17(3):234–40.
Cond Res. 2000;14(1):5–13.
2. Bird SP, Mabon T, Pryde M, Feebrey S, Cannon J. Triphasic
19. Nelson AG, Arnall DA, Loy SF, Silvester LJ, Conlee RK. Con-
multinutrient supplementation during acute resistance exercise
sequences of combining strength and endurance training regi-
improves session volume load and reduces muscle damage in
mens. Phys Ther. 1990;70(5):287–94.
strength-trained athletes. Nutr Res. 2013;33(5):376–87. https​://
20. Kraemer WJ, Patton JF, Gordon SE, Harman EA, Deschenes
doi.org/10.1016/j.nutre​s.2013.03.002.
MR, Reynolds K, et al. Compatability of high-intensity strength
3. Hakkinen K, Pakarinen A, Alen M, Kauhanen H, Komi PV. Daily
and endurance training on hormonal and skeletal muscle adapta-
hormonal and neuromuscular responses to intensive strength train-
tions. J Appl Physiol. 1995;78(3):976–89.
ing in 1 week. Int J Sports Med. 1988;9(6):422–8. https​://doi.
21. Sale DG, Jacobs I, MacDougall JD, Garner S. Comparison of
org/10.1055/s-2007-10250​44.
two regimens of concurrent strength and endurance training.
4. Michaut A, Pousson M, Ballay Y, Van Hoecke J. Effects of an
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1990;22(3):348–56.
eccentric exercise session short-term recovery of muscle contrac-
22. Robineau J, Babault N, Piscione J, Lacome M, Andre-Xavier B.
tility. J Soc Biol. 2000;194(3–4):171–6.
The specific training effects of concurrent aerobic and strength
5. Scott KE, Rozenek R, Russo AC, Crussemeyer JA, Lacourse
exercises depends on recovery duration. J Strength Cond Res.
MG. Effects of delayed onset muscle soreness on selected physi-
2016;30(3):672–83. https​://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.00000​00000​
ological responses to submaximal running. J Strength Cond Res.
00079​8.
2003;17(4):652–8.
23. Chtara M, Chamari K, Chaouachi M, Chaouachi A, Koubaa D,
6. Bentley DJ, Smith PA, Davie AJ, Zhou S. Muscle activation of
Feki Y, et al. Effects of intra-session concurrent endurance and
the knee extensors following high intensity endurance exercise in
strength training sequence on aerobic performance and capacity.
cyclists. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2000;81(4):297–302.
Br J Sports Med. 2005;39(8):555–60. https​://doi.org/10.1136/
7. Bentley DJ, Zhou S, Davie AJ. The effect of endurance exercise
bjsm.2004.01524​8.
on muscle force generating capacity of the lower limbs. J Sci Med
24. Deakin BD. Concurrent training in endurance athletes: the acute
Sport. 1998;1(3):179–88.
effects on muscle recovery capacity, physiological, hormonal
8. Doma K, Deakin G. The acute effect of concurrent training on
and gene expression responses post-exercise. Lismore: Southern
running performance over 6 days. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2015. https​
Cross University; 2004.
://doi.org/10.1080/02701​367.2015.10531​04.
25. Palmer CD, Sleivert GG. Running economy is impaired fol-
9. Doma K, Deakin GB. The effects of intensity and type of resist-
lowing a single bout of resistance exercise. J Sci Med Sport.
ance training on muscle force generation capacity immediately-
2001;4(4):447–59.
and 6 h post-training. J Sci Med Sport. 2011;14(1):e110.
26. Paschalis V, Koutedakis Y, Baltzopoulos V, Mougios V, Jamur-
10. Doma K, Deakin GB. The effects of combined strength and endur-
tas AZ, Theoharis V. The effects of muscle damage on running
ance training on running performance the following day. Int J
economy in healthy males. Int J Sports Med. 2005;26(10):827–
Sport Health Sci. 2013;11:1–9.
31. https​://doi.org/10.1055/s-2005-83746​1.
