Content uploaded by Eric R Helms
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Eric R Helms on Nov 14, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
RPE and Velocity Relationships for the Back Squat, Bench Press, and Deadlift in Powerlifters
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare average concentric velocity (ACV) and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) based on repetitions in reserve on the squat, bench press and deadlift. Fifteen powerlifters (3 female, 12 male, 28.4 ± 8.5 years) worked up to a one repetition maximum (1RM) on each lift. RPE was recorded on all sets and ACV was recorded for all sets performed at 80% of estimated 1RM and higher, up to 1RM. RPE at 1RM on the squat, bench press and deadlift was 9.6 ± 0.5, 9.7 ± 0.4 and 9.6 ± 0.5, respectively and were not significantly different (p > 0.05). ACV at 1RM on the squat, bench press and deadlift was 0.23 ± 0.05, 0.10 ± 0.04 and 0.14 ± 0.05 m·s-1, respectively. The squat was faster than both the bench press and deadlift (p <0.001) and the deadlift was faster than the bench press (p = 0.05). Very strong relationships (r = 0.88 to 0.91) between percentage 1RM and RPE were observed on each lift. ACV showed strong (r= -0.79 to -0.87) and very strong (r= -0.90-92) inverse relationships with RPE and percentage 1RM on each lift, respectively. We conclude that RPE may be a useful tool for prescribing intensity for the squat, bench press, and deadlift in powerlifters, in addition to traditional methods such as percentage of 1RM. Despite high correlations between percentage 1RM and ACV, a 'velocity load profile' should be developed to prescribe intensity on an individual basis with appropriate accuracy.
... González-Badillo & Sánchez-Medina, 2010; Sanchez-Medina et al. 2014; García-Ramos et al. 2018; Hecksteden et al. 2018), 0.50 m/s за тестот влечење товар од лежење на мев на рамна клупа (Sanchez-Medina et al. 2014; García-Ramos et al. 2019; Loturco et al. 2021) 0.30 m/s за тестот чучнување со шипка(Izquerdo et al. 2006;Sanchez-Medina et al. 2011; Banyard et al. 2017;Helms et al. 2017) и 0.15 m/s за тестот мртво кревање(Helms et al. 2017;Lake et al. 2017;Ruf et al. 2018 ...
... González-Badillo & Sánchez-Medina, 2010; Sanchez-Medina et al. 2014; García-Ramos et al. 2018; Hecksteden et al. 2018), 0.50 m/s за тестот влечење товар од лежење на мев на рамна клупа (Sanchez-Medina et al. 2014; García-Ramos et al. 2019; Loturco et al. 2021) 0.30 m/s за тестот чучнување со шипка(Izquerdo et al. 2006;Sanchez-Medina et al. 2011; Banyard et al. 2017;Helms et al. 2017) и 0.15 m/s за тестот мртво кревање(Helms et al. 2017;Lake et al. 2017;Ruf et al. 2018 ...
Determining the load during training and competition
is of key importance in the work of the fitness coach.
The isoinertial dynamometer is an instrument that
finds wide application in biomechanical diagnostics as
well as in training. The instrument has the required
validity and reliability and is easy to use. The metrics
it calculates are of key importance in speed-based
training. Research shows that this method of training
very often has greater positive effects than the
traditional one.
Determining the load/velocity profile, predicting one
repetition maximum, assessing daily readiness,
autoregulation and fatigue management are the
primary goals of speed-based training.
The large number of indicators calculated by this
device represent an excellent basis for objective
planning, programming and implementation of the
training process.
... An autoregulated approach avoids adopting pre-planned phases of training, and instead, favours continuous modification of training in response to the athlete's individual rate of adaptation [83]. In resistance exercise training programmes that emphasize muscular strength or hypertrophy, autoregulation can be applied through alterations in either objective or subjective within-session measures (e.g., ratings of perceived exertion, reps in reserve, velocity-based training) or between-session measures (e.g., countermovement jump, 1-RM) [83,84]. Therefore, adopting an autoregulated approach allows the strength and physique coach to prescribe heavier or lighter training in an undulating manner, rather than in a rigid or pre-planned way [85]. ...
Background
Deloading is a ubiquitous yet under-researched strategy within strength and physique training. How deloading should be integrated into the training programme to elicit optimal training outcomes is unknown. To aid its potential integration, this study established consensus around design principles for integrating deloading in strength and physique training programmes using expert opinion and practical experience.
