Literature DB >> 28557855

Mean Velocity vs. Mean Propulsive Velocity vs. Peak Velocity: Which Variable Determines Bench Press Relative Load With Higher Reliability?

Amador García-Ramos1,2, Francisco L Pestaña-Melero1, Alejandro Pérez-Castilla1, Francisco J Rojas1, G Gregory Haff3.   

Abstract

García-Ramos, A, Pestaña-Melero, FL, Pérez-Castilla, A, Rojas, FJ, and Haff, GG. Mean velocity vs. mean propulsive velocity vs. peak velocity: which variable determines bench press relative load with higher reliability? J Strength Cond Res 32(5): 1273-1279, 2018-This study aimed to compare between 3 velocity variables (mean velocity [MV], mean propulsive velocity [MPV], and peak velocity [PV]): (a) the linearity of the load-velocity relationship, (b) the accuracy of general regression equations to predict relative load (%1RM), and (c) the between-session reliability of the velocity attained at each percentage of the 1-repetition maximum (%1RM). The full load-velocity relationship of 30 men was evaluated by means of linear regression models in the concentric-only and eccentric-concentric bench press throw (BPT) variants performed with a Smith machine. The 2 sessions of each BPT variant were performed within the same week separated by 48-72 hours. The main findings were as follows: (a) the MV showed the strongest linearity of the load-velocity relationship (median r = 0.989 for concentric-only BPT and 0.993 for eccentric-concentric BPT), followed by MPV (median r = 0.983 for concentric-only BPT and 0.980 for eccentric-concentric BPT), and finally PV (median r = 0.974 for concentric-only BPT and 0.969 for eccentric-concentric BPT); (b) the accuracy of the general regression equations to predict relative load (%1RM) from movement velocity was higher for MV (SEE = 3.80-4.76%1RM) than for MPV (SEE = 4.91-5.56%1RM) and PV (SEE = 5.36-5.77%1RM); and (c) the PV showed the lowest within-subjects coefficient of variation (3.50%-3.87%), followed by MV (4.05%-4.93%), and finally MPV (5.11%-6.03%). Taken together, these results suggest that the MV could be the most appropriate variable for monitoring the relative load (%1RM) in the BPT exercise performed in a Smith machine.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 28557855     DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001998

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Strength Cond Res        ISSN: 1064-8011            Impact factor:   3.775


  17 in total

1.  Combined effects of very short "all out" efforts during sprint and resistance training on physical and physiological adaptations after 2 weeks of training.

Authors:  Stefano Benítez-Flores; André R Medeiros; Fabrício Azevedo Voltarelli; Eliseo Iglesias-Soler; Kenji Doma; Herbert G Simões; Thiago Santos Rosa; Daniel A Boullosa
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2019-03-16       Impact factor: 3.078

2.  Analysis of the Load-Velocity Relationship in Deadlift Exercise.

Authors:  Alejandro Benavides-Ubric; David M Díez-Fernández; Manuel A Rodríguez-Pérez; Manuel Ortega-Becerra; Fernando Pareja-Blanco
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2020-08-13       Impact factor: 2.988

3.  Acute Effects of Caffeine Supplementation on Movement Velocity in Resistance Exercise: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Javier Raya-González; Tara Rendo-Urteaga; Raúl Domínguez; Daniel Castillo; Alejandro Rodríguez-Fernández; Jozo Grgic
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 11.136

4.  Acute Effects of Barbell Bouncing and External Cueing on Power Output in Bench Press Throw in Resistance-Trained Men.

Authors:  Atle Hole Saeterbakken; Jorund Loken; Tom Erik Jorung Solstad; Nicolay Stien; Olaf Prieske; Suzanne Scott; Vidar Andersen
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2022-06-06       Impact factor: 4.755

Review 5.  Methods for Controlling and Reporting Resistance Training Proximity to Failure: Current Issues and Future Directions.

Authors:  Joshua C Pelland; Zac P Robinson; Jacob F Remmert; Rebecca M Cerminaro; Brian Benitez; Thomas A John; Eric R Helms; Michael C Zourdos
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2022-03-05       Impact factor: 11.928

6.  Performance and reference data in the jump squat at different relative loads in elite sprinters, rugby players, and soccer players.

Authors:  Irineu Loturco; Michael R McGuigan; Tomás T Freitas; Pedro L Valenzuela; Lucas A Pereira; Fernando Pareja-Blanco
Journal:  Biol Sport       Date:  2020-08-31       Impact factor: 2.806

7.  The impact of test loads on the accuracy of 1RM prediction using the load-velocity relationship.

Authors:  Mark G L Sayers; Michel Schlaeppi; Marina Hitz; Silvio Lorenzetti
Journal:  BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil       Date:  2018-05-29

8.  Movement velocity in the chair squat is associated with measures of functional capacity and cognition in elderly people at low risk of fall.

Authors:  Carlos Balsalobre-Fernández; Ángel Cordón; Nazaret Unquiles; Daniel Muñoz-García
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2018-04-30       Impact factor: 2.984

9.  Assessment of the load-velocity profile in the free-weight prone bench pull exercise through different velocity variables and regression models.

Authors:  Amador García-Ramos; David Ulloa-Díaz; Paola Barboza-González; Ángela Rodríguez-Perea; Darío Martínez-García; Mauricio Quidel-Catrilelbún; Francisco Guede-Rojas; Jesualdo Cuevas-Aburto; Danica Janicijevic; Jonathon Weakley
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-02-27       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  A Cluster Set Protocol in the Half Squat Exercise Reduces Mechanical Fatigue and Lactate Concentrations in Comparison with A Traditional Set Configuration.

Authors:  D Varela-Olalla; A Romero-Caballero; J Del Campo-Vecino; C Balsalobre-Fernández
Journal:  Sports (Basel)       Date:  2020-04-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.