Abstract
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 ms-1, individual MVT of the preliminary session, and individual MVT of the validity session). Five loads (≈25-40-55-70-85% 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 (P0.556; ES0.02; r0.99).
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.
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 ms-1, individual MVT of the preliminary session, and individual MVT of the validity session). Five loads (≈25-40-55-70-85% 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 (P0.556; ES0.02; r0.99).
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.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 369-377 |
Number of pages | 9 |
Journal | Isokinetics and Exercise Science |
Volume | 29 |
Issue number | 4 |
Early online date | 22 Jan 2021 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 19 Oct 2021 |
Keywords
- Biophysics
- Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
- Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation