Affiliation:
1. School of Physical Education and Sport, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
2. Strength Training & Neuromuscular Performance (STreNgthP) Research Group, Camilo José Cela University, Madrid, Spain
3. School of Kinesiology, Applied Health, and Recreation, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, USA
4. School of Arts, Sciences and Humanities, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Abstract
The study investigated the
concurrent validity and reliability of the load-velocity relationship to
predict the one-repetition maximum (1RM) of the power clean from the knee (PCK), high pull from the knee (HPK), and
mid-thigh clean pull (MTCP). For each exercise, 12 participants performed two
1RM sessions tests and two sessions to measure the barbell’s load-velocity
relationship at 30, 45, 60, 75, and 90% of 1RM. The velocity recorded at each
load was used to establish the linear regression equation and, consequently, to
predict 1RM value. A low validity between the 1RM direct test and predicted 1RM
was observed for PCK (typical error [TE]=3.96 to 4.50 kg, coefficient of
variation [CV]=4.68 to 5.27%, effect size [ES]=-0.76 to -0.58, Bland-Altman
bias [BAB]=9.83 to 11.19 kg), HPK (TE=4.58 to 5.82 kg, CV=6.44 to 8.14%, ES=-0.40
to -0.39, BAB=3.52 to 4.17 kg), and MTCP (TE=6.33 to 8.08 kg, CV=4.78 to 6.16%,
ES=-0.29 to -0.19, BAB=3.98 to 6.17 kg). Adequate reliability was observed for
the 1RM direct test and for the predicted 1RM. However, based on Bland-Altman
limits of agreement, lower measurement errors were obtained for the 1RM direct
test in comparison to the predicted 1RM for all the exercises. In conclusion,
the load-velocity relationship was not able to predict 1RM values with high
accuracy in the PCK, HPK, and MTCP. Moreover, the 1RM direct test was the most
reliable for PCK, HPK and MTCP.
Publisher
Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Zagreb
Subject
Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献