PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the adaptations provoked by various velocity loss (VL) thresholds used in resistance training on the squat force-velocity (F-V) relationship. METHODS: Sixty-four resistance-trained young men were randomly assigned to one of four 8-week resistance training programs (all 70%-85% 1-repetition maximum) using different VL thresholds (VL0 = 0%, VL10 = 10%, VL20 = 20%, and VL40 = 40%) in the squat exercise. The F-V relationship was assessed under unloaded and loaded conditions in squat. Linear and hyperbolic (Hill) F-V equations were used to calculate force at zero velocity (F0), velocity at zero force (V0), maximum muscle power (Pmax), and force produced at mean velocities ranging from 0.0 to 2.0 m·s-1. Changes in parameters derived from the F-V relationship were compared among groups using linear mixed models. RESULTS: Linear equations showed increases in F0 (120.7 N [89.4 to 152.1]) and Pmax (76.2 W [45.3 to 107.2]) and no changes in V0 (-0.02 m·s-1 [-0.11 to 0.06]) regardless of VL. Hyperbolic equations depicted increases in F0 (120.7 N [89.4 to 152.1]), V0 (1.13 m·s-1 [0.78 to 1.48]), and Pmax (198.5 W [160.5 to 236.6]) with changes in V0 being greater in VL0 and VL10 versus VL40 (both P < .001). All groups similarly improved force at 0.0 to 2.0 m·s-1 (all P < .001), although in general, effect sizes were greater in VL10 and VL20 versus VL0 and VL40 at velocities ≤0.5 m·s-1. CONCLUSIONS: All groups improved linear and hyperbolic F0 and Pmax and hyperbolic V0 (except VL40). The dose-response relationship exhibited an inverted U-shape pattern at velocities ≤0.5 m·s-1 with VL10 and VL20 showing the greatest standardized changes.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the adaptations provoked by various velocity loss (VL) thresholds used in resistance training on the squat force-velocity (F-V) relationship. METHODS: Sixty-four resistance-trained young men were randomly assigned to one of four 8-week resistance training programs (all 70%-85% 1-repetition maximum) using different VL thresholds (VL0 = 0%, VL10 = 10%, VL20 = 20%, and VL40 = 40%) in the squat exercise. The F-V relationship was assessed under unloaded and loaded conditions in squat. Linear and hyperbolic (Hill) F-V equations were used to calculate force at zero velocity (F0), velocity at zero force (V0), maximum muscle power (Pmax), and force produced at mean velocities ranging from 0.0 to 2.0 m·s-1. Changes in parameters derived from the F-V relationship were compared among groups using linear mixed models. RESULTS: Linear equations showed increases in F0 (120.7 N [89.4 to 152.1]) and Pmax (76.2 W [45.3 to 107.2]) and no changes in V0 (-0.02 m·s-1 [-0.11 to 0.06]) regardless of VL. Hyperbolic equations depicted increases in F0 (120.7 N [89.4 to 152.1]), V0 (1.13 m·s-1 [0.78 to 1.48]), and Pmax (198.5 W [160.5 to 236.6]) with changes in V0 being greater in VL0 and VL10 versus VL40 (both P < .001). All groups similarly improved force at 0.0 to 2.0 m·s-1 (all P < .001), although in general, effect sizes were greater in VL10 and VL20 versus VL0 and VL40 at velocities ≤0.5 m·s-1. CONCLUSIONS: All groups improved linear and hyperbolic F0 and Pmax and hyperbolic V0 (except VL40). The dose-response relationship exhibited an inverted U-shape pattern at velocities ≤0.5 m·s-1 with VL10 and VL20 showing the greatest standardized changes.
Entities:
Keywords:
fatigue; horizontal jump; power; strength training; velocity-based training
Authors: Julian Alcazar; Fernando Pareja-Blanco; Carlos Rodriguez-Lopez; Hector Gutierrez-Reguero; Juan Sanchez-Valdepeñas; Pedro J Cornejo-Daza; Ignacio Ara; Luis M Alegre Journal: Eur J Appl Physiol Date: 2022-07-21 Impact factor: 3.346