Effect of the Stretch-Shortening Cycle on the Relationship Between Maximum Number of Repetitions and Lifting Velocity During the Prone Bench Pull.

Autor: Miras-Moreno S; Department of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain., 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, Universidad Católica de la Santísima Concepción, Concepción, Chile., Weakley J; School of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.; Sports Performance, Recovery, Injury and New Technologies (SPRINT) Research Centre, Australian Catholic University, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.; Carnegie Applied Rugby Research (CARR) Centre, Carnegie School of Sport, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, UK., Rojas-Ruiz FJ; Department of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain., Pérez-Castilla A; Department of Education, Faculty of Education Sciences, University of Almería, Almería, Spain.; SPORT Research Group (CTS-1024), CIBIS (Centro de Investigación para el Bienestar y la Inclusión Social) Research Center, University of Almería, Almería, Spain.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Sports health [Sports Health] 2024 Oct 18, pp. 19417381241286519. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Oct 18.
DOI: 10.1177/19417381241286519
Abstrakt: Background: The fastest mean (MV fastest ) and peak (PV fastest ) velocity in a set are used to predict the maximum number of repetitions (RTF), but stretch-shortening cycle (SSC) effects on these relationships are unknown.
Hypothesis: Velocity values associated with each RTF would show higher values for eccentric-concentric and multiple-point methods compared with concentric-only and 2-point methods.
Study Design: Cross-sectional study.
Level of Evidence: Level 3.
Methods: After determining the prone bench pull (PBP) 1-repetition maximum (1RM), 23 resistance-trained male participants randomly performed 2 sessions (1 for each PBP exercise), consisting of single sets of RTFs against 3 relative loads (60%-80%-70%1RM). Individualized RTF-velocity relationships were constructed using the multiple-point (60%-80%-70%1RM) and 2-point (60%-80%1RM) methods.
Results: Goodness-of-fit was very high and comparable for concentric-only (RTF-MV fastest , r 2 = 0.97; RTF-PV fastest , r 2 = 0.98) and eccentric-concentric (RTF-MV fastest , r 2 = 0.98; RTF-PV fastest , r 2 = 0.99) PBP exercises. Velocity values associated with different RTFs were generally higher for eccentric-concentric compared with concentric-only PBP exercise, but these differences showed heteroscedasticity ( R 2 ≥ 0.143). However, velocity values associated with different RTFs were comparable for the multiple- and 2-point methods ( F ≤ 2.4; P ≥ 0.13).
Conclusion: These results suggest that the inclusion of the SSC does not impair the goodness-of-fit of RTF-velocity relationships, but these relationships should be determined specifically for each PBP exercise (ie, concentric-only and eccentric-concentric). In addition, the 2-point method serves as a quick and less strenuous procedure to estimate RTF.
Clinical Relevance: Practitioners only need to monitor the MV fastest or PV fastest and the RTF from 2 (2-point method) or 3 (multiple-point method) sets performed to failure to construct an RTF-velocity relationship. Once these relationships have been established, coaches need only monitor the MV fastest or PV fastest of the set to estimate RTF against a given absolute load.
Competing Interests: The authors report no potential conflicts of interest in the development and publication of this article.
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: