Physiological Responses to Increasing Battling Rope Weight During Two 3-Week High-Intensity Interval Training Programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: Bornath, DPD and Kenno, KA. Physiological responses to increasing battling rope weight during two 3-week high-intensity interval training programs. J Strength Cond Res 36(2): 352-358, 2022-The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of increasing battling rope weight during 6 weeks (wks) of battling rope high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on upper-body oxygen consumption and skeletal muscle strength, power, and endurance performance. Eighteen recreationally active men and 15 women (23 ± 2 year) performed 10 × 30-second (s) bouts of all-out exercise, interchanging between double and alternating whip battling rope exercises, separated by 60 seconds of rest, 3×/wk, for 6 weeks. For the first 3 weeks, women used 40-foot, 1.5-inch diameter, 20-lb ropes and men used 50-foot, 1.5-inch diameter, 25-lb ropes, after which the battling rope weight was increased by 10 lb for a second 3-week period of battling rope HIIT. Men and women exercised at a minimum of 85% of their predicted maximum heart rate with post-exercise blood lactate concentrations peaking at 10.79 mmol·L-1 and 8.33 mmol·L-1, respectively. After 3 and 6 weeks of battling rope HIIT, men and women increased upper-body maximal oxygen consumption (V̇o2max), maximum voluntary contraction isometric shoulder flexion and extension strength, shoulder power output, and push-up and sit-up endurance. These increases in aerobic and skeletal muscle measurements are similar to previous HIIT studies involving treadmills and cycle ergometers. Battling rope HIIT produced adaptations in skeletal muscle and aerobic performance in as little as 3 weeks, and with increases in battling rope weight displayed further improvements after 6 weeks of battling rope HIIT. These data support the implementation of battling rope HIIT to improve cardiorespiratory fitness and skeletal muscle performance with increased workloads.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".