IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i21p7811-d434573.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Group versus Individualised Minimum Velocity Thresholds in the Prediction of Maximal Strength in Trained Female Athletes

Author

Listed:
  • Elias J. G. Caven

    (Higher Education Sport, Hartpury University, Gloucester GL19 3BE, UK)

  • Tom J. E. Bryan

    (Higher Education Sport, Hartpury University, Gloucester GL19 3BE, UK)

  • Amelia F. Dingley

    (Higher Education Sport, Hartpury University, Gloucester GL19 3BE, UK)

  • Benjamin Drury

    (Higher Education Sport, Hartpury University, Gloucester GL19 3BE, UK)

  • Amador Garcia-Ramos

    (Department of Physical Education and Sport, University of Granada, 52005 Granada, Spain
    Department of Sports Sciences and Physical Conditioning, Faculty of Education, Universidad Católica de la Santísima Concepción, Concepción, Chile)

  • Alejandro Perez-Castilla

    (Department of Physical Education and Sport, University of Granada, 52005 Granada, Spain)

  • Jorge Arede

    (Research Center in Sports Sciences, Health Sciences and Human Development, CIDESD, University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, 5000-801 Vila Real, Portugal)

  • John F. T. Fernandes

    (Higher Education Sport, Hartpury University, Gloucester GL19 3BE, UK)

Abstract

This study examined the accuracy of different velocity-based methods in the prediction of bench press and squat one-repetition maximum (1RM) in female athletes. Seventeen trained females (age 17.8 ± 1.3 years) performed an incremental loading test to 1RM on bench press and squat with the mean velocity being recorded. The 1RM was estimated from the load–velocity relationship using the multiple- (8 loads) and two-point (2 loads) methods and group and individual minimum velocity thresholds (MVT). No significant effect of method, MVT or interaction was observed for the two exercises ( p > 0.05). For bench press and squat, all prediction methods demonstrated very large to nearly perfect correlations with respect to the actual 1RM (r range = 0.76 to 0.97). The absolute error (range = 2.1 to 3.8 kg) for bench press demonstrated low errors that were independent of the method and MVT used. For squat, the favorable group MVT errors for the multiple- and two-point methods (absolute error = 7.8 and 9.7 kg, respectively) were greater than the individual MVT errors (absolute error = 4.9 and 6.3 kg, respectively). The 1RM can be accurately predicted from the load–velocity relationship in trained females, with the two-point method offering a quick and less fatiguing alternative to the multiple-point method.

Suggested Citation

  • Elias J. G. Caven & Tom J. E. Bryan & Amelia F. Dingley & Benjamin Drury & Amador Garcia-Ramos & Alejandro Perez-Castilla & Jorge Arede & John F. T. Fernandes, 2020. "Group versus Individualised Minimum Velocity Thresholds in the Prediction of Maximal Strength in Trained Female Athletes," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-10, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:21:p:7811-:d:434573
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/21/7811/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/21/7811/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ruggero Romagnoli & Sergio Civitella & Carlo Minganti & Maria Francesca Piacentini, 2022. "Concurrent and Predictive Validity of an Exercise-Specific Scale for the Perception of Velocity in the Back Squat," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-10, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:21:p:7811-:d:434573. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.