Abstract

Simple SummaryThe aim of this research is to analyze the different variables that influence the prescription of resistance training (one-repetition maximum (1RM) and number of maximal repetitions (xRM)) through the velocity of execution, with the aim of approaching the precise definition and control of intensity in bench press exercise. Fifty male physical education students were divided into four groups according to their relative strength ratio (RSR) and performed a 1RM bench press test, and two maximum number of repetitions (MNR) tests one week apart, using a relative load corresponding to 70% 1RM determined through the mean propulsive velocity (MPV) obtained from the individual load–velocity relationship. Regarding MPV, the best (fastest) repetition of the set values were similar between groups (0.62 m·s−1–0.64 m·s−1). The average MNR was 12.38 ± 2.51, with significant variation between groups with regards to MNR (CV:13–29%), and greater variability in the group corresponding to the lowest RSR values (CV: 29%). The use of variables such as the 1RM or a MNR do not allow an adequate degree of precision to prescribe and control the relative intensity of resistance training. Besides, execution velocity control can offer an adequate alternative to guarantee an accurate prescription of intensity with regard to resistance training.Background: The aim of the study was to analyze the use of variables such as % of one-repetition maximum (1RM) and number of maximal repetitions (xRM) with execution velocity to define and control the intensity of resistance training in bench press exercise. Hence, exercise professionals will achieve better control of training through a greater understanding of its variables. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, fifty male physical education students were divided into four groups according to their relative strength ratio (RSR) and performed a 1RM bench press test (T1). In the second test, participants performed repetitions to exhaustion (T2), using a relative load corresponding to 70% 1RM determined through the mean propulsive velocity (MPV) obtained from the individual load–velocity relationship. This same test was repeated a week later (T3). Tests were monitored according to the MPV of each repetition and blood lactate values (LACT). Results: Regarding MPV, the best (fastest) repetition of the set (MPVrep Best) values were similar between groups (0.62 m·s−1–0.64 m·s−1), with significant differences in relation to the high RSR group (p < 0.001). The average maximum number of repetitions (MNR) was 12.38 ± 2.51, with no significant differences between the RSR groups. Nonetheless, significant variation existed between groups with regards to MNR (CV: 13–29%), with greater variability in the group corresponding to the lowest RSR values (CV: 29%). The loss of velocity in the MNR test in the different groups was similar (p > 0.05). Average LACT values (5.72 mmol·L−1) showed significant differences between the Medium RSR and Very Low RSR groups. No significant differences were found (p > 0.05) between T2 and T3 with regards to MNR, MPVrep Best, or MPVrep Last, with little variability seen between participants. Conclusions: The use of variables such as the 1RM, estimated using an absolute load value, or an MNR do not allow an adequate degree of precision to prescribe and control the relative intensity of resistance training. Besides, execution velocity control can offer an adequate alternative to guarantee an accurate prescription of intensity with regard to resistance training.

Highlights

  • Despite the huge amount of research and literature available on resistance training and achieving the correct stimulus, knowledge about the effort level achieved through any type of training oriented towards improving strength remains an insufficiently addressed issue [1–3]

  • The aims of the present study were the following: (1) Analyze the velocity values produced in a progressive load test until 1RM in a bench press exercise (BP). (2) Analyze the different velocity values produced in a BP exercise, according to strength level, via a test in which as many repetitions as possible are performed until exhaustion (maximum number of repetitions (MNR))

  • Following analysis of mean propulsive velocity (MPV) at 1RM in the group as a whole, values of 0.16 ± 0.05 m·s−1 were documented. Examining this variable within each relative strength ratio (RSR) group, significant differences were found between the MPV High RSR and Very Low RSR (p < 0.05)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Despite the huge amount of research and literature available on resistance training and achieving the correct stimulus, knowledge about the effort level achieved through any type of training oriented towards improving strength remains an insufficiently addressed issue [1–3] This fact, which limits the methodological quality of the existing literature, possesses implications concerning both the challenge of establishing an appropriate dose–. In recent years the emergence of variables such as execution velocity has led to important advances in the knowledge of training load monitoring [10,11] This valuable contribution has not always been entirely understood or broken down with regard to its potential application for coaches. In cases where the connection is made with velocity, the approach applied shares the same limitations as traditional methodologies [13,14] Such limitations impair both advancement in the understanding of this variable and its use by exercise professionals. Exercise professionals will achieve better control of training through a greater understanding of its variables

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call