Force–velocity relationship in Paralympic powerlifting: two or multiple-point methods to determine a maximum repetition

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorAidar, Felipe J.
dc.contributor.authorBrito, Ciro J.
dc.contributor.authorde Matos, Dihogo G.
dc.contributor.authorde Oliveira, Levy A. S.
dc.contributor.authorde Souza, Rapahel F.
dc.contributor.authorde Almeida-Neto, Paulo F.
dc.contributor.authorde Araújo Tinoco Cabral, Breno G.
dc.contributor.authorNeiva, Henrique P.
dc.contributor.authorNeto, Frederico R.
dc.contributor.authorReis, Victor M.
dc.contributor.authorMarinho, Daniel A.
dc.contributor.authorMarques, Mário C.
dc.contributor.authorClemente, Filipe M.
dc.contributor.authorNobari, Hadi
dc.date.accessioned2022-09-01T03:20:31Z
dc.date.issued2022-08-24
dc.date.updated2022-09-01T03:20:31Z
dc.description.abstractAbstract Background Due to the absence of evidence in the literature on Paralympic Powerlifting the present study investigated various methods to assess bench press maximum repetition and the way each method influences the measurement of minimum velocity limit (MVT), load at zero velocity (LD0), and force–velocity (FV). Objective To evaluate the precision of the multi-point method using proximal loads (40, 50, 60, 70, 80, and 90% of one repetition maximum; 1RM) compared to the four-point method (50, 60, 70, and 80% of 1RM) and the two-point method using distant loads (40 and 80% and 50 and 80% of 1RM) in in the MVT, LD0, and FV, in bench press performed by Paralympic Powerlifters (PP). Methods To accomplish this, 15 male elite PP athletes participated in the study (age: 27.7 ± 5.7 years; BM: 74.0 ± 19.5 kg). All participants performed an adapted bench press test (free weight) with 6 loads (40, 50, 60, 70, 80, and 90% 1RM), 4 loads (50, 60, 70, and 80% 1RM), and 2 loads (40–80% and 50–80% 1RM). The 1RM predictions were made by MVT, LD0, and FV. Results The main results indicated that the multiple (4 and 6) pointsmethod provides good results in the MVT (R2 = 0.482), the LD0 (R2 = 0.614), and the FV (R2 = 0.508). The two-point method (50–80%) showed a higher mean in MVT [1268.2 ± 502.0 N; ICC95% 0.76 (0.31–0.92)], in LD0 [1504.1 ± 597.3 N; 0.63 (0.17–0.86)], and in FV [1479.2 ± 636.0 N; 0.60 (0.10–0.86)]. Conclusion The multiple-point method (4 and 6 points) and the two-point method (40–80%) using the MVT, LD0, and FV all showed a good ability to predict bench press 1RM in PP.
dc.identifier.citationBMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2022 Aug 24;14(1):159
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1186/s13102-022-00552-9
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1993/36831
dc.language.rfc3066en
dc.rightsopen accessen_US
dc.rights.holderThe Author(s)
dc.titleForce–velocity relationship in Paralympic powerlifting: two or multiple-point methods to determine a maximum repetition
dc.typeJournal Article
local.author.affiliationFaculty of Kinesiology and Recreation Managementen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
13102_2022_Article_552.pdf
Size:
1.99 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
2.24 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed to upon submission
Description:
Download
Collections
University of Manitoba Scholarship
Faculty of Kinesiology and Recreation Management Scholarly Works