Resistance TrainingTRG-CLGNCT07653425
Traditional Versus Cluster Resistance Training in Striking Combat Sport Athletes
A study testing Traditional and Cluster in people with Resistance Training, run by Universidad de Granada at 1 site in Chile.
Trial summary
This randomized controlled trial compared the effects of traditional and cluster resistance training on neuromuscular performance in amateur striking combat sport athletes. Twenty-eight athletes completed a 6-week full-body resistance training program including squat, bench press, deadlift, and bench pull exercises. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 14 to 50 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Resistance Training
- What is being tested?
- Traditional and Cluster
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 32 participants
- Where
- 1 siteChile
- Study dates
- 4 Sep 2024to 6 Mar 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 14 to 50 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult
Who may be able to join
- Healthy men and women aged 18 years or older. Active participation in striking combat sports (boxing, kickboxing, or karate) for at least 3 years.
- Minimum of 1 year of experience with the resistance exercises included in the study (squat, bench press, deadlift, and bench pull).
- Willingness to refrain from participating in additional strength training programs during the study period.
- Provision of written informed consent.
Who cannot join
- Presence of any musculoskeletal injury during the 6 months preceding data collection.
- Any medical condition that could contraindicate participation in resistance training.
- Failure to complete the training intervention or testing procedures.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Effects of Traditional and Cluster Resistance Training Using Four Multi-Joint Exercises on Neuromuscular Performance in Striking Combat Sport Athletes
This randomized controlled trial compared the effects of traditional and cluster resistance training on neuromuscular performance in amateur striking combat sport athletes. Twenty-eight athletes completed a 6-week full-body resistance training program including squat, bench press, deadlift, and bench pull exercises. Participants were assigned to either a traditional training group, which performed repetitions continuously, or a cluster training group, which incorporated short intra-set rest periods. Neuromuscular performance was assessed before and after the intervention through countermovement jump height, medicine-ball throw distance, and load-velocity relationship variables obtained from the four resistance exercises. The study aimed to determine whether cluster resistance training provides superior neuromuscular adaptations compared with traditional resistance training when training volume and relative intensity are matched.
- Conditions
- Resistance Training
- Being tested
- Traditional, Cluster
- Keywords
- sport performance, set configuration, strength training, velocity-based training
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
TraditionalBehavioural
Participants completed a 6-week full-body resistance training program consisting of squat, bench press, deadlift, and bench pull exercises. Training was performed twice weekly and included 3 sets of 8 repetitions at 75% of the individual one-repetition maximum (1RM) for each exercise. All repetitions within a set were performed consecutively without intra-set rest periods. Participants were instructed to execute the concentric phase of each repetition with maximal intended velocity.
ClusterBehavioural
Participants completed a 6-week full-body resistance training program consisting of squat, bench press, deadlift, and bench pull exercises. Training was performed twice weekly and included 3 sets of 8 repetitions at 75% of the individual one-repetition maximum (1RM) for each exercise. Repetitions were organized into clusters of two repetitions separated by 15-second intra-set rest intervals (2 + 2 + 2 + 2 repetitions). Participants were instructed to execute the concentric phase of each repetition with maximal intended velocity.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Traditional | Active comparator | Participants performed a 6-week full-body resistance training program consisting of squat, bench press, deadlift, and bench pull exercises. Training was conducted twice per week and included 3 sets of 8 repetitions at 75% of the individual one-repetition maximum (1RM) for each exercise. Participants completed all repetitions consecutively within each set without intra-set rest periods. Inter-set rest intervals were 3 minutes and inter-exercise rest intervals were 5 minutes. Receives: Behavioral: Traditional |
| Cluster | Experimental | Participants performed the same 6-week full-body resistance training program as the traditional training group, consisting of squat, bench press, deadlift, and bench pull exercises performed twice per week. Training included 3 sets of 8 repetitions at 75% of the individual one-repetition maximum (1RM) for each exercise. The repetitions were organized into clusters of two repetitions separated by 15-second intra-set rest intervals (2 + 2 + 2 + 2 repetitions). Inter-set rest intervals were 3 minutes and inter-exercise rest intervals were 5 minutes. Receives: Behavioral: Cluster |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Load-velocity relationship (LVR).