11. Doma K, Deakin GB. The effects of strength training and endur-
27. Twist C, Eston R. The effects of exercise-induced muscle dam-
ance training order on running economy and performance. Appl
age on maximal intensity intermittent exercise performance. Eur
Physiol Nutr Metab. 2013;38(6):651–6. https​://doi.org/10.1139/
J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 2005;94(5–6):652–8. https​://doi.
apnm-2012-0362.
org/10.1007/s0042​1-005-1357-9.
12. Doma K, Deakin GB. The acute effects intensity and volume
28. Fyfe JJ, Bishop DJ, Stepto NK. Interference between concurrent
of strength training on running performance. Eur J Sports
resistance and endurance exercise: molecular bases and the role
Sci. 2014;14(2):107–15. https ​ : //doi.org/10.1080/17461​
of individual training variables. Sports Med. 2014;44(6):743–62.
391.2012.72665​3.
https​://doi.org/10.1007/s4027​9-014-0162-1.
13. Doma K, Schumann M, Sinclair WH, Leicht AS, Deakin GB,
29. Kraemer WJ, Adams K, Cafarelli E, Dudley GA, Dooly C, Feigen-
Hakkinen K. The repeated bout effect of typical lower body
baum MS, et al. American College of Sports Medicine position
strength training sessions on sub-maximal running performance
stand. Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults.
and hormonal response. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2015;115(8):1789–
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2002;34(2):364–80.
99. https​://doi.org/10.1007/s0042​1-015-3159-z.
30. American College of Sports Medicine. American College
14. Gee TI, French DN, Howatson G, Payton SJ, Berger NJ, Thomp-
of Sports Medicine position stand. Progression models in
son KG. Does a bout of strength training affect 2,000 m rowing
resistance training for healthy adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc.
ergometer performance and rowing-specific maximal power
2009;41(3):687–708. https​://doi.org/10.1249/mss.0b013​e3181​
24 h later? Eur J Appl Physiol. 2011;111(11):2653–62. https​://
91567​0.
doi.org/10.1007/s0042​1-011-1878-3.
31. Abboud GJ, Greer BK, Campbell SC, Panton LB. Effects of
15. Doma K, Deakin GB, Bentley DJ. Implications of impaired
load-volume on EPOC after acute bouts of resistance training in
endurance performance following single bouts of resistance
resistance-trained men. J Strength Cond Res. 2013;27(7):1936–
training: an alternate concurrent training perspective. Sports
41. https​://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013​e3182​772ee​d.
Med. 2017;47(11):2187–200. https​: //doi.org/10.1007/s4027​
32. Moran-Navarro R, Perez CE, Mora-Rodriguez R, de la Cruz-
9-017-0758-3.
Sanchez E, Gonzalez-Badillo JJ, Sanchez-Medina L, et al. Time
16. Craig BW, Lucas J, Pohlman R. The effecxts of running, weight-
course of recovery following resistance training leading or not to
lifting and a combination of both on growth hormone release. J
failure. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2017;117(12):2387–99. https​://doi.
Appl Sport Sci Res. 1991;5:198–203.
org/10.1007/s0042​1-017-3725-7.
17. Chtara M, Chaouachi A, Levin GT, Chaouachi M, Chamari
33. Weakley JJS, Till K, Read DB, Roe GAB, Darrall-Jones J, Phibbs
K, Amri M, et al. Effect of concurrent endurance and circuit
PJ, et al. The effects of traditional, superset, and tri-set resist-
resistance training sequence on muscular strength and power
ance training structures on perceived intensity and physiological
Optimising Endurance Via Alternate Concurrent Training Perspective

responses. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2017;117(9):1877–89. https​://doi. exercises. Int J Sports Med. 2012;33(8):627–34. https​://doi.
org/10.1007/s0042​1-017-3680-3. org/10.1055/s-0031-12996​98.
