Velocity-Based Method in Free-Weight and Machine-Based Training Modalities: The Degree of Freedom Matters

Author:

Hernández-Belmonte Alejandro,Buendía-Romero Ángel,Pallares Jesús G.ORCID,Martínez-Cava Alejandro

Abstract

Abstract Hernández-Belmonte, A, Buendía-Romero, Á, Pallares, JG, and Martínez-Cava, A. Velocity-based method in free-weight and machine-based training modalities: the degree of freedom matters. J Strength Cond Res 37(9): e500–e509, 2023—This study aimed to analyze and compare the load-velocity relationships of free-weight and machine-based modalities of 4 resistance exercises. Moreover, we examined the influence of the subject's strength level on these load-velocity relationships. Fifty men completed a loading test in the free-weight and machine-based modalities of the bench press, full squat, shoulder press, and prone bench pull exercises. General and individual relationships between relative intensity (%1RM) and velocity variables were studied through the coefficient of determination (R 2) and standard error of the estimate (SEE). Moreover, the velocity attained to each %1RM was compared between both modalities. Subjects were divided into stronger and weaker to study whether the subject's strength level influences the mean test (mean propulsive velocity [MPVTest]) and 1RM (MPV1RM) velocities. For both modalities, very close relationships (R 2 ≥ 0.95) and reduced estimation errors were found when velocity was analyzed as a dependent (SEE ≤ 0.086 m·s−1) and independent (SEE ≤ 5.7% 1RM) variable concerning the %1RM. Fits were found to be higher (R 2 ≥ 0.995) for individual load-velocity relationships. Concerning the between-modality comparison, the velocity attained at each intensity (from 30 to 100% 1RM) was significantly faster for the free-weight variant. Finally, nonsignificant differences were found when comparing MPVTest (differences ≤ 0.02 m·s−1) and MPV1RM (differences ≤ 0.01 m·s−1) between stronger and weaker subjects. These findings prove the accuracy and stability of the velocity-based method in the free-weight and machine-based variants but highlight the need to use the load-velocity relationship (preferably the individual one) specific to each training modality.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation,Orthopedics and Sports Medicine,General Medicine

Reference34 articles.

1. Comparison of muscle force production using the Smith machine and free weights for bench press and squat exercises;Cotterman;J Strength Cond Res,2005

2. Reproducibility and repeatability of five different technologies for bar velocity measurement in resistance training;Courel-Ibáñez;Ann Biomed Eng,2019

3. Two-point method: A quick and fatigue-free procedure for assessment of muscle mechanical capacities and the 1 repetition maximum;García Ramos;Strength Cond J,2018

4. Differences in the load-velocity profile between 4 bench-press variants;García-Ramos;Int J Sports Physiol Perform,2018

5. Movement velocity as a measure of loading intensity in resistance training;González-Badillo;Int J Sports Med,2010

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3