Individual LVR were determined for the squat, bench press, and bench pull exercises using a Smith machine (FFittech, Taiwan, China), whereas the deadlift exercise was performed with a hexagonal barbell. Each test started with an initial external load of 20 kg, which was progressively increased until the mean velocity (MV) of the fastest repetition differed by less than 0.30 m·s-1 from the theoretical MV associated with the 1RM of each exercise (0.30 m/s for squat, 0.15 m/s for deadlift, 0.17 m/s for bench press, and 0.50 m/s for bench pull) (Weakley et al., 2021). The load increments were adjusted according to the exercise and movement velocity to ensure an appropriate distribution of loads across the individual force-velocity spectrum. Three repetitions were performed at lighter loads, whereas only two repetitions were completed at heavier loads. A standardized rest interval of 10 seconds was provided between repetitions at the same load.
Measured: Baseline and after 6 weeks of resistance training
Secondary outcomes (2)
Countermovement jump
Participants completed three CMJ attempts with a 1-minute recovery period between trials. From a standing position with feet approximately shoulder-width apart and hands placed on the hips, participants performed a rapid countermovement to a self-selected depth and immediately executed a maximal vertical jump. Jump height was estimated from flight time using the equation: height = (flight time2 × 9.81 m·s-2) / 8, where 9.81 m·s-2 corresponds to gravitational acceleration. Flight time was recorded using an infrared optical measurement system (OptoJump, Microgate, Bolzano, Italy). Participants were instructed to maintain their hands on the hips during the entire movement and to land with the lower limbs fully extended. Trials not complying with these technical requirements were discarded and repeated after 1 minute of rest under the supervision of the same experienced evaluator. The best performance obtained across the three trials was retained for subsequent analyses.
Measured: Baseline and after 6 weeks of resistance training
Medicine ball throw (MBT).
Upper-body explosive performance was evaluated using a seated MBT test performed with a 3-kg medicine ball. Testing was conducted indoors on a hardwood surface. Participants sat behind a marked line with both feet in contact with the floor and executed a single-arm forward chest-pass action from a stable seated position. Throws were performed separately with the dominant and non-dominant arms, using a coordinated movement involving the trunk and upper-limb musculature. Throwing distance was determined as the linear distance between the starting line and the first point of ball contact with the floor, measured with a tape measure. Three maximal attempts were completed with each arm, with 1 minute of recovery between trials. The greatest distance achieved with each arm was retained for subsequent statistical analyses.
Measured: Baseline and after 6 weeks of resistance training
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted17 Jun 2026
- Study start4 Sep 2024
- Primary completion6 Mar 2025
- Study completion6 Mar 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Resistance TrainingStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 32 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Universidad de Granada
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Amador García Ramos, Universidad de Granada
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07653425
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- UGR-TRG-CLG-2024
- Other IDs
- 25KJA180002
- Acronym
- TRG-CLG
- Status last verified
- Jun 2026
- First submitted
- 11 Jun 2026
- Last updated
- 17 Jun 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 17 Jun 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effects of Traditional and Cluster Resistance Training Using Four Multi-Joint Exercises on Neuromuscular Performance in Striking Combat Sport Athletes
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07653425
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- TRG-CLG / UGR-TRG-CLG-2024
- Conditions
- Resistance Training
- Keywords
- sport performance, set configuration, strength training, velocity-based training
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 32 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Universidad de GranadaUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 4 Sep 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 6 Mar 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 6 Mar 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 17 Jun 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This randomized controlled trial compared the effects of traditional and cluster resistance training on neuromuscular performance in amateur striking combat sport athletes. Twenty-eight athletes completed a 6-week full-body resistance training program including squat, bench press, deadlift, and bench pull exercises. Participants were assigned to either a traditional training group, which performed repetitions continuously, or a cluster training group, which incorporated short intra-set rest periods. Neuromuscular performance was assessed before and after the intervention through countermovement jump height, medicine-ball throw distance, and load-velocity relationship variables obtained from the four resistance exercises. The study aimed to determine whether cluster resistance training provides superior neuromuscular adaptations compared with traditional resistance training when training volume and relative intensity are matched.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Traditional | Active comparator | Behavioral: TraditionalParticipants performed a 6-week full-body resistance training program consisting of squat, bench press, deadlift, and bench pull exercises. Training was conducted twice per week and included 3 sets of 8 repetitions at 75% of the individual one-repetition maximum (1RM) for each exercise. Participants completed all repetitions consecutively within each set without intra-set rest periods. Inter-set rest intervals were 3 minutes and inter-exercise rest intervals were 5 minutes. |
| Cluster | Experimental | Behavioral: ClusterParticipants performed the same 6-week full-body resistance training program as the traditional training group, consisting of squat, bench press, deadlift, and bench pull exercises performed twice per week. Training included 3 sets of 8 repetitions at 75% of the individual one-repetition maximum (1RM) for each exercise. The repetitions were organized into clusters of two repetitions separated by 15-second intra-set rest intervals (2 + 2 + 2 + 2 repetitions). Inter-set rest intervals were 3 minutes and inter-exercise rest intervals were 5 minutes. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 14 to 50 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Healthy men and women aged 18 years or older. Active participation in striking combat sports (boxing, kickboxing, or karate) for at least 3 years.