34. Hasenoehrl T, Wessner B, Tschan H, Vidotto C, Crevenna R, 51. Kleindienst FI, Michel KJ, Schwarz J, Krabbe B. Comparison of
Csapo R. Eccentric resistance training intensity may affect kinematic and kinetic parameters between the locomotion pat-
the severity of exercise induced muscle damage. J Sports Med terns in nordic walking, walking and running. Sportverletz Sports-
Phys Fit. 2017;57(9):1195–204. https​://doi.org/10.23736​/S0022​ chaden. 2006;20(1):25–30. https​://doi.org/10.1055/s-2006-92659​
-4707.16.06476​-8. 2.
35. Draganidis D, Chatzinikolaou A, Jamurtas AZ, Carlos Barbero J, 52. Dolezal BA, Potteiger JA. Concurrent resistance and endurance
Tsoukas D, Theodorou AS, et al. The time-frame of acute resist- training influence basal metabolic rate in nondieting individuals.
ance exercise effects on football skill performance: the impact of J Appl Physiol. 1998;85(2):695–700.
exercise intensity. J Sports Sci. 2013;31(7):714–22. https​://doi. 53. Glowacki SP, Martin SE, Maurer A, Baek W, Green HJ,
org/10.1080/02640​414.2012.74672​5. Crouse SF. Effects of resistance, endurance, and concurrent
36. Freitas TT, Calleja-Gonzalez J, Alarcon F, Alcaraz PE. Acute exercise on training outcomes in men. Med Sci Sports Exerc.
effects of two different resistance circuit training protocols on 2004;36(12):2119–27.
performance and perceived exertion in semiprofessional basket- 54. Hennessy LC, Watson AWS. The interference effects of training
ball players. J Strength Cond Res. 2016;30(2):407–14. https:​ //doi. for strength and endurance simultaneously. J Strength Cond Res.
org/10.1519/JSC.00000​00000​00112​3. 1994;8(1):12–9.
37. Doma K, Leicht A, Sinclair W, Schumann M, Damas F, Burt D, 55. de Souza EO, Tricoli V, Roschel H, Brum PC, Bacurau
et al. Impact of exercise-induced muscle damage on performance AV, Ferreira JC, et  al. Molecular adaptations to concurrent
test outcomes in elite female basketball players. J Strength Cond training. Int J Sports Med. 2013;34(3):207–13. https​: //doi.
Res. 2018;32(6):1731–8. https:​ //doi.org/10.1519/JSC.000000​ 0000​ org/10.1055/s-0032-13126​27.
00224​4. 56. Gorostiaga EM, Izquierdo M, Iturralde P, Ruesta M, Ibáñez J.
38. Chen TC, Nosaka K, Lin MJ, Chen HL, Wu CJ. Changes in run- Effects of heavy resistance training on maximal and explosive
ning economy at different intensities following downhill running. force production, endurance and serum hormones in adolescent
J Sports Sci. 2009;27(11):1137–44. https:​ //doi.org/10.1080/02640​ handball players. Eur J Appl Physiol. 1999;80(5):485–93.
41090​30620​27. 57. Rusko H, Bosco CC. Metabolic response of endurance athletes
39. Chen TC, Nosaka K, Tu JH. Changes in running economy follow- to training with added load. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol.
ing downhill running. J Sports Sci. 2007;25(1):55–63. https​://doi. 1987;56(4):412–8.
org/10.1080/02640​41060​07182​28. 58. Kraemer WJ, Vescovi JD, Volek JS, Nindl BC, Newton RU, Patton
40. Connolly DA, Sayers SP, McHugh MP. Treatment and preven- JF, et al. Effects of concurrent resistance and aerobic training on
tion of delayed onset muscle soreness. J Strength Cond Res. load-bearing performance and the army physical fitness test. Mil
2003;17(1):197–208. Med. 2004;169(12):994–9.
41. Abernethy PJ, Thayer R, Taylor AW. Acute and chronic responses 59. Schumann M, Mykkanen OP, Doma K, Mazzolari R, Nyman
of skeletal muscle to endurance and sprint exercise. A review. K, Hakkinen K. Effects of endurance training only versus same-
Sports Med. 1990;10(6):365–89. session combined endurance and strength training on physical
42. Beneke R, von Duvillard SP. Determination of maximal lactate performance and serum hormone concentrations in recreational
steady state response in selected sports events. Med Sci Sports endurance runners. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2015;40(1):28–36.
