Previous investigators have proposed that knee strength, hamstrings to quadriceps, and side-to-side asymmetries may vary according to soccer field positions. However, different results have been found in these variables, and a generalization of this topic could lead to data misinterpretation by coaches and soccer clubs. Thus, the aim of this study was to measure knee strength and asymmetry in soccer players across different field positions. One hundred and two male professional soccer players performed maximal concentric and eccentric isokinetic knee actions on the preferred and nonpreferred legs at a velocity of 60° · s. Players were divided into their field positions for analysis: goalkeepers, side backs, central backs, central defender midfielders, central attacking midfielders, and forwards. Results demonstrated that only goalkeepers (GK) differed from most other field positions on players' characteristics, and concentric peak torque across muscles. Although all players presented functional ratios of the preferred (0.79 ± 0.14) and nonpreferred (0.75 ± 0.13) legs below accepted normative values, there were no differences between positions for conventional or functional strength ratios or side-to-side asymmetry. The same comparisons were made only between field players, without inclusion of the GK, and no differences were found between positions. Therefore, the hamstrings to quadriceps and side-to-side asymmetries found here may reflect knee strength functional balance required for soccer skills performance and game demands across field positions. These results also suggest that isokinetic strength profiles should be considered differently in GK compared with other field positions due to their specific physiological and training characteristics.

The maximal number of repetitions that can be completed at various percentages of the one repetition maximum (1RM) [REPS ~ %1RM relationship] is foundational knowledge in resistance exercise programming. The current REPS ~ %1RM relationship is based on few studies and has not incorporated uncertainty into estimations or accounted for between-individuals variation. Therefore, we conducted a meta-regression to estimate the mean and between-individuals standard deviation of the number of repetitions that can be completed at various percentages of 1RM. We also explored if the REPS ~ %1RM relationship is moderated by sex, age, training status, and/or exercise. A total of 952 repetitions-to-failure tests, completed by 7289 individuals in 452 groups from 269 studies, were identified. Study groups were predominantly male (66%), healthy (97%), < 59 years of age (92%), and resistance trained (60%). The bench press (42%) and leg press (14%) were the most commonly studied exercises. The REPS ~ %1RM relationship for mean repetitions and standard deviation of repetitions were best described using natural cubic splines and a linear model, respectively, with mean and standard deviation for repetitions decreasing with increasing %1RM. More repetitions were evident in the leg press than bench press across the loading spectrum, thus separate REPS ~ %1RM tables were developed for these two exercises. Analysis of moderators suggested little influences of sex, age, or training status on the REPS ~ %1RM relationship, thus the general main model REPS ~ %1RM table can be applied to all individuals and to all exercises other than the bench press and leg press. More data are needed to develop REPS ~ %1RM tables for other exercises.

The hamstrings-to-quadriceps muscle strength ratio calculated by peak torque has been used as an important tool to detect muscle imbalance, monitor knee joint stability, describe muscle strength properties and functionality, and for lower extremity injury prevention and rehabilitation. However, this ratio does not consider other neuromuscular variables that can also influence the antagonist to agonist muscle relationship, such as torque produced at multiple angles of range of motion, explosive strength, muscle size, muscle fatigue, or muscle activation. The aim of this study was to comprehensively review alternative methods of determining the hamstrings-to-quadriceps ratio. These include ratios calculated by angle-specific torque, rate of torque development, muscle size, fatigue index, and muscle activation (measured by electromyography). Collectively, the literature demonstrates that utilizing alternative methods of determining the hamstrings-to-quadriceps ratio can be functionally relevant for a better understanding of the neuromuscular mechanisms underpinning the interaction of strength between hamstrings and quadriceps. However, there is insufficient evidence to recommend any of the alternative methods as sensitive clinical tools for predicting injury risk and monitoring knee joint integrity. Future longitudinal studies, along with injury incidence, are needed to further investigate all alternative methods of determining the hamstrings-to-quadriceps ratio. These have potential to offer insight into how athletes and the general population should be trained for performance enhancement and injury reduction, and may be used along with traditional methods for a thorough assessment of an individual’s H:Q muscle balance.

Many individuals do not participate in resistance exercise, with perceived lack of time being a key barrier. Minimal dose strategies, which generally reduce weekly exercise volumes to less than recommended guidelines, might improve muscle strength with minimal time investment. However, minimal dose strategies and their effects on muscle strength are still unclear. Here our aims are to define and characterize minimal dose resistance exercise strategies and summarize their effects on muscle strength in individuals who are not currently engaged in resistance exercise. The minimal dose strategies overviewed were: “Weekend Warrior,” single-set resistance exercise, resistance exercise “snacking,” practicing the strength test, and eccentric minimal doses. “Weekend Warrior,” which minimizes training frequency, is resistance exercise performed in one weekly session. Single-set resistance exercise, which minimizes set number and session duration, is one set of multiple exercises performed multiple times per week. “Snacks,” which minimize exercise number and session duration, are brief bouts (few minutes) of resistance exercise performed once or more daily. Practicing the strength test, which minimizes repetition number and session duration, is one maximal repetition performed in one or more sets, multiple days per week. Eccentric minimal doses, which eliminate or minimize concentric phase muscle actions, are low weekly volumes of submaximal or maximal eccentric-only repetitions. All approaches increase muscle strength, and some approaches improve other outcomes of health and fitness. “Weekend Warrior” and single-set resistance exercise are the approaches most strongly supported by current research, while snacking and eccentric minimal doses are emerging concepts with promising results. Public health programs can promote small volumes of resistance exercise as being better for muscle strength than no resistance exercise at all.

For decades, researchers have observed that eccentric (ECC) muscle strength is greater than concentric (CON) muscle strength. However, knowledge of the ECC:CON strength ratio is incomplete and might inform resistance exercise prescriptions. Our purposes were to determine the magnitude of the ECC:CON ratio of human skeletal muscle in vivo and explore if sex, age, joint actions/exercises, and movement velocity impact it. A total of 340 studies were identified through searches. It was possible to analyse 1516 ECC:CON ratios, aggregated from 12,546 individuals who made up 564 groups in 335 of the identified studies. Approximately 98% of measurements occurred on isokinetic machines. Bayesian meta-analyses were performed using log-ratios as response variables then exponentiated back to raw ratios. The overall main model estimate for the ECC:CON ratio was 1.41 (95% credible interval [CI] 1.38–1.44). The ECC:CON ratio was slightly less in men (1.38 [CI 1.34–1.41]) than women (1.47 [CI 1.43–1.51]), and greater in older adults (1.62 [CI 1.57–1.68]) than younger adults (1.39 [CI 1.36–1.42]). The ratio was similar between grouped upper-body (1.42 [CI 1.38–1.46]) and lower-body joint actions/exercises (1.40 [CI 1.37–1.44]). However, heterogeneity in the ratio existed across joint actions/exercises, with point estimates ranging from 1.32 to 2.61. The ECC:CON ratio was most greatly impacted by movement velocity, with a 0.20% increase in the ratio for every 1°/s increase in velocity. The results show that ECC muscle strength is ~ 40% greater than CON muscle strength. However, the ECC:CON ratio is greatly affected by movement velocity and to lesser extents age and sex. Differences between joint actions/exercises likely exist, but more data are needed to provide more precise estimates.