Faculty Opinions recommendation of Where does the One-Repetition Maximum Exist on the Force-Velocity Relationship in Squat?

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
G Gregory Haff
Keyword(s):  
Repetition Maximum ◽  
Velocity Relationship ◽  
Force Velocity ◽  
The One

scholarly journals Where does the One-Repetition Maximum Exist on the Force-Velocity Relationship in Squat?

2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (13) ◽  
pp. 1035-1043 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean Rivière ◽  
Jérémy Rossi ◽  
Pedro Jimenez-Reyes ◽  
Jean-Benoit Morin ◽  
Pierre Samozino
Keyword(s):  
Lower Limb ◽  
Goodness Of Fit ◽  
Reaction Force ◽  
Squat Jump ◽  
Repetition Maximum ◽  
Velocity Relationship ◽  
Force Velocity ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The One ◽  
The Individual

AbstractThe aim was to determine the position of the one-repetition maximum (1RM) squat point on the force-velocity (F-V) relationship obtained during squat jump (SJ). Ten healthy athletes performed a 1RM squat during which ground reaction force and lower-limb extension velocity were measured, and six loaded SJs to determine individual F-V relationship. The goodness of fit of the linear F-V relationship with or without the 1RM point was tested. The vertical and horizontal coordinates were determined relative to the theoretical maximal force (F0) and the highest loaded SJ (load of 44.5±4.6% 1RM). The goodness of fit of the individual F-V relationship did not differ with or without the 1RM condition, even if the 1RM point was slightly below the curve (−5±5%, P=0.018). The 1RM point can be considered as a point of the F-V relationship. The velocity (0.22±0.05 m.s−1) of the 1RM point corresponded to ~30% of the velocity reached during the highest loaded SJ. The force developed in the 1RM condition was ~16% higher than during the highest loaded SJ and ~11% lower than F0. This finding underlines the difference between F0 and the 1RM condition.

scholarly journals Concurrent Validity and Reliability of the Load-Velocity Relationship to Predict the One-Repetition Maximum during Three Weightlifting Derivatives

Kinesiology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 215-225
Author(s):  
Ricardo Berton ◽  
Marcos Soriano ◽  
Demostenys David da Silva ◽  
Marcel Lopes dos Santos ◽  
Gustavo Teixeira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Measurement Errors ◽  
Concurrent Validity ◽  
Direct Test ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Repetition Maximum ◽  
Typical Error ◽  
Velocity Relationship ◽  
The One ◽  
Power Clean ◽  
Adequate Reliability

The study investigated the concurrent validity and reliability of the load-velocity relationship to predict the one-repetition maximum (1RM) of the power clean from the knee (PCK), high pull from the knee (HPK), and mid-thigh clean pull (MTCP). For each exercise, 12 participants performed two 1RM sessions tests and two sessions to measure the barbell’s load-velocity relationship at 30, 45, 60, 75, and 90% of 1RM. The velocity recorded at each load was used to establish the linear regression equation and, consequently, to predict 1RM value. A low validity between the 1RM direct test and predicted 1RM was observed for PCK (typical error [TE]=3.96 to 4.50 kg, coefficient of variation [CV]=4.68 to 5.27%, effect size [ES]=-0.76 to -0.58, Bland-Altman bias [BAB]=9.83 to 11.19 kg), HPK (TE=4.58 to 5.82 kg, CV=6.44 to 8.14%, ES=-0.40 to -0.39, BAB=3.52 to 4.17 kg), and MTCP (TE=6.33 to 8.08 kg, CV=4.78 to 6.16%, ES=-0.29 to -0.19, BAB=3.98 to 6.17 kg). Adequate reliability was observed for the 1RM direct test and for the predicted 1RM. However, based on Bland-Altman limits of agreement, lower measurement errors were obtained for the 1RM direct test in comparison to the predicted 1RM for all the exercises. In conclusion, the load-velocity relationship was not able to predict 1RM values with high accuracy in the PCK, HPK, and MTCP. Moreover, the 1RM direct test was the most reliable for PCK, HPK and MTCP.

Force–Velocity Relationship of Upper Body Muscles: Traditional Versus Ballistic Bench Press

2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 178-185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amador García-Ramos ◽  
Slobodan Jaric ◽  
Paulino Padial ◽  
Belén Feriche
Keyword(s):  
Bench Press ◽  
Maximum Velocity ◽  
Maximum Force ◽  
Upper Body ◽  
Strongly Correlated ◽  
Mean Values ◽  
Repetition Maximum ◽  
Velocity Relationship ◽  
Force Velocity ◽  
Relationship Of

This study aimed to (1) evaluate the linearity of the force–velocity relationship, as well as the reliability of maximum force (F0), maximum velocity (V0), slope (a), and maximum power (P0); (2) compare these parameters between the traditional and ballistic bench press (BP); and (3) determine the correlation of F0 with the directly measured BP 1-repetition maximum (1RM). Thirty-two men randomly performed 2 sessions of traditional BP and 2 sessions of ballistic BP during 2 consecutive weeks. Both the maximum and mean values of force and velocity were recorded when loaded by 20–70% of 1RM. All force–velocity relationships were strongly linear (r > .99). While F0 and P0 were highly reliable (ICC: 0.91–0.96, CV: 3.8–5.1%), lower reliability was observed for V0 and a (ICC: 0.49–0.81, CV: 6.6–11.8%). Trivial differences between exercises were found for F0 (ES: < 0.2), however the a was higher for the traditional BP (ES: 0.68–0.94), and V0 (ES: 1.04–1.48) and P0 (ES: 0.65–0.72) for the ballistic BP. The F0 strongly correlated with BP 1RM (r: 0.915–0.938). The force–velocity relationship is useful to assess the upper body maximal capabilities to generate force, velocity, and power.

