Purpose: To analyze the relationship between movement velocity and relative load (%1RM) in the pull-up exercise (PU) and to determine the pattern of repetition-velocity loss during a single set to failure in pulling one’s own body mass. Methods: Fifty-two men (age = 26.5 ± 3.9 y, body mass = 74.3 ± 7.2 kg) performed a first evaluation (T1) consisting of an 1-repetition-maximum test (1RM) and a test of maximum number of repetitions to failure pulling one’s own body mass (MNR) in the PU exercise. Thirty-nine subjects performed both tests on a second occasion (T2) following 12 wk of training. Results: The authors observed a strong relationship between mean propulsive velocity (MPV) and %1RM (r = −.96). Mean velocity attained with 1RM load (V1RM) was 0.20 ± 0.05 m·s−1, and it influenced the MPV attained with each %1RM. Although 1RM increased by 3.4% from T1 to T2, the relationship between MPV and %1RM, and V1RM, remained stable. The authors also confirmed stability in the V1RM regardless of individual relative strength. The authors found a strong relationship between percentage of velocity loss and percentage of performed repetitions (R 2 = .88), which remained stable despite a 15% increase in MNR. Conclusions: Monitoring repetition velocity allows estimation of the %1RM used as soon as the first repetition with a given load is performed, and the number of repetitions remaining in reserve when a given percentage of velocity loss is achieved during a PU exercise set.
Miguel Sánchez-Moreno, David Rodríguez-Rosell, Fernando Pareja-Blanco, Ricardo Mora-Custodio, and Juan José González-Badillo
Miguel Sánchez-Moreno, David Rodríguez-Rosell, David Díaz-Cueli, Fernando Pareja-Blanco, and Juan José González-Badillo
Purpose: This study analyzed the effects of 3 training interventions: 1 isolated endurance training (ET) and 2 concurrent training (CT), which differed in the velocity loss (VL) magnitude allowed during the resistance training (RT) set: 15% (VL15) versus 45%, on strength and endurance running performance. Methods: A total of 33 resistance- and endurance-trained men were randomly allocated into 3 groups: VL15, VL 45%, and ET. ET was similar across all groups. The CT groups differed in the VL allowed during the RT set. Before and after the 8-week training program the following tests were performed: (1) running sprints, (2) vertical jump, (3) progressive loading test in the squat exercise, and (4) incremental treadmill running test up to maximal oxygen uptake. Results: Significant differences (P < .001) in RT volume (approximately 401 vs 177 total repetitions for VL 45% and VL15, respectively) were observed. Significant “group” × “time” interactions were observed for vertical jump and all strength-related variables: the CT groups attained significantly greater gains than ET. Moreover, a significant “group” × “time” interaction (P = .03) was noted for velocity at maximal oxygen uptake. Although all groups showed increases in velocity at maximal oxygen uptake, the VL15 group achieved greater gains than the ET group. Conclusions: CT interventions experienced greater strength gains than the ET group. Although all groups improved their endurance performance, the VL15 intervention resulted in greater gains than the ET approach. Therefore, moderate VL thresholds in RT performed during CT could be a good strategy for concurrently maximizing strength and endurance development.
Miguel Sánchez-Moreno, Gonçalo Rendeiro-Pinho, Pedro V. Mil-Homens, and Fernando Pareja-Blanco
Purpose: This study aimed (1) to analyze the interindividual variability in the maximal number of repetitions (MNR) performed against a given relative load (percentage of 1-repetition maximum [%1RM]) and (2) to examine the relationship between the velocity loss (VL) magnitude and the percentage of completed repetitions with regard to the MNR (%Rep), when the %1RM is based on individual load–velocity relationships. Methods: Following an assessment of 1RM strength and individual load–velocity relationships, 14 resistance-trained men completed 5 MNR tests against loads of 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, and 90% 1RM in the Smith machine bench-press exercise. The relative loads were determined from the individual load–velocity relationship. Results: Individual relationships between load and velocity displayed coefficients of determination (R 2) ranging from .986 to .998. The MNR showed an interindividual coefficient of variation ranging from 8.6% to 33.1%, increasing as the %1RM increased. The relationship between %Rep and the magnitude of VL showed a general R 2 of .92 to .94 between 50% and 80% 1RM, which decreased to .80 for 90% 1RM. The mean individual R 2 values were between .97 and .99 for all loading conditions. The %Rep when a given percentage of VL was reached showed interindividual coefficient of variation values ranging from 5% to 20%, decreasing as the %Rep increased in each load condition. Conclusions: Setting a number of repetitions had acceptable interindividual variability, with moderate relative loads being adjusted based on the individual load–velocity relationship. However, to provide a more homogeneous level of effort between athletes, the VL approach should be considered, mainly when using individual VL–%Rep relationships.
Beatriz Bachero-Mena, Miguel Sánchez-Moreno, Fernando Pareja-Blanco, and Borja Sañudo
Purpose: To analyze the acute and short-term physical and metabolic responses to resisted sprint training with 5 different loading conditions (0%, 20%, 40%, 60%, and 80% body mass). Methods: Fifteen male participants performed 8 × 20-m sprints with 2-minute rests between sprints with 5 different loading conditions. Subjects performed a battery of tests (creatine kinase and lactate concentrations, countermovement jump, 20-m sprint, and isokinetic knee extension and flexion contractions) at 3 different time points (preexercise [PRE], postexercise [POST], and 24-h postexercise [POST24H]). Results: Results revealed significant increases in blood lactate for all loading conditions; however, as sled loadings increased, higher blood lactate concentrations and increments in sprint times during the training session were observed. Significant increases in creatine kinase concentration were observed from PRE to POST24H for all loading conditions. Concerning physical performance, significant decreases in countermovement-jump height from PRE to POST were found for all loading conditions. In addition, significant decreases in 20-m sprint performance from PRE to POST were observed for 0% (P = .05) and 80% (P = .02). No significant differences with PRE were observed for the physical-performance variables at POST24H, except for 20% load, which induced a significant decrease in mean power during knee flexion (P = .03). Conclusions: These results suggest that the higher the load used during resisted sprint training, the higher the physical-performance impairments and metabolic response produced, although all loading conditions led to a complete recovery of sprint performance at POST24H.