Background There has been a surge of interest on velocity-based training (VBT) in recent years. However, it remains unclear whether VBT is more effective in improving strength, jump, linear sprint and change of direction speed (CODs) than the traditional 1RM percentage-based training (PBT). Objectives To compare the training effects in VBT vs. PBT upon strength, jump, linear sprint and CODs performance. Data sources Web of science, PubMed and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI). Study eligibility criteria The qualified studies for inclusion in the meta-analysis must have included a resistance training intervention that compared the effects of VBT and PBT on at least one measure of strength, jump, linear sprint and CODs with participants aged ≥16 yrs. and be written in English or Chinese. Methods The modified Pedro Scale was used to assess the risk of bias. Random-effects model was used to calculate the effects via the mean change and pre-SD (standard deviation). Mean difference (MD) or Standardized mean difference (SMD) was presented correspondently with 95% confidence interval (CI). Results Six studies met the inclusion criteria including a total of 124 participants aged 16 to 30 yrs. The differences of training effects between VBT and PBT were not significant in back squat 1RM (MD = 3.03kg; 95%CI: -3.55, 9.61; I2 = 0%) and load velocity 60%1RM (MD = 0.02m/s; 95%CI: -0.01,0.06; I2 = 0%), jump (SMD = 0.27; 95%CI: -0.15,0.7; I2 = 0%), linear sprint (MD = 0.01s; 95%CI: -0.06, 0.07; I2 = 0%), and CODs (SMD = 0.49; 95%CI: -0.14, 1.07; I2 = 0%). Conclusion Both VBT and PBT can enhance strength, jump, linear sprint and CODs performance effectively without significant group difference.
The aim of this study was to determine the optimal velocity loss (VL) threshold that maximises the post activation potentiation (PAP) stimulus for achieving larger and more consistent performance gains in track and field athletes. Twenty-two athletes from athletics participated in four back squat PAP tests with four different VL threshold (5%, 10%, 15% and 20% VL) at an intensity of 85%1RM. Countermovement jump (CMJ) height, power, and momentum were assessed before, and 10 s, 4, 8, 12, 16 minutes after the PAP condition. Repetitions of the squat in all the PAP conditions were also recorded. Only the 5% VL condition produced significant improvements in height (ES = 0.73, P = 0.038), peak power output (ES = 0.73, P = 0.038) and momentum (ES = 0.72, P = 0.041) of CMJ, and these changes appeared 8 minutes after the condition. The total number of repetitions during the 5% VL condition was significantly lower than that observed in the 15% (P = 0.003) and 20% VL (P < 0.001) trials. The results from this study indicate that 5%VL during the 2 sets preconditioning squat at 85%1RM was optimal for eliciting PAP in a CMJ exercise, and resulted in significant increases at the 8-min recovery period. The same squat condition also had the least number of repetitions. However, considering the efficiency in practice, athletes can also choose the rest time of 4-min, which can also achieve similar results.
This study investigated the grouped and individualized load-velocity profile (GLVP vs. ILVP) in Bulgarian split squat using Smith machine and free weight. Seventy five recreational male lifters completed two incremental loading tests of Bulgarian split squat. Mean velocity was measured by a linear-position transducer (GymAware). Linear regression equation was applied to construct the GLVP and ILVP. The agreement of predicted %1RM and measured %1RM was assessed by a combination of intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), coefficient of variation (CV), standard error of measurement (SEM) and Bland-Altman analysis. Acceptable validity was defined as ICC > 0.75, CV ≤ 10% and p ≥ 0.05 (a paired Wilcoxon signed-rank test). A very high level of inverse load-velocity relationships were demonstrated in Bulgarian split squat (r = − 0.92) with free weights and a Smith machine. ILVP (ICC ≥ 0.98, CV ≤ 8.73%, p ≥ 0.56) was valid enough to predict the %1RM, but GLVP of both limbs revealed large CVs in free weights (CV: 15.4%,15.63%) and a Smith machine (CV: 11.24%, 12.25%). Cross-validation between the actual %1RM and predicted %1RM using free weights and a Smith machine ILVP was not acceptable (p ≤ 0.03, CV ≥ 14.07%). A very high level of inverse relationship were observed between %1RM and MV in Bulgarian split squat using free weights and a Smith machine, indicating individualized load velocity properties, and the ILVP showed high between-devices variability in both scenarios. Using velocity as a measure of loading intensity in Bulgarian split squat needs to consider the individualized load velocity properties, and difference between free weights and a Smith machine.
PurposeThe aim of this study was to investigate the physiological and perceptional responses to forward, forward-backward, and lateral shuttle running.MethodsTwenty-four eligible male subjects performed a maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) test and three directional modes (i.e., forward, forward-backward, and lateral) of 5-m shuttle running at the speed of 6 km⋅h–1 for 5 min on separate days. Heart rate (HR) and oxygen uptake (VO2) were continuously measured during the whole tests. Rating of perceived exertion (RPE) was inquired and recorded immediately after the test. Capillary blood samples were collected from the earlobe during the recovery to determine the peak value of blood lactate concentration ([La–]peak).ResultsRunning directional mode had significant effects on HR (F = 72.761, P < 0.001, η2p = 0.760), %HRmax (F = 75.896, P < 0.001, η2p = 0.767), VO2 (F = 110.320, P < 0.001, η2p = 0.827), %VO2max (F = 108.883, P < 0.001, η2p = 0.826), [La–]peak (F = 55.529, P < 0.001, η2p = 0.707), and RPE (F = 26.268, P < 0.001, η2p = 0.533). All variables were significantly different between conditions (P ≤ 0.026), with the variables highest in lateral shuttle running and lowest in forward shuttle running. The effect sizes indicated large magnitude in the differences of all variables between conditions (ES = 0.86–2.83, large) except the difference of RPE between forward and forward-backward shuttle running (ES = 0.62, moderate).ConclusionThese findings suggest that the physiological and perceptional responses in shuttle running at the same speed depend on the directional mode, with the responses highest in lateral shuttle running, and lowest in forward shuttle running.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.