Methods
Expert strength and physique coaches were invited to an online Delphi consisting of 3 rounds. Thirty-four coaches completed the first round, 29 completed the second round, and 21 completed the third round of a Delphi questionnaire. In the first round, coaches answered 15 open-ended questions from four categories: 1: General Perceptions of Deloading; 2: Potential Applications of Deloading; 3: Designing and Implementing Deloading; and 4: Creating an Inclusive Deloading Training Environment. First-round responses were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis, resulting in 138 statements organized into four domains. In the second and third rounds, coaches rated each statement using a four-point Likert scale, and collective agreement or disagreement was calculated.
Results
Stability of consensus was achieved across specific aspects of the four categories. Findings from the final round were used to develop the design principles, which reflect the consensus achieved.
Conclusions
This study develops consensus on design principles for integrating deloading into strength and physique sports training programmes. A consensus definition is proposed: “Deloading is a period of reduced training stress designed to mitigate physiological and psychological fatigue, promote recovery, and enhance preparedness for subsequent training.” These findings contribute novel knowledge that might advance the current understanding of deloading in strength and physique sports.
... These ratings are typically assessed via scales ranging from 0 to 10, 6 to 20, or 0 to 100 (Borg 1970(Borg , 1982Borg & Borg, 2002). Research has shown that the perception of effort is associated with several physiological parameters, such as heart rate and lactate levels (Mays et al., 2010;Scherr et al., 2013), as well as performance indicators, such as running speed and movement velocity (Helms et al., 2017;Rago et al., 2019;Rotstein et al., 2005). Consequently, RPE measures yield valuable information that can be used in clinical and performance settings (Inoue et al., 2022;Mays et al., 2010). ...
Ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) are frequently used to monitor and prescribe exercise intensity. However, studies examining the shape and robustness of how feelings of effort map onto objective outputs are limited and report inconsistent results. To address this, we investigated whether (1) producing isometric forces according to RPE levels reliably leads to differences in force output, (2) if feelings of effort map linearly or non-linearly onto force output, and (3) if this mapping is robust when visual feedback and social facilitation are present. In a counterbalanced repeated measures design, N = 26 participants performed isometric handgrip contractions prescribed by ten levels of the Borg CR-10 scale. They did so either with or without the availability of concurrent visual feedback regarding their force production, and in the presence or absence of another person performing the same task simultaneously. We found that subjects reliably produced different force outputs that corresponded to each RPE level. Furthermore, concurrent visual feedback led to a linearization of force output, while in the absence of feedback, the produced forces could also be described by quadratic and cubic functions. Exploratory post-hoc analyses revealed that participants perceived moderate RPE levels to be more challenging to produce. By shedding light on the dynamic nature of the mapping between RPE and objective performance, our findings provide helpful insights regarding the utility of RPE scales.
... The reason for this difference between Phase 1 and 2, could probably be attributed to the fact that participants in Phase 2 had an instruction video to guide them, and this probably led to more accurate ratings of perceived exertion. Therefore, since RIR previously has been shown to correlate well to objective measures of performance such as bar speed (28) this indicates that RIR is a usable tool to measure internal intensity in powerlifting provided that explicit instruction of when and how to perform the rating are given. ...
Research on risk factors and injuries in powerlifting has so far only been studied through cross-sectional/observational studies. In other sports, training load has been prospectively investigated and shown to influence injury risk. However, no method to quantify training load in powerlifting exist. The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility of a novel standardized method for prospective recording of training load and injuries. The study was conducted in two phases with eight powerlifters initially included in each phase respectively. In Phase 1, the powerlifters registered training load and injuries throughout four weeks and answered a feasibility questionnaire. Based on the results from the questionnaire, updates to the training and injury log were made and the powerlifters in Phase 2 used the updated version to log four weeks of training. Training load and injuries were reported consistently which made calculations on training load and injury incidence possible. The participants reported rate of perceived exertion as difficult to assess and report. However, 9/12 powerlifters stated that they could the training and injury log for a period of at least six months. In conclusion, this standardized training and injury log seems to be a feasible method to quantify training load and injuries in powerlifting. The method could be used in further prospective studies on training load and injuries in powerlifting and in clinical practice.
... The rest of the training session was dedicated to warm up exercises, warm up sets and complementary resistance training exercises. Training intensity for the three powerlifting movements was reported to be at an average of 86.6 ± 5.5% of their 1RM and at 8.4 ± 0.3 Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE) based on the RPE scale for repetitions in reserve (14,25,26). Participants presented an average International Journal of Exercise Science http://www.intjexersci.com ...
