scholarly journals The Validity and Reliability of a Customized Rigid Supportive Harness During Smith Machine Back Squat Exercise

2014 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 636-642 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brendan R. Scott ◽  
Ben J. Dascombe ◽  
Jace A. Delaney ◽  
Nathan Elsworthy ◽  
Robert G. Lockie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Back Squat ◽  
Squat Exercise

Validity and Reliability of the PUSH Wearable Device to Measure Movement Velocity During the Back Squat Exercise

2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (7) ◽  
pp. 1968-1974 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Balsalobre-Fernández ◽  
Matt Kuzdub ◽  
Pedro Poveda-Ortiz ◽  
Juan del Campo-Vecino
Keyword(s):  
Wearable Device ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Movement Velocity ◽  
Back Squat ◽  
Squat Exercise

scholarly journals Validity and reliability of a novel optoelectronic device to measure movement velocity, force and power during the back squat exercise

2018 ◽  
Vol 37 (7) ◽  
pp. 795-802 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto Laza-Cagigas ◽  
Mark Goss-Sampson ◽  
Eneko Larumbe-Zabala ◽  
Leke Termkolli ◽  
Fernando Naclerio
Keyword(s):  
Optoelectronic Device ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Movement Velocity ◽  
Back Squat ◽  
Squat Exercise

Joint-Level Analyses of the Back Squat With and Without Intraset Rest

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 583-589 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason D. Stone ◽  
Adam C. King ◽  
Shiho Goto ◽  
John D. Mata ◽  
Joseph Hannon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sagittal Plane ◽  
Movement Pattern ◽  
Joint Angles ◽  
Mean Power ◽  
Joint Power ◽  
Joint Level ◽  
Back Squat ◽  
Squat Exercise ◽  
Limb Kinematics ◽  
Plane Joint

Purpose: To provide a joint-level analysis of traditional (TS) and cluster (CS) set structure during the back-squat exercise. Methods: Eight men (24 [3] y, 177.3 [7.9] cm, 82.7 [11.0] kg, 11.9 [3.5] % body fat, and 150.3 [23.0] kg 1-repetition maximum [1RM]) performed the back-squat exercise (80%1RM) using TS (4 × 6, 2-min interset rest) and CS (4 × [2 × 3], 30-s intraset rest, 90-s interset rest), randomly. Lower-limb kinematics were collected by motion capture, as well as kinetic data by bilateral force platforms. Results: CS attenuated the loss in mean power (TS −21.6% [3.9%]; CS −12.4% [7.5%]; P = .042), although no differences in gross movement pattern (sagittal-plane joint angles) within and between conditions were observed (P ≥ .05). However, joint power produced at the hip increased from repetition (REP) 1 through REP 6 during TS, while a decrease was noted at the knee. A similar pattern was observed in the CS condition but was limited to the hip. Joint power produced at the hip increased from REP 1 through REP 3 but returned to REP 1 values before a similar increase through REP 6, resulting in differences between conditions (REP 4, P = .018; REP 5, P = .022). Conclusions: Sagittal-plane joint angles did not change in either condition, although CS elicited greater power. Differing joint power contributions (hip and knee) suggest potential central mechanism that may contribute to enhanced power output during CS and warrant further study. Practitioners should consider incorporating CS into training to promote greater power adaptations and to mitigate fatigue.

scholarly journals Effects of front and back squat techniques on patellofemoral joint kinetics in males

2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 76 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Sinclair ◽  
S Atkins ◽  
N Kudiersky ◽  
PJ Taylor ◽  
H Vincent
Keyword(s):  
Patellofemoral Joint ◽  
Pain Syndrome ◽  
Current Investigation ◽  
Strength And Conditioning ◽  
Joint Kinetics ◽  
Associated Injury ◽  
Back Squat ◽  
Squat Exercise ◽  
Experienced Male ◽  
Joint Load

Purpose: The barbell squat is fundamental in strength and conditioning, with two principal variants; the back and front squat. Unfortunately, the propensity for injury is high particularly at the knee. The aim of the current investigation was examine the influence of front and back squat variations on patellofemoral joint load. Methods: Patellofemoral loads were obtained from thirty-five experienced male participants, who completed both back and front squats at 70% of 1 RM. Differences between squat conditions were examined using Bonferroni adjusted (P = .008) paired t-tests. Results: The results showed that significant differences (P < .008) in patellofemoral load were identified between both conditions with the highest load being experienced during the back squat exercise. Conclusions: Given the proposed relationship between the magnitude of the load experienced by the patellofemoral joint and associated injury pathology, the back squat appears to place lifters at greater risk from injury. Therefore, it may be prudent therefore for lifters who are predisposed to patellofemoral pain syndrome to utilize the front squat in their training.

scholarly journals Estimation of Relative Load From Bar Velocity in the Full Back Squat Exercise

2017 ◽  
Vol 01 (02) ◽  
pp. E80-E88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luis Sánchez-Medina ◽  
Jesús Pallarés ◽  
Carlos Pérez ◽  
Ricardo Morán-Navarro ◽  
Juan González-Badillo
Keyword(s):  
Relative Strength ◽  
Loading Test ◽  
Mean Velocity ◽  
Relative Load ◽  
Back Squat ◽  
Training Approach ◽  
Velocity Relationship ◽  
Squat Exercise ◽  
Close Relationship ◽  
Bar Velocity

AbstractThe use of bar velocity to estimate relative load in the back squat exercise was examined. 80 strength-trained men performed a progressive loading test to determine their one-repetition maximum (1RM) and load-velocity relationship. Mean (MV), mean propulsive (MPV) and peak (PV) velocity measures of the concentric phase were analyzed. Both MV and MPV showed a very close relationship to %1RM (R2=0.96), whereas a weaker association (R2=0.79) and larger SEE (0.14 vs. 0.06 m·s−1) were found for PV. Prediction equations to estimate load from velocity were obtained. When dividing the sample into 3 groups of different relative strength (1RM/body mass), no differences were found between groups for the MPV attained against each %1RM. MV attained with the 1RM was 0.32±0.03 m·s−1. The propulsive phase accounted for ~82% of concentric duration at 40% 1RM, and progressively increased until reaching 100% at 1RM. Provided that repetitions are performed at maximal intended velocity, a good estimation of load (%1RM) can be obtained from mean velocity as soon as the first repetition is completed. This finding provides an alternative to the often demanding, time-consuming and interfering 1RM or nRM tests and allows implementing a velocity-based resistance training approach.

The effects of a high-intensity free-weight back-squat exercise protocol on postural stability in resistance-trained males

2014 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 211-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
R.M. Thiele ◽  
E.C. Conchola ◽  
T.B. Palmer ◽  
J.M. DeFreitas ◽  
B.J. Thompson
Keyword(s):  
High Intensity ◽  
Postural Stability ◽  
Exercise Protocol ◽  
Back Squat ◽  
Free Weight ◽  
Squat Exercise

Reliability of Trunk Muscle Electromyography in the Loaded Back Squat Exercise

2016 ◽  
Vol 37 (06) ◽  
pp. 448-456 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Clark ◽  
M. Lambert ◽  
A. Hunter
Keyword(s):  
Trunk Muscle ◽  
Back Squat ◽  
Squat Exercise
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document