Exerc. 1996;28(2):241–6. https​://doi.org/10.1139/apnm-2014-0262.
43. Roecker K, Striegel H, Dickhuth HH. Heart-rate recommenda- 60. Psilander N, Frank P, Flockhart M, Sahlin K. Adding strength
tions: transfer between running and cycling exercise? Int J Sports to endurance training does not enhance aerobic capacity in
Med. 2003;24(3):173–8. https​://doi.org/10.1055/s-2003-39087​. cyclists. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2015;25(4):e353–9. https​://doi.
44. Fontana P, Boutellier U, Knopfli-Lenzin C. Time to exhaus- org/10.1111/sms.12338​.
tion at maximal lactate steady state is similar for cycling and 61. Levin GT, McGuigan MR, Laursen PB. Effect of concurrent
running in moderately trained subjects. Eur J Appl Physiol. resistance and endurance training on physiologic and performance
2009;107(2):187–92. https:​ //doi.org/10.1007/s00421​ -009-1111-9. parameters of well-trained endurance cyclists. J Strength Cond
45. Thomas TR, Ziogas G, Smith T, Zhang Q, Londeree BR. Physi- Res. 2009;23(8):2280–6. https:​ //doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e​ 3181​
ological and perceived exertion responses to six modes of sub- b990c​2.
maximal exercise. Res Q Exerc Sport. 1995;66(3):239–46. https​ 62. Burt D, Lamb K, Nicholas C, Twist C. Effects of repeated bouts
://doi.org/10.1080/02701​367.1995.10608​838. of squatting exercise on sub-maximal endurance running per-
46. Hill DW, Vingren JL. Maximal accumulated oxygen deficit in formance. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2013;113(2):285–93. https​://doi.
running and cycling. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2011;36(6):831–8. org/10.1007/s0042​1-012-2437-2.
https​://doi.org/10.1139/h11-108. 63. Doma K, Schumann M, Leicht AS, Heilbronn BE, Damas F, Burt
47. Casuso RA, Aragon-Vela J, Huertas JR, Ruiz-Ariza A, Martinez- D. The repeated bout effect of traditional resistance exercises on
Lopez EJ. Comparison of the inflammatory and stress response running performance across 3 bouts. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab.
between sprint interval swimming and running. Scand J Med Sci 2017;42(9):978–85. https​://doi.org/10.1139/apnm-2017-0214.
Sports. 2018;28(4):1371–8. https​://doi.org/10.1111/sms.13046​. 64. Hayter KJ, Doma K, Schumann M, Deakin GB. The comparison
48. Gergley JC. Comparison of two lower-body modes of endurance of cold-water immersion and cold air therapy on maximal cycling
training on lower-body strength development while concurrently performance and recovery markers following strength exercises.
training. J Strength Cond Res. 2009;23(3):979–87. https​://doi. PeerJ. 2016;4:e1841. https​://doi.org/10.7717/peerj​.1841.
org/10.1519/JSC.0b013​e3181​a0629​d. 65. Doncaster GG, Twist C. Exercise-induced muscle damage from
49. Pasquet B, Carpentier A, Duchateau J, Hainaut K. Muscle fatigue bench press exercise impairs arm cranking endurance perfor-
during concentric and eccentric contractions. Muscle Nerve. mance. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2012;112(12):4135–42. https​://doi.
2000;23(11):1727–35. org/10.1007/s0042​1-012-2404-y.
50. Silva RF, Cadore EL, Kothe G, Guedes M, Alberton CL, 66. Molina R, Denadai BS. Muscle damage slows oxygen uptake
Pinto SS, et  al. Concurrent training with different aerobic kinetics during moderate-intensity exercise performed at high
 K. Doma et al.

pedal rate. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2011;36(6):848–55. https​ 82. Ballor DL, Becque MD, Katch VL. Metabolic responses dur-
://doi.org/10.1139/h11-109. ing hydraulic resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc.