International Journal of Exercise Science 16(4): 828-845, 2023. The purpose of this study was to present the relationships between maximal strength and body composition and to conduct yearly follow-ups presenting the chronic effects of maximal strength training on body composition. Thirty-four (age = 28.8 ± 8.7 yrs) classic powerlifters (M = 21; F = 13) completed at least one Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry (DXA) 43.97 ± 23.93 days after a sanctioned international powerlifting federation affiliate competition (Squat + Bench Press + Deadlift = Total (kg)). In addition, thirteen subjects (n = 13) completed at least one yearly follow up. Paired sample T-Tests and simple linear regressions were performed to determine significant effects on body composition and maximal strength measures. Prediction formulas were obtained as follows: Bone Mineral Content (BMC) (g) = 3.39 * Total (kg) + 1494.78 (r = 0.84; p < 0.000; SEE = 348.05); Bone Mineral Density (BMD) (g/cm 3) = 0.000390 * Total (kg) + 1.115 (r = 0.71; p < 0.000; SEE = 0.062); Total (kg) = 10.84 * Lean Body Weight (LBW) (kg)-154.89 (r = 0.90; p < 0.000; SEE = 70.27); Total (kg) = 22.74 * Relative LBW (kg/m)-306.66 (r = 0.92; p < 0.000; SEE = 64.07). Significant differences were observed in BMD (+1.57 ± 1.55%; p = 0.018; ES = 0.22), between measures one and two (333.7 ± 36.3 days apart) as well as LBW (-2.95 ± 3.82%; p = 0.049; ES = 0.16), and Body Fat Percentage (+2.59%; p = 0.029; ES = 0.20) between measures two and three (336 ± 13.3 days apart). Thus, maximal strength can be used to predict BMC and BMD, while LBW can be used to predict maximal strength. As well, consistent powerlifting practice can increase BMD in adults.
... This is a limitation because some studies have shown tthar relative strength is positively related with average concentric velocity [49]. For example, the average concentric velocity during the 1RM squat in study [49] (0.26 ± 0.08 m/s 1 ) was slightly lower than that of the studies performed using novice squatters [54], recreationally trained men [55,56] and college athletes [57], but slightly higher than that of the studies analyzing powerlifters [54,58]. Moreover, differences between populations were found in load-velocity profiles (e.g., young men vs. middle-aged men, or young men vs. young women) [30,59,60]. ...
The purpose of this paper was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies examining the differences in the mean propulsive velocities between men and women in the different exercises studied (squat, bench press, inclined bench press and military press). Quality Assessment and Validity Tool for Correlational Studies was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Six studies of good and excellent methodological quality were included. Our meta-analysis compared men and women at the three most significant loads of the force-velocity profile (30, 70 and 90% of 1RM). A total of six studies were included in the systematic review, with a total sample of 249 participants (136 men and 113 women). The results of the main meta-analysis indicated that the mean propulsive velocity is lower in women than men in 30% of 1RM (ES = 1.30 ± 0.30; CI: 0.99-1.60; p < 0.001) and 70% of 1RM (ES = 0.92 ± 0.29; CI: 0.63, 1.21; p < 0.001). In contrast, for the 90% of the 1RM (ES = 0.27 ± 0.27; CI: 0.00, 0.55), we did not find significant differences (p = 0.05). Our results support the notion that prescription of the training load through the same velocity could cause women to receive different stimuli than men.
... Next, the participants performed one repetition at 80% of the estimated 1RM, followed by one repetition at 90% of their estimated 1RM. If the participants failed an attempt with an increased load twice, the test was ended and the last weight that the athlete could lift was recorded as 1 RM (Helms et al., 2017). Participants performed 1RM trials with at least 5 minutes of rest between each attempt. ...
Post-activation performance enhancement (PAPE) is referred to enhancement in muscular performance due to high-intensity voluntary contractions. This study aimed to examine the effect of the horizontal vs. vertical PAPE protocol on the start performance in swimming. Sixteen swimmers (age: 13.71 ± 0.95 years; height: 169.43 ± 9.68 cm; body mass: 58.47 ± 7.64 kg) performed three warm-up protocols: (i) a swim-specific warm-up (SWU); (ii) back squat (BS) followed SWU (SWUB); (iii) barbell hip thrust (BHT) followed SWU (SWUH) which consisted of 1 set of 3 reps at 80% 1RM. Rest times are evaluated individually. The findings of this study indicate that SWUB has no beneficial effect on any phase in all examined parameters, while SWUH has a slight improvement only in the take-off phase compared to SWUB (p < 0.05). BHT is better compared to BS as a PAPE stimulus for swimming, but there is no positive effect on 50 m swimming time compared to SWU (p > 0.05). In conclusion, to the best of our knowledge, the effect of BHT as a PAPE stimulus was investigated for swimming for the first time, but results show that neither BS nor BHT has a positive effect on 50 m swimming performance.
