TY - JOUR
T1 - Validity of the bench press one-repetition maximum test predicted through individualized load-velocity relationship using different repetition criteria and minimal velocity thresholds
AU - Pérez-Castilla, Alejandro
AU - Fernandes, John F.T.
AU - García-Ramos, Amador
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 - IOS Press. All rights reserved.
PY - 2021/10/19
Y1 - 2021/10/19
N2 - BACKGROUND: More practical and less fatiguing strategies have been developed to accurately predict the one-repetition maximum (1RM). OBJETIVE: To compare the accuracy of the estimation of the free-weight bench press 1RM between six velocity-based 1RM prediction methods. METHODS: Sixteen men performed an incremental loading test until 1RM on two separate occasions. The first session served to determine the minimal velocity threshold (MVT). The second session was used to determine the validity of the six 1RM prediction methods based on 2 repetition criteria (fastest or average velocity) and 3 MVTs (general MVT of 0.17 m?s-1, individual MVT of the preliminary session, and individual MVT of the validity session). Five loads (≈ 2540557085% of 1RM) were used to assess the individualized load-velocity relationships. RESULTS: The absolute difference between the actual and predicted 1RM were low (range = 2.7-3.7%) and did not reveal a significant main effect for repetition criterion (P= 0.402), MVT (P= 0.173) or their two-way interaction (P= 0.354). Furthermore, all 1RM prediction methods accurately estimated bench press 1RM (P? 0.556; ES ? 0.02; r? 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: The individualized load-velocity relationship provides an accurate prediction of the 1RM during the free-weight bench press exercise, while the repetition criteria and MVT do not appear to meaningfully affect the prediction accuracy.
AB - BACKGROUND: More practical and less fatiguing strategies have been developed to accurately predict the one-repetition maximum (1RM). OBJETIVE: To compare the accuracy of the estimation of the free-weight bench press 1RM between six velocity-based 1RM prediction methods. METHODS: Sixteen men performed an incremental loading test until 1RM on two separate occasions. The first session served to determine the minimal velocity threshold (MVT). The second session was used to determine the validity of the six 1RM prediction methods based on 2 repetition criteria (fastest or average velocity) and 3 MVTs (general MVT of 0.17 m?s-1, individual MVT of the preliminary session, and individual MVT of the validity session). Five loads (≈ 2540557085% of 1RM) were used to assess the individualized load-velocity relationships. RESULTS: The absolute difference between the actual and predicted 1RM were low (range = 2.7-3.7%) and did not reveal a significant main effect for repetition criterion (P= 0.402), MVT (P= 0.173) or their two-way interaction (P= 0.354). Furthermore, all 1RM prediction methods accurately estimated bench press 1RM (P? 0.556; ES ? 0.02; r? 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: The individualized load-velocity relationship provides an accurate prediction of the 1RM during the free-weight bench press exercise, while the repetition criteria and MVT do not appear to meaningfully affect the prediction accuracy.
KW - Autoregulation
KW - maximal dynamic strength
KW - resistance training
KW - strength testing
KW - velocity-based training
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85119377266&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3233/IES-202247
DO - 10.3233/IES-202247
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85119377266
SN - 0959-3020
VL - 29
SP - 369
EP - 377
JO - Isokinetics and Exercise Science
JF - Isokinetics and Exercise Science
IS - 4
ER -