Roland van den Tillaar, Hallvard N Falch, Stian Larsen
{"title":"基于载荷-速度关系的最大俯卧撑和卧推性能比较及预测。","authors":"Roland van den Tillaar, Hallvard N Falch, Stian Larsen","doi":"10.1519/JSC.0000000000005160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>van den Tillaar, R, Falch, HN, and Larsen, S. A comparison of maximal push-up and bench press performance and their prediction based on load-velocity relationships. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2025-This study aimed to compare maximal push-up and bench press performance, and their prediction based on the load-velocity relationships. Eleven resistance-trained men (age 25.3 ± 4.0 years, body mass 84.2 ± 6.1 kg, and body height 1.80 ± 0.06 m) performed push-ups and bench presses with 4 different loads randomly. Push-ups were performed with and without a 10-20-30 kg weight vest. Bench press was performed with similar weights as in the push-ups, followed by finding 1RM in each exercise. A linear encoder measured barbell and push-up velocities during the exercises, and force plates were used to measure the average force on the arms during the push-ups. A load-velocity relationship was established between the load and velocity for the push-up and bench press per subject and the equation used to establish a predicted 1RM. The main findings of this study demonstrate that 1RM for push-ups was significantly higher than with bench press (112.4 ± 18.9 vs. 106.4 ± 20.4 kg); meanwhile, there were no differences in the predicted 1RM. Furthermore, an extremely strong association was observed between the actual 1RM loads performed with the push-up and bench press (r = 0.92). Even with different load-velocity relationships for the 2 exercises, it was possible to predict a cross-over 1RM between them, which was not significantly different from the actual 1RM loads. For coaches and athletes, this method is an easy, cost, and time-effective option for standard 1RM bench press testing to predict maximal upper body strength.</p>","PeriodicalId":17129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparison of Maximal Push-Up and Bench Press Performance and Their Prediction Based on Load-Velocity Relationships.\",\"authors\":\"Roland van den Tillaar, Hallvard N Falch, Stian Larsen\",\"doi\":\"10.1519/JSC.0000000000005160\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>van den Tillaar, R, Falch, HN, and Larsen, S. A comparison of maximal push-up and bench press performance and their prediction based on load-velocity relationships. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2025-This study aimed to compare maximal push-up and bench press performance, and their prediction based on the load-velocity relationships. Eleven resistance-trained men (age 25.3 ± 4.0 years, body mass 84.2 ± 6.1 kg, and body height 1.80 ± 0.06 m) performed push-ups and bench presses with 4 different loads randomly. Push-ups were performed with and without a 10-20-30 kg weight vest. Bench press was performed with similar weights as in the push-ups, followed by finding 1RM in each exercise. A linear encoder measured barbell and push-up velocities during the exercises, and force plates were used to measure the average force on the arms during the push-ups. A load-velocity relationship was established between the load and velocity for the push-up and bench press per subject and the equation used to establish a predicted 1RM. The main findings of this study demonstrate that 1RM for push-ups was significantly higher than with bench press (112.4 ± 18.9 vs. 106.4 ± 20.4 kg); meanwhile, there were no differences in the predicted 1RM. Furthermore, an extremely strong association was observed between the actual 1RM loads performed with the push-up and bench press (r = 0.92). Even with different load-velocity relationships for the 2 exercises, it was possible to predict a cross-over 1RM between them, which was not significantly different from the actual 1RM loads. For coaches and athletes, this method is an easy, cost, and time-effective option for standard 1RM bench press testing to predict maximal upper body strength.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17129,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000005160\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000005160","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
摘要:van den Tillaar, R, Falch, HN和Larsen, S.最大俯卧撑和卧推性能的比较及其基于负载-速度关系的预测。[J][强度与控制][X]: 000-000, 2025-本研究旨在比较最大俯卧撑和卧推的性能,以及基于载荷-速度关系的预测。11名接受阻力训练的男性(年龄25.3±4.0岁,体重84.2±6.1 kg,身高1.80±0.06 m)随机进行4种负荷的俯卧撑和卧推。使用和不使用10-20-30 kg重量背心进行俯卧撑。卧推的重量与俯卧撑相似,然后在每次练习中找到1RM。线性编码器测量了练习过程中的杠铃和俯卧撑速度,力板用于测量俯卧撑过程中手臂上的平均力。建立了每个受试者俯卧撑和卧推的载荷和速度之间的载荷-速度关系,并建立了预测1RM的方程。本研究的主要发现表明,俯卧撑的1RM明显高于卧推(112.4±18.9 vs 106.4±20.4 kg);同时,预测的1RM没有差异。此外,在俯卧撑和卧推的实际1RM负荷之间观察到非常强的关联(r = 0.92)。即使两个练习的负载-速度关系不同,也可以预测它们之间的交叉1RM,这与实际的1RM负载没有显着差异。对于教练和运动员来说,这种方法是一种简单、成本低、省时的标准1RM卧推测试方法,可用于预测最大上身力量。
A Comparison of Maximal Push-Up and Bench Press Performance and Their Prediction Based on Load-Velocity Relationships.
Abstract: van den Tillaar, R, Falch, HN, and Larsen, S. A comparison of maximal push-up and bench press performance and their prediction based on load-velocity relationships. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2025-This study aimed to compare maximal push-up and bench press performance, and their prediction based on the load-velocity relationships. Eleven resistance-trained men (age 25.3 ± 4.0 years, body mass 84.2 ± 6.1 kg, and body height 1.80 ± 0.06 m) performed push-ups and bench presses with 4 different loads randomly. Push-ups were performed with and without a 10-20-30 kg weight vest. Bench press was performed with similar weights as in the push-ups, followed by finding 1RM in each exercise. A linear encoder measured barbell and push-up velocities during the exercises, and force plates were used to measure the average force on the arms during the push-ups. A load-velocity relationship was established between the load and velocity for the push-up and bench press per subject and the equation used to establish a predicted 1RM. The main findings of this study demonstrate that 1RM for push-ups was significantly higher than with bench press (112.4 ± 18.9 vs. 106.4 ± 20.4 kg); meanwhile, there were no differences in the predicted 1RM. Furthermore, an extremely strong association was observed between the actual 1RM loads performed with the push-up and bench press (r = 0.92). Even with different load-velocity relationships for the 2 exercises, it was possible to predict a cross-over 1RM between them, which was not significantly different from the actual 1RM loads. For coaches and athletes, this method is an easy, cost, and time-effective option for standard 1RM bench press testing to predict maximal upper body strength.
期刊介绍:
The editorial mission of The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research (JSCR) is to advance the knowledge about strength and conditioning through research. A unique aspect of this journal is that it includes recommendations for the practical use of research findings. While the journal name identifies strength and conditioning as separate entities, strength is considered a part of conditioning. This journal wishes to promote the publication of peer-reviewed manuscripts which add to our understanding of conditioning and sport through applied exercise science.