... Ultimately, this suggests that the load-velocity relationship is also subject specific. For this reason, several authors have advocated that the individual load-velocity profile should be determined to enable a more accurate estimation of relative load in more advanced lifters (9,13,16). ...
Mendonca, GV, Fitas, A, Santos, P, Gomes, M, and Pezarat-Correia, P. Predictive equations to estimate relative load based on movement velocity in males and females: accuracy of estimation for the Smith machine concentric back squat. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2022-We sought to determine the validity of using the Smith machine bar velocity to estimate relative load during the concentric back squat performed by adult male and female subjects. Thirty-two subjects (16 men: 23.3 ± 3.8 and 16 women: 26.1 ± 2.7 years) were included. The load-velocity relationship was extracted for all subjects individually. Mean concentric velocity (MCV), combined with sex, was used to develop equations predictive of relative load (% one repetition maximum [1RM]). Prediction accuracy was determined with the mean absolute percent error and Bland-Altman plots. Relative strength was similar between the sexes. However, male subjects exhibited faster concentric MCV at 1RM (p < 0.05). Mean concentric velocity and the sex-by-MCV interaction were both significant predictors of %1RM (p < 0.0001), explaining 89% of its variance. The absolute error was similar between the sexes (men: 9.4 ± 10.0; women: 8.4 ± 10.5, p > 0.05). The mean difference between actual and predicted %1RM in Bland-Altman analysis was nearly zero in both sexes and showed no heteroscedasticity. The limits of agreement in both men and women were of approximately ±15%. Taken together, it can be concluded that sex should be taken into consideration when aiming at accurate prescription of relative load based on movement velocity. Moreover, predicting relative load from MCV and sex provides an error of approximately 10% in assessments of relative load in groups of persons. Finally, when used for individual estimations, these equations may implicate a considerable deviation from the actual relative load, and this may limit their applicability to training conditions in which extreme accuracy is required (i.e., more advanced lifters and athletes).
Wer wünscht sich nicht ein einfaches System zur Ermittlung der optimalen Trainingsbelastung? Herkömmliche Verfahren sind oft aufwendig, wenig objektiv und werden den Trainierenden wegen der unvermeidbaren Leistungsschwankungen oft nicht gerecht. Geschwindigkeitsbasiertes Krafttraining verspricht hier Abhilfe. Es ermöglicht eine relativ einfache Ermittlung der optimalen Trainingsparameter, verspricht gute Ergebnisse bei geringerer Ermüdung und lässt sich im Trainingsalltag leicht umsetzen.
Many studies have considered adaptation in the transition from a trained organ to an untrained organ (cross-training) and unilateral training, however, the transfer effect between upper and lower body training has received less attention. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the effect of upper and lower-body plyometric training on anthropometric, performance and upper-body electromyography activity in young athletes. Thirty-six male students were selected and divided into three groups: control,-upper body plyometric, and upper-lower body plyometric (mixed) training. Plyometric exercise protocol for four weeks three times a week included push-up plyometrics (4 sets/ 10 repetitions) performed by both groups. The mixed group also continued lower-body plyometric exercise (4 sets/ 10 repetitions on obstacles). At the beginning and end of the course, anthropometric tests (fat and fat-free mass) and functional (Wingate, overhead medicine ball throwing, and deadlift) were performed simultaneously with electromyography data evaluation. The physiological work did not change significantly in selected muscles (p >0.05) with the addition of lower body plyometric training. The median frequency in left and right pectoralis major muscles was significantly reduced in the mixed group compared to other groups (p <0.05). In addition, there was no difference in 1.
Resistance exercise is difficult to quantify owing to its inherent complexity with numerous training variables contributing to the training dose (type of exercise, load lifted, training volume, inter-set rest periods, and repetition velocity). In addition, the intensity of resistance training is often inadequately determined as the relative load lifted (% 1-repetition maximum), which does not account for the effects of inter-set recovery periods, repetition velocity, or the number of repetitions performed in each set at a given load. Methods to calculate the volume load associated with resistance training, as well as the perceived intensity of individual sets and entire training sessions have been shown to provide useful information regarding the actual training stimulus. In addition, questionnaires to subjectively assess how athletes are coping with the stressors of training and portable technologies to quantify performance variables such as concentric velocity may also be valuable. However, while several methods have been proposed to quantify resistance training, there is not yet a consensus regarding how these methods can be best implemented and integrated to complement each other. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to provide practical information for strength coaches to highlight effective methods to assess resistance training, and how they can be integrated into a comprehensive monitoring program.
Objective. To compare resistance bouts performed to failure atlow (60% 1RM) and high (90% 1RM) workloads for acute rate of perceived exertion (RPE) (per exercise), session RPE (S-RPE) (30 min post), HR (per exercise) and total work (per session, and per exercise).Background. RPE is a convenient method for quantifying intensityin aerobic exercise. However, RPE has recently been extended to exercise modalities dominated by anaerobic pathways such as resistance training (RT). Method. Subjects (N=12) were assessed using an exercise-specific1 repetition maximum (1RM) for 6 exercises. On separate days in a counterbalanced order, subjects performed 3 sets of each exercise to volitional failure at a low intensity (LI) and a high intensity (HI) with 2 minutes rest between sets and exercises. At the end of each set, subjects estimated acute RPE for that set using a 10-point numerical scale. Thirty minutes after the end of the exercise session subjects estimated their S-RPE for the entire workout. HR, total work, and acute RPE were compared (HI v. LI) using repeated measures ANOVA.Results. A paired samples t-test showed LI was significantly higher(p=0.039) than HI for session RPE (LI=8.8±0.8, HI=6.3±1.2) andtotal work (LI=17461±4419, HI=8659±2256) (p=0.043). Per exercise,total work and acute RPE were significantly greater (p=0.01) for LI for all exercises. Peak HR was significantly higher per exercise during LI for leg press (p=0.041), bench press (p=0.031), lat pull-down (p=0.037) and shoulder press (p=0.046).
The primary aim of this study was to compare rating of perceived exertion (RPE) values measuring repetitions in reserve (RIR) at particular intensities of 1RM in experienced (ES) and novice squatters (NS). Further, this investigation compared average velocity between ES and NS at the same intensities. Twenty-nine individuals (24.0±3.4yrs.) performed a one-repetition maximum (1RM) squat followed by a single repetition with loads corresponding to 60, 75, and 90% of 1RM and an 8-repetition set at 70% 1RM. Average velocity was recorded at 60, 75, and 90% 1RM and on the first and last repetitions of the 8-repetition set. Subjects reported an RPE value that corresponded to an RIR value (RPE-10 = 0-RIR, RPE-9 = 1-RIR, and so forth). Subjects were assigned to one of two groups: 1) ES (n=15, training age: 5.2±3.5yrs.), 2) NS (n=14, training age: 0.4±0.6yrs.). The mean of the average velocities for ES were slower (P<0.05) than NS at 100% and 90% 1RM. However, there were no differences (P>0.05) between groups at 60%, 75%, or for the 1st and 8th repetitions at 70% 1RM. Additionally, ES recorded greater RPE at 1RM than NS (P=0.023). In ES there was a strong inverse relationship between average velocity and RPE at all percentages (r= -0.88, P<0.001), and a strong inverse correlation in NS between average velocity and RPE at all intensities (r=-0.77,P=0.001). Our findings demonstrate an inverse relationship between average velocity and RPE/RIR. ES exhibited slower average velocity and higher RPE at 1RM than NS, signaling greater efficiency at high intensities. The RIR-based RPE scale is a practical method to regulate daily training load and provide feedback during a 1RM test.
Strength training is a critical exercise stimulus for inducing changes in muscular strength, size and power (6). Recently, linear position transducers have gained in popularity as a means to monitor velocity in strength training exercises. The measurement error of such devices has been shown to be low and both relative and absolute reliability have been shown to be acceptable (2, 7, 11). The purpose of this article is to provide the overview and benefits of monitoring movement velocity in strength training exercises, along with providing the basis for novel “velocity-based” strength training prescription. We have covered the following practical applications: Guidelines to develop a velocity/load profile for athletes; Using the velocity load/profile to predict and monitor changes to maximal strength; Using velocity monitoring to control fatigue effects of strength training; Using velocity monitoring as an immediate performance feedback to promote the highest level of effort in specific training exercises and stronger adaptive stimuli. Linear position transducers are reliable and valid tools to help strength and conditioning practitioners monitor and optimize their strength training programs.