67. Joyce S, Sabapathy S, Bulmer AC, Minahan C. The effect of prior 1987;19(4):363–7.
eccentric exercise on heavy-intensity cycling: the role of gender 83. Burd NA, Andrews RJ, West DW, Little JP, Cochran AJ, Hector
and oral contraceptives. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2014;114(5):995– AJ, et al. Muscle time under tension during resistance exercise
1003. https​://doi.org/10.1007/s0042​1-014-2832-y. stimulates differential muscle protein sub-fractional synthetic
68. Baranauskiene N, Kilikeviciene S, Stasiule L, Civinskiene G, responses in men. J Physiol. 2012;590(Pt 2):351–62. https​://doi.
Stasiulis A. Gender differences in residual effect of prior drop org/10.1113/jphys​iol.2011.22120​0.
jumps on oxygen uptake during heavy cycling exercise. Medicina 84. Crewther B, Keogh J, Cronin J, Cook C. Possible stimuli for
(Kaunas). 2017;53(5):331–8. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.medic​ strength and power adaptation: acute hormonal responses. Sports
i.2017.10.001. Med. 2006;36(3):215–38.
69. Twist C, Eston RG. The effect of exercise-induced muscle damage 85. Keogh JW, Wilson GJ, Weatherby RP. A cross-sectional compari-
on perceived exertion and cycling endurance performance. Eur J son of different resistance training techniques in the bench press.
Appl Physiol. 2009;105(4):559–67. https:​ //doi.org/10.1007/s0042​ J Strength Cond Res. 1999;13(3):247–58.
1-008-0935-z. 86. Keeler LK, Finkelstein LH, Miller W, Fernhall B. Early-phase
70. Chaves CP, Simao R, Miranda H, Ribeiro J, Soares J, Salles adaptations of traditional-speed vs. superslow resistance train-
B, et  al. Influence of exercise order on muscle damage dur- ing on strength and aerobic capacity in sedentary individuals. J
ing moderate-intensity resistance exercise and recovery. Res Strength Cond Res. 2001;15(3):309–14.
Sports Med. 2013;21(2):176–86. https​://doi.org/10.1080/15438​ 87. Lavender AP, Nosaka K. Changes in fluctuation of isometric force
627.2012.73843​9. following eccentric and concentric exercise of the elbow flexors.
71. Meneghel AJ, Verlengia R, Crisp AH, Aoki MS, Nosaka K, da Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 2006;96(3):235–40. https​://
Mota GR, et al. Muscle damage of resistance-trained men after doi.org/10.1007/s0042​1-005-0069-5.
two bouts of eccentric bench press exercise. J Strength Cond Res. 88. Muthalib M, Lee H, Millet GY, Ferrari M, Nosaka K. Compari-
2014;28(10):2961–6. https​://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.00000​00000​ son between maximal lengthening and shortening contractions
00049​4. for biceps brachii muscle oxygenation and hemodynamics. J Appl
72. Leveritt M, Abernethy PJ, Barry BK, Logan PA. Concur- Physiol. 2010;109(3):710–20. https​://doi.org/10.1152/jappl​physi​
rent strength and endurance training. A review. Sports Med. ol.01297​.2009.
1999;28(6):413–27. 89. Morgan DL, Allen DG. Early events in stretch-induced muscle
73. Schumann M, Pelttari P, Doma K, Karavirta L, Hakkinen K. Neu- damage. J Appl Physiol. 1999;87(6):2007–15.
romuscular adaptations to same-session combined endurance and 90. Proske U, Morgan DL. Muscle damage from eccentric exercise:
strength training in recreational endurance runners. Int J Sports mechanism, mechanical signs, adaptation and clinical applica-
Med. 2016;37(14):1136–43. https:​ //doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-11259​ tions. J Physiol. 2001;537(Pt 2):333–45.
