Sergio A. Lemus, Mallory Volz, Avery Blasdale, Francisco Beron-Vera, Cheng-Bang Chen, Bryan J. Mann, Francesco Travascio
{"title":"用五种基于速度的训练装置测量举重动作中速度的准确性","authors":"Sergio A. Lemus, Mallory Volz, Avery Blasdale, Francisco Beron-Vera, Cheng-Bang Chen, Bryan J. Mann, Francesco Travascio","doi":"10.1177/17479541241266248","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The use of weightlifting exercises is prevalent in competitive and recreational environments, as well as sport-specific training. Traditionally, weightlifting coaches prescribe specific training loads based on an individual's maximal ability. Velocity-based training offers an alternative method that promises to quantify strength based on velocity and provides information that increases competitiveness through real-time feedback. Various velocity measurement devices are available on the market. Their precision is critical for the adequate implementation of velocity-based training. The aim of the present study was to compare the concentric peak velocity measurements of five of these devices during two weightlifting movements, the snatch and clean, to data collected with a 12-camera motion capture system, which was considered as gold standard. It was hypothesized that the velocity measurement devices used in this study would vary in accuracy based on their retail prices. Velocity readings associated with light and moderate (40% and 70% of one-repetition max) loads were measured for both the snatch and clean performed by 12 competitive weightlifters. A least products regression was used to assess validity by comparing five devices against a criterion measure. A general linear model showed statistical differences in the velocities measured with these five devices ( p < 0.001). Specifically, the GymAware RS linear position transducer was the most accurate device, demonstrating no fixed or proportional bias when used to quantify velocity during the snatch and clean. The remaining four devices significantly underestimated peak velocity, which would directly impact the daily planning of lifters’ training. Practitioners must consider the error and bias of each device before implementing velocity-based training.","PeriodicalId":47767,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching","volume":"44 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The accuracy of measuring velocity during weightlifting movements with five velocity-based training devices\",\"authors\":\"Sergio A. Lemus, Mallory Volz, Avery Blasdale, Francisco Beron-Vera, Cheng-Bang Chen, Bryan J. Mann, Francesco Travascio\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17479541241266248\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The use of weightlifting exercises is prevalent in competitive and recreational environments, as well as sport-specific training. Traditionally, weightlifting coaches prescribe specific training loads based on an individual's maximal ability. Velocity-based training offers an alternative method that promises to quantify strength based on velocity and provides information that increases competitiveness through real-time feedback. Various velocity measurement devices are available on the market. Their precision is critical for the adequate implementation of velocity-based training. The aim of the present study was to compare the concentric peak velocity measurements of five of these devices during two weightlifting movements, the snatch and clean, to data collected with a 12-camera motion capture system, which was considered as gold standard. It was hypothesized that the velocity measurement devices used in this study would vary in accuracy based on their retail prices. Velocity readings associated with light and moderate (40% and 70% of one-repetition max) loads were measured for both the snatch and clean performed by 12 competitive weightlifters. A least products regression was used to assess validity by comparing five devices against a criterion measure. A general linear model showed statistical differences in the velocities measured with these five devices ( p < 0.001). Specifically, the GymAware RS linear position transducer was the most accurate device, demonstrating no fixed or proportional bias when used to quantify velocity during the snatch and clean. The remaining four devices significantly underestimated peak velocity, which would directly impact the daily planning of lifters’ training. Practitioners must consider the error and bias of each device before implementing velocity-based training.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47767,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17479541241266248\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17479541241266248","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
The accuracy of measuring velocity during weightlifting movements with five velocity-based training devices
The use of weightlifting exercises is prevalent in competitive and recreational environments, as well as sport-specific training. Traditionally, weightlifting coaches prescribe specific training loads based on an individual's maximal ability. Velocity-based training offers an alternative method that promises to quantify strength based on velocity and provides information that increases competitiveness through real-time feedback. Various velocity measurement devices are available on the market. Their precision is critical for the adequate implementation of velocity-based training. The aim of the present study was to compare the concentric peak velocity measurements of five of these devices during two weightlifting movements, the snatch and clean, to data collected with a 12-camera motion capture system, which was considered as gold standard. It was hypothesized that the velocity measurement devices used in this study would vary in accuracy based on their retail prices. Velocity readings associated with light and moderate (40% and 70% of one-repetition max) loads were measured for both the snatch and clean performed by 12 competitive weightlifters. A least products regression was used to assess validity by comparing five devices against a criterion measure. A general linear model showed statistical differences in the velocities measured with these five devices ( p < 0.001). Specifically, the GymAware RS linear position transducer was the most accurate device, demonstrating no fixed or proportional bias when used to quantify velocity during the snatch and clean. The remaining four devices significantly underestimated peak velocity, which would directly impact the daily planning of lifters’ training. Practitioners must consider the error and bias of each device before implementing velocity-based training.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching is a peer-reviewed, international, academic/professional journal, which aims to bridge the gap between coaching and sports science. The journal will integrate theory and practice in sports science, promote critical reflection of coaching practice, and evaluate commonly accepted beliefs about coaching effectiveness and performance enhancement. Open learning systems will be promoted in which: (a) sports science is made accessible to coaches, translating knowledge into working practice; and (b) the challenges faced by coaches are communicated to sports scientists. The vision of the journal is to support the development of a community in which: (i) sports scientists and coaches respect and learn from each other as they assist athletes to acquire skills by training safely and effectively, thereby enhancing their performance, maximizing their enjoyment of the sporting experience and facilitating character development; and (ii) scientific research is embraced in the quest to uncover, understand and develop the processes involved in sports coaching and elite performance.