•  
  •  
 

Abstract

Estimating 1-repetition maximum (1RM) by measuring mean concentric velocity (MCV)is an indirect method that has gained popularity in the field of strength and conditioning. It has previously been recommended that 4 – 6 loads ranging from 30 – 85% 1RM be used when estimating 1RM via MCV. Nonetheless, the validity of fewer loads at varying intensities is an area in need of further investigating. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to validate various load-velocity relationships to predict bench press 1RM values. Methods: 20 resistance-trained individuals (50% males) participated in this study. Warm-up sets consisted of subjects bench pressing loads at 50 (5-repetitions), 70 (3-repetitions) and 90% (1-repetition) of estimated 1RM. Following the warm-up loads, a maximal of 4 attempts were performed in order to determine measured 1RM. The MCV (m∙s-1)was recorded using a linear position transducer during the warm-up and 1RM trials in order to develop load-velocity profiles. Specifically, four different velocity-based 1RM equations (EQ) were determined using the warm-up loads of 50, 70, and 90% (MCV-EQ1), 50 and 90% (MCV-EQ2), 70 and 90% (MCV-EQ3), and 50 and 70% (MCV-EQ4). Results: Evaluation of mean differences revealed the constant error (CE) for the MCV prediction equations were not statistically significant for any comparisons (CEs = 0.80 to 2.96 kg; all p > 0.05). In addition, the correlation coefficients between the MCV prediction methods and measured 1RM were near perfect for all comparisons (r ³ 0.98; all p < 0.001). The validity statistics indicated the standard error of estimate (SEE) and 95% limits of agreement (LOAs) was lowest for MCV-EQ1 (7.86 kg and ±15.00 kg, respectively) and highest for MCV-EQ3 (9.24 kg and 17.74 kg, respectively). Nonetheless, the SEEs and 95% LOAs for MCV-EQ2 (8.10 kg and ±15.55 kg, respectively) and MCV-EQ4 (8.38 kg and ±16.08 kg, respectively) were similar as MCV-EQ1. Conclusions: The current study findings revealed that MCV-EQ3 produced the largest individual error (SEE and 95% LOAs). Therefore, practitioners may consider employing the load-velocity relationships of MCV-EQ1, MCV-EQ2, or MCV-EQ4. Collectively, the current study findings reveal that 2 (MCV-EQ2 and MCV-EQ4) or 3 (MCV-EQ1) warm-up loads can easily be employed to estimate velocity-based 1RM on the bench press.

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.