2. 91. Chapman D, Newton M, Sacco P, Nosaka K. Greater mus-
74. Collins MA, Snow TK. Are adaptations to combined endurance cle damage induced by fast versus slow velocity eccentric
and strength training affected by the sequence of training? J Sports exercise. Int J Sports Med. 2006;27(8):591–8. https ​ : //doi.
Sci. 1993;11(6):485–91. https​://doi.org/10.1080/02640​41930​ org/10.1055/s-2005-86592​0.
87300​17. 92. Chapman DW, Newton M, McGuigan M, Nosaka K. Effect of
75. Eddens L, van Someren K, Howatson G. The role of intra-ses- lengthening contraction velocity on muscle damage of the elbow
sion exercise sequence in the interference effect: a systematic flexors. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008;40(5):926–33. https​://doi.
review with meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2018;48(1):177–88. org/10.1249/MSS.0b013​e3181​68c82​d.
https​://doi.org/10.1007/s4027​9-017-0784-1. 93. Dolezal BA, Potteiger JA, Jacobsen DJ, Benedict SH. Muscle dam-
76. Legaz Arrese A, Serrano Ostariz E, Jcasajus Mallen JA, Mun- age and resting metabolic rate after acute resistance exercise with
guia Izquierdo D. The changes in running performance and an eccentric overload. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000;32(7):1202–7.
maximal oxygen uptake after long-term training in elite athletes. 94. Hackney KJ, Engels HJ, Gretebeck RJ. Resting energy expendi-
J Sports Med Phys Fit. 2005;45(4):435–40. ture and delayed-onset muscle soreness after full-body resistance
77. Borgen NT. Running performance, ­VO 2max , and running training with an eccentric concentration. J Strength Cond Res.
economy: the widespread issue of endogenous selection bias. 2008;22(5):1602–9. https​://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013​e3181​
Sports Med. 2018;48(5):1049–58. https​://doi.org/10.1007/s4027​ 8222c​5.
9-017-0789-9. 95. Izquierdo M, Ibanez J, Hakkinen K, Kraemer WJ, Larrion JL,
78. Waldman HS, Heatherly AJ, Waddell AF, Krings BM, O’Neal EK. Gorostiaga EM. Once weekly combined resistance and cardio-
Five-kilometer time trial reliability of a nonmotorized treadmill vascular training in healthy older men. Med Sci Sports Exerc.
and comparison of physiological and perceptual responses vs. a 2004;36(3):435–43.
motorized treadmill. J Strength Cond Res. 2018;32(5):1455–61. 96. Baar K. Training for endurance and strength: lessons from cell
https​://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.00000​00000​00199​3. signaling. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006;38(11):1939–44. https​://
79. Doma K, Deakin BD, Leicht A, Sealey RM. The reliabiliity of doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.00002​33799​.62153​.19.
running economy among trained distance runners and field- 97. Drummond MJ, Vehrs PR, Schaalje GB, Parcell AC. Aerobic and
based players. J Exerc Sci Fit. 2012;10(2):90–6. https​://doi. resistance exercise sequence affects excess postexercise oxygen
org/10.1016/j.jesf.2012.10.006. consumption. J Strength Cond Res. 2005;19(2):332–7. https:​ //doi.
80. Hakkinen K, Komi PV, Alen M. Effect of explosive type strength org/10.1519/R-14353​.1.
training on isometric force- and relaxation-time, electromyo- 98. Ronnestad BR, Hansen EA, Raastad T. In-season strength main-
graphic and muscle fibre characteristics of leg extensor muscles. tenance training increases well-trained cyclists’ performance. Eur
Acta Physiol Scand. 1985;125(4):587–600. J Appl Physiol. 2010;110(6):1269–82. https​://doi.org/10.1007/
81. Housh DJ, Housh TJ, Johnson GO, Chu WK. Hypertrophic s0042​1-010-1622-4.
response to unilateral concentric isokinetic resistance training. J
Appl Physiol. 1992;73(1):65–70.