Using Squat Repetition Maximum Testing to Determine Hamstring Resistance Training Exercise Loads

2010 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 293-299
Author(s):  
William P Ebben ◽  
Nicholas J Long ◽  
Zach D Pawlowski ◽  
Lauren M Chmielewski ◽  
Rustin W Clewien ◽  
...  
2013 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 67 ◽  
Author(s):  
K Nolte ◽  
PE Krüger ◽  
PS Els

Objective. To evaluate whether three-dimensional (3D) musculoskeletal modelling could be effective in assessing the safety and efficacy of exercising on a seated row resistance-training machine. The focus of the evaluation was on biomechanical and anthropometric considerations of the end user.Methods. Three anthropometric cases were created; these represented a 5th percentile female as well as a 50th and a 95th percentile male based on body mass index. Two repetitions, with a resistance equal to 50% of the functional strength of one repetition maximum (1RM) for each anthropometric case, were performed.Results. Results indicate that the default model of the LifeModeler software has important limitations that should be taken into consideration when used to evaluate exercise equipment. Adjustments had to be made to the model to solve the forward dynamics simulations; as a result, no muscle forces or contraction values were obtained. This negatively influenced the value of the results as these parameters are important when analysing an exercise. The seated row resistance-training machine’s engineered or manufactured adjustability was sufficient, as it appeared to accommodate the three anthropometric cases adequately during execution of this exercise.Conclusion. It appears that 3D musculoskeletal modelling can be used to evaluate resistance-training exercises such as the seated row; however, the limitations indicated by this study must be taken into consideration, especially when using the default LifeModeler model


2006 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 141-144 ◽  
Author(s):  
LUUK P.B. SPREUWENBERG ◽  
WILLIAM J. KRAEMER ◽  
BARRY A. SPIERING ◽  
JEFF S. VOLEK ◽  
DISA L. HATFIELD ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 50 (5S) ◽  
pp. 298
Author(s):  
Scott A. Conger ◽  
Jun Guo ◽  
Kenzie Mercier ◽  
Cameron D. Needham ◽  
Clare Zamzow ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 67
Author(s):  
K Nolte ◽  
PE Krüger ◽  
PS Els

Objective. To evaluate whether three-dimensional (3D) musculoskeletal modelling could be effective in assessing the safety and efficacy of exercising on a seated row resistance-training machine. The focus of the evaluation was on biomechanical and anthropometric considerations of the end user.Methods. Three anthropometric cases were created; these represented a 5th percentile female as well as a 50th and a 95th percentile male based on body mass index. Two repetitions, with a resistance equal to 50% of the functional strength of one repetition maximum (1RM) for each anthropometric case, were performed.Results. Results indicate that the default model of the LifeModeler software has important limitations that should be taken into consideration when used to evaluate exercise equipment. Adjustments had to be made to the model to solve the forward dynamics simulations; as a result, no muscle forces or contraction values were obtained. This negatively influenced the value of the results as these parameters are important when analysing an exercise. The seated row resistance-training machine’s engineered or manufactured adjustability was sufficient, as it appeared to accommodate the three anthropometric cases adequately during execution of this exercise.Conclusion. It appears that 3D musculoskeletal modelling can be used to evaluate resistance-training exercises such as the seated row; however, the limitations indicated by this study must be taken into consideration, especially when using the default LifeModeler model


2016 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
James R. Head ◽  
Matthew S. Tenan ◽  
Andrew J. Tweedell ◽  
Thomas F. Price ◽  
Michael E. LaFiandra ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 041-052
Author(s):  
Wittawas Sajjapong ◽  
◽  
Preeya Leelahagul ◽  
Sitha Pongphibool ◽  
Narupon Thongsuk ◽  
...  

Introduction: Many underweight males take commercial protein supplements to increase their body weight and build muscle. Nonetheless, commercial protein supplements may cause adverse effects. This study aimed to determine the effects of resistance training exercise combined with a high protein diet on body weight and muscle mass in underweight adolescent males. Methods: A repeated measures design study was conducted on nine males aged 12-15 years with low body weight. Energy and protein requirements were calculated, and energy and protein consumptions were measured for each meal during the high protein diet without exercise (HP) period and the high protein diet with resistance exercise (HPE) period. Subjects engaged in three resistance training sessions each week during HP-E period, for eight weeks. Dietary intake, body composition, blood biochemistry, physical fitness, and self-esteem were assessed. Results: In HP-E period, resistance training exercise combined with a high protein intake (2.14 g/kg/d) increased body weight and lean tissue mass (LTM) by 0.5 kg and 0.5 kg, respectively. Resistance training during HP-E period increased arm, leg, and trunk muscle strength by 20.2%, 7.2%, and 14.5%, respectively, more than high protein diet alone during HP period. High protein intake in HP-E period did not affect blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and creatinine levels (11.0 mg/dL and 0.70 mg/dL, respectively). Conclusion: Eight weeks of resistance training combined with a high protein diet increased body weight and LTM without adverse effects. In particular, resistance exercise predominantly increased muscle strength. Kidney function was not affected by high protein consumption throughout this study.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document