Comparison of Velocity-Based and Traditional Percentage-Based Loading Methods on Maximal Strength and Power Adaptations.

Dorrell, HF, Smith, MF, and Gee, TI. Comparison of velocity-based and traditional percentage-based loading methods on maximal strength and power adaptations. J Strength Cond Res 34(1): 46-53, 2020-This study explored the effects of velocity-based training (VBT) on maximal strength and jump height. Sixteen trained men (22.8 ± 4.5 years) completed a countermovement jump (CMJ) test and 1 repetition maximum (1RM) assessment on back squat, bench press, strict overhead press, and deadlift, before and after 6 weeks of resistance training. Participants were assigned to VBT or percentage-based training (PBT) groups. The VBT group's load was dictated through real-time velocity monitoring, as opposed to pretesting 1RM data (PBT). No significant differences were present between groups for pretesting data (p > 0.05). Training resulted in significant increases (p < 0.05) in maximal strength for back squat (VBT 9%, PBT 8%), bench press (VBT 8%, PBT 4%), strict overhead press (VBT 6%, PBT 6%), and deadlift (VBT 6%). Significant increases in CMJ were witnessed for the VBT group only (5%). A significant interaction effect was witnessed between training groups for bench press (p = 0.004) and CMJ (p = 0.018). Furthermore, for back squat (9%), bench press (6%), and strict overhead press (6%), a significant difference was present between the total volume lifted. The VBT intervention induced favorable adaptations in maximal strength and jump height in trained men when compared with a traditional PBT approach. Interestingly, the VBT group achieved these positive outcomes despite a significant reduction in total training volume compared with the PBT group. This has potentially positive implications for the management of fatigue during resistance training.

RCT Entities:   Population Interventions Outcomes