- Minimum of 1 year of experience with the resistance exercises included in the study (squat, bench press, deadlift, and bench pull).
- Willingness to refrain from participating in additional strength training programs during the study period.
- Provision of written informed consent.
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Presence of any musculoskeletal injury during the 6 months preceding data collection.
- Any medical condition that could contraindicate participation in resistance training.
- Failure to complete the training intervention or testing procedures.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| TraditionalParticipants completed a 6-week full-body resistance training program consisting of squat, bench press, deadlift, and bench pull exercises. Training was performed twice weekly and included 3 sets of 8 repetitions at 75% of the individual one-repetition maximum (1RM) for each exercise. All repetitions within a set were performed consecutively without intra-set rest periods. Participants were instructed to execute the concentric phase of each repetition with maximal intended velocity. | Behavioural | Traditional |
| ClusterParticipants completed a 6-week full-body resistance training program consisting of squat, bench press, deadlift, and bench pull exercises. Training was performed twice weekly and included 3 sets of 8 repetitions at 75% of the individual one-repetition maximum (1RM) for each exercise. Repetitions were organized into clusters of two repetitions separated by 15-second intra-set rest intervals (2 + 2 + 2 + 2 repetitions). Participants were instructed to execute the concentric phase of each repetition with maximal intended velocity. | Behavioural | Cluster |
Primary outcome
Load-velocity relationship (LVR).
Time frame: Baseline and after 6 weeks of resistance training
Individual LVR were determined for the squat, bench press, and bench pull exercises using a Smith machine (FFittech, Taiwan, China), whereas the deadlift exercise was performed with a hexagonal barbell. Each test started with an initial external load of 20 kg, which was progressively increased until the mean velocity (MV) of the fastest repetition differed by less than 0.30 m·s-1 from the theoretical MV associated with the 1RM of each exercise (0.30 m/s for squat, 0.15 m/s for deadlift, 0.17 m/s for bench press, and 0.50 m/s for bench pull) (Weakley et al., 2021). The load increments were adjusted according to the exercise and movement velocity to ensure an appropriate distribution of loads across the individual force-velocity spectrum. Three repetitions were performed at lighter loads, whereas only two repetitions were completed at heavier loads. A standardized rest interval of 10 seconds was provided between repetitions at the same load.
2 secondary outcomes
Countermovement jump
Time frame: Baseline and after 6 weeks of resistance training
Medicine ball throw (MBT).
Time frame: Baseline and after 6 weeks of resistance training
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 17 Jun 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Resistance Training
Not yet recruiting
Testing a Smartphone App to Support a Mediterranean Diet and Strength Exercise
Treatment Adherence and Compliance, Resistance Exercise
Not yet recruiting
Exercise in Alzheimer's Disease: Functional Biomarkers
Alzheimer's Dementia (AD), Alzheimer Disease (AD)
Active, not recruiting
Flexibility, Resistance, Aerobic, Movement Execution Training in Adults With Hereditary Spastic Paraplegia
Hereditary Spastic Paraplegia
Recruiting
IMST for Dementia Risk Reduction
Systolic Blood Pressure, Blood Pressure
Not yet recruiting
Contribution of Corticospinal and Reticulospinal Mechanisms to Neural Adaptations Induced by Muscle Strengthening of Healthy Adults
Healthy Volunteers, Resistance Training Adaptation
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Traditional and Cluster in people with Resistance Training, run by Universidad de Granada at 1 site in Chile.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 17 Jun 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Chile. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Load-velocity relationship (LVR). (time frame: Baseline and after 6 weeks of resistance training). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 17 Jun 2026.