scholarly journals Predictive Validity of the Snatch Pull Force-Velocity Profile to Determine the Snatch One Repetition-Maximum in Male and Female Elite Weightlifters

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 35
Author(s):  
Ingo Sandau ◽  
Helmi Chaabene ◽  
Urs Granacher
Keyword(s):  
Predictive Validity ◽  
Prediction Accuracy ◽  
Video Tracking ◽  
Systematic Bias ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Pull Force ◽  
Repetition Maximum ◽  
Large Correlation ◽  
Velocity Relationship ◽  
Force Velocity

Background: The prediction of one repetition-maximum (1RM) performance from specific tests is highly relevant for the monitoring of training in weightlifting. Therefore, this study aimed at examining the predictive validity of the theoretical 1RM snatch (snatchth) computed from the two-point snatch pull force-velocity relationship (FvR2) to determine actual snatch 1RM performance in elite weightlifters. Methods: Eight (three female, five male) elite weightlifters carried out a 1RM snatch test followed by a snatch pull test with loads of 80% and 110% of the previously determined 1RM snatch. Barbell kinematics were determined for all lifts using video-tracking. From the snatch pull barbell kinematics, the snatch pull FvR2 was modeled and the snatchth was calculated. Results: The main findings indicated a non-significant (p = 0.706) and trivial (d = 0.01) mean difference between the actual 1RM snatch performance and the snatchth. Both measures showed an extremely large correlation (r = 0.99). The prediction accuracy of the actual 1RM snatch from snatchth was 0.2 ± 1.5 kg (systematic bias ± standard deviation of differences). Conclusions: This study provides a new approach to estimate 1RM snatch performance in elite weightlifters using the snatch pull FvR2. The results demonstrate that the snatchth-model accurately predicts 1RM snatch performance.

scholarly journals Relationships between Mechanical Variables in the Traditional and Close-Grip Bench Press

2017 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert G. Lockie ◽  
Samuel J. Callaghan ◽  
Matthew R. Moreno ◽  
Fabrice G. Risso ◽  
Tricia M. Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Peak Power ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Upper Body ◽  
Mean Power ◽  
Repetition Maximum ◽  
Paired Samples ◽  
Force Velocity ◽  
The One

Abstract The study aim was to determine relationships between mechanical variables in the one-repetition maximum (1RM) traditional bench press (TBP) and close-grip bench press (CGBP). Twenty resistance-trained men completed a TBP and CGBP 1RM. The TBP was performed with the preferred grip; the CGBP with a grip width of 95% biacromial distance. A linear position transducer measured: lift distance and duration; work; and peak and mean power, velocity, and force. Paired samples t-tests (p < 0.05) compared the 1RM and mechanical variables for the TBP and CGBP; effect sizes (d) were also calculated. Pearson’s correlations (r; p < 0.05) computed relationships between the TBP and CGBP. 1RM, lift duration, and mean force were greater in the TBP (d = 0.30-3.20). Peak power and velocity was greater for the CGBP (d = 0.50-1.29). The 1RM TBP correlated with CGBP 1RM, power, and force (r = 0.685-0.982). TBP work correlated with CGBP 1RM, lift distance, power, force, and work (r = 0.542-0.931). TBP power correlated with CGBP 1RM, power, force, velocity, and work (r = 0.484-0.704). TBP peak and mean force related to CGBP 1RM, power, and force (r = 0.596-0.980). Due to relationships between the load, work, power, and force for the TBP and CGBP, the CGBP could provide similar strength adaptations to the TBP with long-term use. The velocity profile for the CGBP was different to that of the TBP. The CGBP could be used specifically to improve high-velocity, upper-body pushing movements.

Training-induced alterations of the in vivo force-velocity relationship of human muscle

1981 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 750-754 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. J. Caiozzo ◽  
J. J. Perrine ◽  
V. R. Edgerton
Keyword(s):  
Training Group ◽  
Knee Extension ◽  
Knee Extensors ◽  
Velocity Relationship ◽  
Slow Velocity ◽  
Group A ◽  
Force Velocity ◽  
Group B ◽  
Relationship Of

Seventeen male and female subjects (ages 20–38 yr) were tested pre- and posttraining for maximal knee extension torque at seven specific velocities (0, 0.84, 1.68, 2.51, 3.35, 4.19, and 5.03 rad . s-1) with an isokinetic dynamometer. Maximal knee extension torques were recorded at a specific joint angle (0.52 rad below the horizontal plane) for all test speeds. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of three experimental groups: group A, control, n = 7; group B, training at 1.68 rad . s-1, n = 5; or group C, training at 4.19 rad . s-1, n = 5. Subjects trained the knee extensors by performing two sets of 10 single maximal voluntary efforts three times a week for 4 wk. Before training, each training group exhibited a leveling-off of muscular tension in the slow velocity-high force region of the in vivo force-velocity relationship. Training at 1.68 rad . s-1 resulted in significant (P less than 0.05) improvements at all velocities except for 5.03 rad . s-1 and markedly affected the leveling-off in the slow velocity-high force region. Training at 4.19 rad . s-1 did not affect the leveling-off phenomenon but brought about significant improvements (P less than 0.05) at velocities of 2.51, 3.35, and 4.19 rad . s-1. The changes seen in the leveling-off phenomenon suggest that training at 1.68 rad . s-1 might have brought about an enhancement of motoneuron activation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document