Abstract
The optimal load for maximal power output during hang power cleans (HPCs) from a mechanical perspective is the 1-repetition-maximum (1RM) load; however, previous research has reported otherwise. The present study thus aimed to investigate the underlying factors that determine optimal load during HPCs. Eight competitive Olympic weight lifters performed HPCs at 40%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, 95%, and 100% of their 1RM while the ground-reaction force and bar/body kinematics were simultaneously recorded. The success criterion during HPC was set above parallel squat at the receiving position. Both peak power and relative peak power were maximized at 80% 1RM (3975.7 [439.1]W, 50.4 [6.6]W/kg, respectively). Peak force, force at peak power, and relative values tended to increase with heavier loads (P < .001), while peak system velocity and system velocity at peak power decreased significantly above 80% 1RM (P = .005 and .011, respectively). There were also significant decreases in peak bar velocity (P < .001) and bar displacement (P < .001) toward heavier loads. There was a strong positive correlation between peak bar velocity and bar displacement in 7 of 8 subjects (r > .90, P < .01). The knee joint angle at the receiving position fell below the quarter-squat position above 70% 1RM. Submaximal loads were indeed optimal for maximal power output for HPC when the success criterion was set above the parallel-squat position. However, when the success criterion was defined as the quarter-squat position, the optimal load became the 1RM load.
Highlights
The optimal load for maximal power output during hang power cleans (HPCs) from a mechanical perspective is the 1-repetition-maximum (1RM) load; previous research has reported otherwise
We tested 2 hypotheses: (1) a decrease in velocity leads to a decrease in power output at loads above the optimal loads reported in previous studies (65%–80% 1RM), which is related to a significant decrease in lifted bar height and (2) 1RM is the optimal load when the success criterion is set at the quarter-squat position
The analysis of variance (ANOVA) results indicated that relative intensity had significant effects on peak power (P = .006, η2p = .595), relative peak power (P = .002, η2p = .644), peak force (P < .001, η2p = .774), relative peak force (P < .001, η2p = .838), force at peak power (P < .001, η2p = .808), relative force at peak power (P < .001, η2p = .859), peak system velocity (P = .005, η2p = .572), and system velocity at peak power (P = .011, η2p = .473)
Summary
The optimal load for maximal power output during hang power cleans (HPCs) from a mechanical perspective is the 1-repetition-maximum (1RM) load; previous research has reported otherwise. According to the National Strength and Conditioning Association guidelines, in HPC, one should receive the bar in a quarter-squat position.[14] Because of this narrow range of success criteria, the bar height lifted during HPC should be consistent for each lifter and independent of external load. The research subjects were not Olympic weight lifters Another possible factor for an optimal load below 1RM is the wide range of success criteria, compared with the quarter squat mentioned before, for the receiving position during HPC. We tested 2 hypotheses: (1) a decrease in velocity leads to a decrease in power output at loads above the optimal loads reported in previous studies (65%–80% 1RM), which is related to a significant decrease in lifted bar height and (2) 1RM is the optimal load when the success criterion is set at the quarter-squat position
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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
