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
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

e0212085

Déclaration 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

Auteurs

Amador García-Ramos (A)

Department of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
Department of Sports Sciences and Physical Conditioning, Faculty of Education, CIEDE, Catholic University of Most Holy Concepción, Concepción, Chile.

David Ulloa-Díaz (D)

Department of Sports Sciences and Physical Conditioning, Faculty of Education, CIEDE, Catholic University of Most Holy Concepción, Concepción, Chile.

Paola Barboza-González (P)

Faculty of Education, Universidad Andres Bello, Concepción, Chile.

Ángela Rodríguez-Perea (Á)

Department of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.

Darío Martínez-García (D)

Department of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.

Mauricio Quidel-Catrilelbún (M)

Department of Sports Sciences and Physical Conditioning, Faculty of Education, CIEDE, Catholic University of Most Holy Concepción, Concepción, Chile.

Francisco Guede-Rojas (F)

Faculty of Rehabilitation Sciences, Kinesiology, Universidad Andres Bello, Concepción, Chile.

Jesualdo Cuevas-Aburto (J)

Department of Sports Sciences and Physical Conditioning, Faculty of Education, CIEDE, Catholic University of Most Holy Concepción, Concepción, Chile.

Danica Janicijevic (D)

Faculty of Sport and Physical Education, University of Belgrade, The Research Centre, Belgrade, Serbia.

Jonathon Weakley (J)

Institute for Sport, Physical Activity and Leisure, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, United Kingdom.

Articles similaires

Humans Perioperative Period Systematic Reviews as Topic Regression Analysis Developing Countries
Alzheimer Disease Humans Regression Analysis Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship Drug Design
Humans Female Ethiopia Adolescent Adult
Regression Analysis Government Environmental Policy Humans Inventions

Classifications MeSH