Literature DB >> 30526366

Differences in the one-repetition maximum and load-velocity profile between the flat and arched bench press in competitive powerlifters.

Amador García-Ramos1,2, Alejandro Pérez-Castilla1, Francisco Javier Villar Macias3, Pedro Á Latorre-Román3, Juan A Párraga3, Felipe García-Pinillos4.   

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the one-repetition maximum (1RM) and the velocity outcomes obtained against the same absolute and relative (%1RM) loads between the flat and arched bench press (BP) variants. Eleven competitive male powerlifters were evaluated in one session with the flat BP (natural lumbar arch and moderate scapular retraction) and in another session with the arched BP (pronounced lumbar arch and scapular retraction). An incremental loading test was used to determine the 1RM as well as the barbell's velocity against the different external loads. The main findings revealed that the 1RM did not significantly differ between the flat (115.9 ± 17.9 kg) and arched (115.7 ± 18.4 kg) BP variants (p = 0.942, effect size = 0.01), while there were no significant differences between BP variants either for the velocity outcomes obtained against the individual loads nor for the velocities associated with each %1RM (p > 0.05). These results suggest that competitive powerlifters do not necessarily present their higher 1RM performance using the arched BP variant. Finally, both BP variants could be used interchangeably when using movement velocity for testing upper-body strength as well as for prescribing the load during velocity-based resistance training routines.

Keywords:  Linear position transducer; maximal strength; powerlifting; velocity-based resistance training

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30526366     DOI: 10.1080/14763141.2018.1544662

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sports Biomech        ISSN: 1476-3141            Impact factor:   2.832


  4 in total

1.  Range of Motion and Sticking Region Effects on the Bench Press Load-Velocity Relationship.

Authors:  Alejandro Martínez-Cava; Ricardo Morán-Navarro; Alejandro Hernández-Belmonte; Javier Courel-Ibáñez; Elena Conesa-Ros; Juan José González-Badillo; Jesús G Pallarés
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2019-11-19       Impact factor: 2.988

2.  Are sEMG, Velocity and Power Influenced by Athletes' Fixation in Paralympic Powerlifting?

Authors:  Ialuska Guerra; Felipe J Aidar; Gianpiero Greco; Paulo Francisco de Almeida-Neto; Michele De Candia; Breno Guilherme de Araújo Tinoco Cabral; Luca Poli; Mauro Mazini Filho; Roberto Carvutto; Ana Filipa Silva; Filipe Manuel Clemente; Georgian Badicu; Stefania Cataldi; Francesco Fischetti
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-03-31       Impact factor: 3.390

3.  Bilateral and unilateral load-velocity profiling in a machine-based, single-joint, lower body exercise.

Authors:  Carlos Balsalobre-Fernández; Mario Cardiel-García; Sergio L Jiménez
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-09-16       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Static and Dynamic Strength Indicators in Paralympic Power-Lifters with and without Spinal Cord Injury.

Authors:  Luan José Lopes Teles; Felipe J Aidar; Dihogo Gama de Matos; Anderson Carlos Marçal; Paulo Francisco de Almeida-Neto; Eduardo Borba Neves; Osvaldo Costa Moreira; Frederico Ribeiro Neto; Nuno Domingos Garrido; José Vilaça-Alves; Alfonso López Díaz-de-Durana; Filipe Manuel Clemente; Ian Jeffreys; Breno Guilherme de Araújo Tinoco Cabral; Victor Machado Reis
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-05-31       Impact factor: 3.390

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.