{"title":"Effect of the Stretch-Shortening Cycle on the Relationship Between Maximum Number of Repetitions and Lifting Velocity During the Prone Bench Pull.","authors":"Sergio Miras-Moreno, Amador García-Ramos, Jonathon Weakley, Francisco J Rojas-Ruiz, Alejandro Pérez-Castilla","doi":"10.1177/19417381241286519","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The fastest mean (MV<sub>fastest</sub>) and peak (PV<sub>fastest</sub>) 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.</p><p><strong>Hypothesis: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Cross-sectional study.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level 3.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Goodness-of-fit was very high and comparable for concentric-only (RTF-MV<sub>fastest</sub>, <i>r</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.97; RTF-PV<sub>fastest</sub>, <i>r</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.98) and eccentric-concentric (RTF-MV<sub>fastest</sub>, <i>r</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.98; RTF-PV<sub>fastest</sub>, <i>r</i><sup>2</sup> = 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 (<i>R</i><sup>2</sup> ≥ 0.143). However, velocity values associated with different RTFs were comparable for the multiple- and 2-point methods (<i>F</i> ≤ 2.4; <i>P</i> ≥ 0.13).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Practitioners only need to monitor the MV<sub>fastest</sub> or PV<sub>fastest</sub> 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<sub>fastest</sub> or PV<sub>fastest</sub> of the set to estimate RTF against a given absolute load.</p>","PeriodicalId":54276,"journal":{"name":"Sports Health-A Multidisciplinary Approach","volume":" ","pages":"19417381241286519"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11556646/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports Health-A Multidisciplinary Approach","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19417381241286519","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: The fastest mean (MVfastest) and peak (PVfastest) 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-MVfastest, r2 = 0.97; RTF-PVfastest, r2 = 0.98) and eccentric-concentric (RTF-MVfastest, r2 = 0.98; RTF-PVfastest, r2 = 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 (R2 ≥ 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 MVfastest or PVfastest 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 MVfastest or PVfastest of the set to estimate RTF against a given absolute load.
期刊介绍:
Sports Health: A Multidisciplinary Approach is an indispensable resource for all medical professionals involved in the training and care of the competitive or recreational athlete, including primary care physicians, orthopaedic surgeons, physical therapists, athletic trainers and other medical and health care professionals.
Published bimonthly, Sports Health is a collaborative publication from the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM), the American Medical Society for Sports Medicine (AMSSM), the National Athletic Trainers’ Association (NATA), and the Sports Physical Therapy Section (SPTS).
The journal publishes review articles, original research articles, case studies, images, short updates, legal briefs, editorials, and letters to the editor.
Topics include:
-Sports Injury and Treatment
-Care of the Athlete
-Athlete Rehabilitation
-Medical Issues in the Athlete
-Surgical Techniques in Sports Medicine
-Case Studies in Sports Medicine
-Images in Sports Medicine
-Legal Issues
-Pediatric Athletes
-General Sports Trauma
-Sports Psychology