Resistance exercise intensity is commonly prescribed as a percent of 1 repetition maximum (1RM). However, the relationship between percent 1RM and the number of repetitions allowed remains poorly studied, especially using free weight exercises. The purpose of this study was to determine the maximal number of repetitions that trained (T) and untrained (UT) men can perform during free weight exercises at various percentages of 1RM. Eight T and 8 UT men were tested for 1RM strength. Then, subjects performed 1 set to failure at 60, 80, and 90% of 1RM in the back squat, bench press, and arm curl in a randomized, balanced design. There was a significant (p < 0.05) intensity x exercise interaction. More repetitions were performed during the back squat than the bench press or arm curl at 60% 1RM for T and UT. At 80 and 90% 1RM, there were significant differences between the back squat and other exercises; however, differences were much less pronounced. No differences in number of repetitions performed at a given exercise intensity were noted between T and UT (except during bench press at 90% 1RM). In conclusion, the number of repetitions performed at a given percent of 1RM is influenced by the amount of muscle mass used during the exercise, as more repetitions can be performed during the back squat than either the bench press or arm curl. Training status of the individual has a minimal impact on the number of repetitions performed at relative exercise intensity.
Abstract In this study, we examined the validity of a novel subjective scale for assessing resistance-exercise effort. Seventeen male bodybuilders performed five sets of 10 repetitions at 70% of one-repetition maximum, for the bench press and squat. At the completion of each set, participants quantified their effort via the rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and novel estimated-repetitions-to-failure scales, and continued repetitions to volitional exhaustion to determine actual-repetitions-to-failure. There were high correlations between estimated- and actual-repetitions-to-failure across sets for the bench press and squat (r ≥ 0.93; P < 0.05). During sets 3, 4, and 5, estimated-repetitions-to-failure predicted the number of repetitions to failure for the bench press and squat, as indicated by smaller effect sizes for differences (ES = 0.37-0.0). The estimated-repetitions-to-failure scale was reliable as indicated by high intraclass correlation coefficients (≥0.92) and narrow 95% limits of agreement (≤0.63 repetitions) for both the bench press and squat. Despite high correlations between RPE and actual-repetitions-to-failure (P < 0.05), RPE at volitional fatigue was less than maximal for both exercises. Our results suggest that the estimated-repetitions-to-failure scale is valid for predicting onset of muscular failure, and can be used for the assessment and prescription of resistance exercise.
This study aimed to analyze the acute mechanical and metabolic response to resistance exercise protocols (REP) differing in the number of repetitions (R) performed in each set (S) with respect to the maximum predicted number (P).
Over 21 exercise sessions separated by 48-72 h, 18 strength-trained males (10 in bench press (BP) and 8 in squat (SQ)) performed 1) a progressive test for one-repetition maximum (1RM) and load-velocity profile determination, 2) tests of maximal number of repetitions to failure (12RM, 10RM, 8RM, 6RM, and 4RM), and 3) 15 REP (S × R[P]: 3 × 6[12], 3 × 8[12], 3 × 10[12], 3 × 12[12], 3 × 6[10], 3 × 8[10], 3 × 10[10], 3 × 4[8], 3 × 6[8], 3 × 8[8], 3 × 3[6], 3 × 4[6], 3 × 6[6], 3 × 2[4], 3 × 4[4]), with 5-min interset rests. Kinematic data were registered by a linear velocity transducer. Blood lactate and ammonia were measured before and after exercise.
Mean repetition velocity loss after three sets, loss of velocity pre-post exercise against the 1-m·s load, and countermovement jump height loss (SQ group) were significant for all REP and were highly correlated to each other (r = 0.91-0.97). Velocity loss was significantly greater for BP compared with SQ and strongly correlated to peak postexercise lactate (r = 0.93-0.97) for both SQ and BP. Unlike lactate, ammonia showed a curvilinear response to loss of velocity, only increasing above resting levels when R was at least two repetitions higher than 50% of P.
Velocity loss and metabolic stress clearly differs when manipulating the number of repetitions actually performed in each training set. The high correlations found between mechanical (velocity and countermovement jump height losses) and metabolic (lactate, ammonia) measures of fatigue support the validity of using velocity loss to objectively quantify neuromuscular fatigue during resistance training.