A comparison of low volume ‘high-intensity-training’ and high volume
traditional resistance training methods on muscular performance,
body composition, and subjective assessments of training

J Giessing; B Eichmann; J Steele; J Fisher

doi:10.5604/20831862.1201813

eISSN: 2083-1862
ISSN: 0860-021X

Biology of Sport

Current Issue Manuscripts accepted About the journal Editorial board Abstracting and indexing Archive Ethical standards and procedures Contact Instructions for authors Journal's Reviewers Special Information

Editorial System

Submit your Manuscript

Editorial Policies

Sarajevo Declaration on Integrity and Visibility of Scholarly Publications

Open access

3/2016
vol. 33

Send email

Copy url:

Original paper

A comparison of low volume ‘high-intensity-training’ and high volume traditional resistance training methods on muscular performance, body composition, and subjective assessments of training

J Giessing

¹

,

B Eichmann

¹

,

J Steele

²

,

J Fisher

²

Institut für Sportwissenschaft, University of Koblenz-Landau, Germany
Centre for Health, Exercise and Sport Science, Southampton Solent University, UK

Biol. Sport 2016;33:241-249

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5604/20831862.1201813

Online publish date: 2016/08/16

Article file

- 6_24412 Article.pdf [0.37 MB]

Get citation

EndNote

Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero

AMA

Giessing J, Eichmann B, Steele J, Fisher J. A comparison of low volume ‘high-intensity-training’ and high volume
traditional resistance training methods on muscular performance,
body composition, and subjective assessments of training. Biology of Sport. 2016;33(3):241-249. doi:10.5604/20831862.1201813.

APA

Giessing, J., Eichmann, B., Steele, J.,  & Fisher, J. (2016). A comparison of low volume ‘high-intensity-training’ and high volume
traditional resistance training methods on muscular performance,
body composition, and subjective assessments of training. Biology of Sport, 33(3), 241-249. https://doi.org/10.5604/20831862.1201813

Chicago

Giessing, J, B Eichmann, J Steele,  and J Fisher. 2016. "A comparison of low volume ‘high-intensity-training’ and high volume
traditional resistance training methods on muscular performance,
body composition, and subjective assessments of training". Biology of Sport 33 (3): 241-249. doi:10.5604/20831862.1201813.

Harvard

Giessing, J., Eichmann, B., Steele, J.,  and Fisher, J. (2016). A comparison of low volume ‘high-intensity-training’ and high volume
traditional resistance training methods on muscular performance,
body composition, and subjective assessments of training. Biology of Sport, 33(3), pp.241-249. https://doi.org/10.5604/20831862.1201813

MLA

Giessing, J et al. "A comparison of low volume ‘high-intensity-training’ and high volume
traditional resistance training methods on muscular performance,
body composition, and subjective assessments of training." Biology of Sport, vol. 33, no. 3, 2016, pp. 241-249. doi:10.5604/20831862.1201813.

Vancouver

Giessing J, Eichmann B, Steele J, Fisher J. A comparison of low volume ‘high-intensity-training’ and high volume
traditional resistance training methods on muscular performance,
body composition, and subjective assessments of training. Biology of Sport. 2016;33(3):241-249. doi:10.5604/20831862.1201813.

PlumX metrics:

Copyright: Institute of Sport. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons CC BY License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format, so long as attribution is given to the creator. The license allows for commercial use.

A comparison of low volume ‘high-intensity-training’ and high volume traditional resistance training methods on muscular performance, body composition, and subjective assessments of training

J Giessing 1 , B Eichmann 1 , J Steele 2 , J Fisher 2

J Giessing

¹

,

B Eichmann

¹

,

J Steele

²

,

J Fisher

²