通用化与个性化负荷-速度方程对卧推运动速度损失幅度的影响:混合模型和等效分析。

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 PHYSIOLOGY
Miguel Sánchez-Moreno, Beatriz Bachero-Mena, Juan Sánchez-Valdepeñas, Fabio Yuzo Nakamura, Fernando Pareja-Blanco
{"title":"通用化与个性化负荷-速度方程对卧推运动速度损失幅度的影响:混合模型和等效分析。","authors":"Miguel Sánchez-Moreno, Beatriz Bachero-Mena, Juan Sánchez-Valdepeñas, Fabio Yuzo Nakamura, Fernando Pareja-Blanco","doi":"10.1123/ijspp.2024-0194","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study analyzed the influence of 2 velocity-based training-load prescription strategies (general vs individual load-velocity equations) on the relationship between the magnitude of velocity loss (VL) and the percentage of repetitions completed in the bench-press exercise.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty-five subjects completed 6 sessions consisting of performing the maximum number of repetitions to failure against their 40%, 60%, and 80% of 1-repetition maximum (1RM) in the Smith machine bench-press exercise using generalized and individualized equations to adjust the training load.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A close relationship and acceptable error were observed between percentage of repetitions completed and the percentage of VL reached for the 3 loading magnitudes and the 2 load-prescription strategies studied (R2 from .83 to .94; standard error of the estimate from 7% to 10%). A simple main effect was observed for load and VL thresholds but not for load-prescription strategies. No significant interaction effects were revealed. The 40% and 60% 1RM showed equivalence on data sets and the most regular variation, whereas the 80% 1-repetition maximum load showed no equivalence and more irregular variation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These results suggest that VL is a useful variable to predict percentage of repetitions completed in the bench-press exercise, regardless of the strategy selected to adjust the relative load. However, caution should be taken when using heavy loads.</p>","PeriodicalId":14295,"journal":{"name":"International journal of sports physiology and performance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of Generalized Versus Individualized Load-Velocity Equations on Velocity-Loss Magnitude in Bench-Press Exercise: Mixed-Model and Equivalence Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Miguel Sánchez-Moreno, Beatriz Bachero-Mena, Juan Sánchez-Valdepeñas, Fabio Yuzo Nakamura, Fernando Pareja-Blanco\",\"doi\":\"10.1123/ijspp.2024-0194\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study analyzed the influence of 2 velocity-based training-load prescription strategies (general vs individual load-velocity equations) on the relationship between the magnitude of velocity loss (VL) and the percentage of repetitions completed in the bench-press exercise.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty-five subjects completed 6 sessions consisting of performing the maximum number of repetitions to failure against their 40%, 60%, and 80% of 1-repetition maximum (1RM) in the Smith machine bench-press exercise using generalized and individualized equations to adjust the training load.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A close relationship and acceptable error were observed between percentage of repetitions completed and the percentage of VL reached for the 3 loading magnitudes and the 2 load-prescription strategies studied (R2 from .83 to .94; standard error of the estimate from 7% to 10%). A simple main effect was observed for load and VL thresholds but not for load-prescription strategies. No significant interaction effects were revealed. The 40% and 60% 1RM showed equivalence on data sets and the most regular variation, whereas the 80% 1-repetition maximum load showed no equivalence and more irregular variation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These results suggest that VL is a useful variable to predict percentage of repetitions completed in the bench-press exercise, regardless of the strategy selected to adjust the relative load. However, caution should be taken when using heavy loads.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14295,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of sports physiology and performance\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of sports physiology and performance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2024-0194\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PHYSIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of sports physiology and performance","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2024-0194","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究分析了两种基于速度的训练负荷处方策略(一般负荷-速度方程与个体负荷-速度方程)对速度损失(VL)大小与卧推练习中完成重复次数百分比之间关系的影响:方法:35 名受试者完成了 6 次训练,包括在史密斯器械卧推训练中以 40%、60% 和 80% 的单次最大重量(1RM)完成最大次数的重复,直至失败:在所研究的 3 种负荷大小和 2 种负荷规定策略中,完成重复次数百分比与达到 VL 百分比之间的关系密切且误差可接受(R2 为 0.83 至 0.94;估计值的标准误差为 7% 至 10%)。在负荷和 VL 临界值方面观察到了简单的主效应,但在负荷规定策略方面没有观察到。没有发现明显的交互效应。40% 和 60% 的 1RM 在数据集上显示出等同性和最有规律的变化,而 80% 的 1 次重复最大负荷则没有显示出等同性和更多的不规则变化:这些结果表明,无论选择何种策略来调整相对负荷,VL 都是预测卧推练习中完成重复次数百分比的有用变量。然而,在使用大负荷时应谨慎。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Impact of Generalized Versus Individualized Load-Velocity Equations on Velocity-Loss Magnitude in Bench-Press Exercise: Mixed-Model and Equivalence Analysis.

Purpose: This study analyzed the influence of 2 velocity-based training-load prescription strategies (general vs individual load-velocity equations) on the relationship between the magnitude of velocity loss (VL) and the percentage of repetitions completed in the bench-press exercise.

Methods: Thirty-five subjects completed 6 sessions consisting of performing the maximum number of repetitions to failure against their 40%, 60%, and 80% of 1-repetition maximum (1RM) in the Smith machine bench-press exercise using generalized and individualized equations to adjust the training load.

Results: A close relationship and acceptable error were observed between percentage of repetitions completed and the percentage of VL reached for the 3 loading magnitudes and the 2 load-prescription strategies studied (R2 from .83 to .94; standard error of the estimate from 7% to 10%). A simple main effect was observed for load and VL thresholds but not for load-prescription strategies. No significant interaction effects were revealed. The 40% and 60% 1RM showed equivalence on data sets and the most regular variation, whereas the 80% 1-repetition maximum load showed no equivalence and more irregular variation.

Conclusion: These results suggest that VL is a useful variable to predict percentage of repetitions completed in the bench-press exercise, regardless of the strategy selected to adjust the relative load. However, caution should be taken when using heavy loads.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
12.10%
发文量
199
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance (IJSPP) focuses on sport physiology and performance and is dedicated to advancing the knowledge of sport and exercise physiologists, sport-performance researchers, and other sport scientists. The journal publishes authoritative peer-reviewed research in sport physiology and related disciplines, with an emphasis on work having direct practical applications in enhancing sport performance in sport physiology and related disciplines. IJSPP publishes 10 issues per year: January, February, March, April, May, July, August, September, October, and November.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信