Modeling the Total Energy Costs of Resistance Exercise: a Work in Progress

Central European Journal of Sport Sciences and Medicine. 2016;14 DOI 10.18276/cej.2016.2-01


Journal Homepage

Journal Title: Central European Journal of Sport Sciences and Medicine

ISSN: 2300-9705 (Print); 2353-2807 (Online)

Publisher: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego

Society/Institution: University of Szczecin

LCC Subject Category: Geography. Anthropology. Recreation: Recreation. Leisure: Sports | Medicine: Internal medicine: Special situations and conditions: Sports medicine | Science: Physiology

Country of publisher: Poland

Language of fulltext: English

Full-text formats available: PDF



Victor M. Reis (Research Centre for Sports Sciences, Health Sciences & Human Development, University of Trás-os-Montes & Alto Douro (UTAD), Portugal)

Christopher B. Scott (University of Southern Maine, Exercise, Health and Sport Sciences, USA)


Double blind peer review

Editorial Board

Instructions for authors

Time From Submission to Publication: 12 weeks


Abstract | Full Text

We present an aerobic and anaerobic, exercise and recovery energy cost model of intermittent energy costs utilizing task (work, Joules) as opposed to rate (per minute) measurements. Low to moderate intensity steady state exercise energy costs are typically portrayed as the volumetric rate at which oxygen is consumed (VO2 L min–1), where a proportionate upward climbing linear relationship is profiled with an increasing power output; add to this the concept of the anaerobic threshold and energy costs increase with more intense aerobic exercise in disproportion to VO2 L min–1 measurements. As a per task function, intermittent work and recovery bouts contain a combined estimate of total costs, that is as kJ or kcal (not kJ.min-1 or kcal.min-1). Adopting this approach to describe single and multiple sets of resistance training, the model that emerges for intermittent resistance exercise portrays linearity between equivalent work and total energy costs that differs proportionately among conditions – “continuous” muscular endurance vs. Intermittent higher load strength work, moderately paced vs. slower and faster conditions, smaller vs. larger working muscle masses and failure (fatigue) vs. non-failure states. Moreover, per kcal (or kJ) of total energy costs, work (J) is more inefficient with a greater load and lower repetition number as opposed to lower resistance with an increased number of repetitions. The concept of energy costs Rusing disproportionately with increased or prolonged work does not appear to apply to resistance exercise.