Assessment of the load-velocity profile in the free-weight prone bench pull exercise through different velocity variables and regression models.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
05
11
2018
accepted:
22
01
2019
entrez:
28
2
2019
pubmed:
28
2
2019
medline:
12
11
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
This aims of this study were (I) to determine the velocity variable and regression model which best fit the load-velocity relationship during the free-weight prone bench pull exercise, (II) to compare the reliability of the velocity attained at each percentage of the one-repetition maximum (1RM) between different velocity variables and regression models, and (III) to compare the within- and between-subject variability of the velocity attained at each %1RM. Eighteen men (14 rowers and four weightlifters) performed an incremental test during the free-weight prone bench pull exercise in two different sessions. General and individual load-velocity relationships were modelled through three velocity variables (mean velocity [MV], mean propulsive velocity [MPV] and peak velocity [PV]) and two regression models (linear and second-order polynomial). The main findings revealed that (I) the general (Pearson's correlation coefficient [r] range = 0.964-0.973) and individual (median r = 0.986 for MV, 0.989 for MPV, and 0.984 for PV) load-velocity relationships were highly linear, (II) the reliability of the velocity attained at each %1RM did not meaningfully differ between the velocity variables (coefficient of variation [CV] range = 2.55-7.61% for MV, 2.84-7.72% for MPV and 3.50-6.03% for PV) neither between the regression models (CV range = 2.55-7.72% and 2.73-5.25% for the linear and polynomial regressions, respectively), and (III) the within-subject variability of the velocity attained at each %1RM was lower than the between-subject variability for the light-moderate loads. No meaningful differences between the within- and between-subject CVs were observed for the MV of the 1RM trial (6.02% vs. 6.60%; CVratio = 1.10), while the within-subject CV was lower for PV (6.36% vs. 7.56%; CVratio = 1.19). These results suggest that the individual load-MV relationship should be determined with a linear regression model to obtain the most accurate prescription of the relative load during the free-weight prone bench pull exercise.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30811432
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0212085
pii: PONE-D-18-31875
pmc: PMC6392250
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0212085Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2018 Mar 1;13(3):326-331
pubmed: 28714752
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2008 Jun;3(2):131-44
pubmed: 19208922
J Strength Cond Res. 2017 Feb;31(2):292-297
pubmed: 27243918
Exp Ther Med. 2016 May;11(5):1531-1536
pubmed: 27168768
J Sports Sci. 2016;34(12):1099-106
pubmed: 26395837
J Strength Cond Res. 2018 May;32(5):1273-1279
pubmed: 28557855
J Strength Cond Res. 2018 Nov 05;:
pubmed: 30399117
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2018 Apr 1;13(4):474-481
pubmed: 28872384
J Strength Cond Res. 2018 Apr 04;:
pubmed: 28885389
J Strength Cond Res. 2018 Feb 27;:
pubmed: 29489715
Int J Sports Med. 2010 Feb;31(2):123-9
pubmed: 20222005
J Strength Cond Res. 2017 Jul 08;:
pubmed: 28700515
J Strength Cond Res. 2019 Sep;33(9):2420-2425
pubmed: 28704314
J Appl Biomech. 2018 Jun 1;34(3):184-190
pubmed: 29252060
Eur J Appl Physiol. 2016 Oct;116(10):2035-43
pubmed: 27577950
J Strength Cond Res. 2019 Apr;33(4):1167-1177
pubmed: 29176384
Int J Sports Med. 2014 Mar;35(3):209-16
pubmed: 23900903
J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Jan;25(1):267-70
pubmed: 19966589
Int J Sports Med. 2010 May;31(5):347-52
pubmed: 20180176
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2018 Jul 1;13(6):763-769
pubmed: 29140148
J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Jan;25(1):87-93
pubmed: 21157389
J Sports Sci. 2009 Mar;27(5):535-9
pubmed: 19219736
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011 Sep;43(9):1725-34
pubmed: 21311352