OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to test whether the auscultatory method and Finapres provide similar readings for blood pressure response during two resistance exercise protocols of different intensities, and to gain some insight into whether auscultation can be used to monitor cardiovascular stress during resistance exercise. METHODS Fourteen patients performed six and 15 maximum repetitions (six and 15, respectively) of one-leg knee extension on different days. Blood pressure (BP) was measured simultaneously with the two methods at rest and during the last repetition of the protocols. RESULTS Neither the systolic blood pressure (SBP) nor the diastolic blood pressure (DBP) differed between methods, both at rest and at six maximum repetitions. Conversely, Finapres recorded higher systolic blood pressure at 15 maximum repetitions (168.8+/-21.7 mmHg) than auscultation (147.0+/-14.5 mmHg; P<0.001). In addition, the blood pressure values obtained by both methods in each exercise protocol (six and 15 maximum repetitions, respectively) were ranked in tertiles and also treated by the gamma (gamma) nonparametric correlation. We observed a high probability for patients to be ranked on the same tertile regardless of the method used, at both six maximum repetitions (SBP=0.80, DBP=0.97) and 15 maximum repetitions (SBP=0.88, DBP=0.92). High association between methods was also observed by simple regression when measurements taken at rest and at each intensity were analyzed altogether for both SBP (r=0.95, r adjusted=0.89) and DBP (r=0.79, r adjusted=0.62). CONCLUSIONS Auscultation provides lower BP values than Finapres, especially at the end of a set including 15 maximum repetitions. The former, however, seems appropriate to assess the relative cardiovascular stress imposed by different protocols of resistance exercise.