Effect of Multiple-Load Training on the Force-Velocity Relationship

Toji, Hideki; Kaneko, Masahiro

doi:10.1519/00124278-200411000-00019

Cited by 9 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, the data can be used to design training programmes for these athletes based on optimal load (2,3,17,18,25,26,32,33,43), as well as knowing how PPO, VGRF and BV will be affected when training across a range of loads, as has been recommended by others (9,41,42). The analysis also demonstrated the value in using data interpolation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 techniques across this range to complete the profiles (16,23).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…training at a range of loads and velocities encountered during sports performance (9,41,42). For jump squats, an explosive triple-extension exercise that elicits high power outputs, loads ranging from body mass (BM) to as high as 80% of POWER, FORCE & VELOCITY DURING JUMP SQUATS 4 1-RM (2,4,9,17,25,30,31,37,39,40,43) have been identified as optimal for PPO, with an even greater range when Olympic lifts (15,27,28,31) and upper-body ballistic exercises are included (3,4).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Peak Power, Force, and Velocity During Jump Squats in Professional Rugby Players

Turner

Unholz

Potts

et al. 2012

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peak Power, Force, and Velocity During Jump Squats in Professional Rugby Players

Turner

Unholz

Potts

et al. 2012

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Testing of the force, velocity, and power during elbow flexion was performed using a Wilkie's arm ergometer (Toji and Kaneko, 2004). As shown in Figure 1, in a seated position, the subject placed his right upper arm on a table and flexed the elbow joint from 40°to 140°with maximum effort.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Aging on Force, Velocity, and Power in the Elbow Flexors of Males

Toji

Kaneko

2007

J Physiol Anthropol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of aging on muscular power development was investigated by determining the forcevelocity relationship. The muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) was estimated by the thickness of the elbow flexors. The subjects were 19 elderly males aged 69.1Ϯ3.7 years old (G-70 group), 15 middle-aged males aged 50.9Ϯ3.5 years old (G-50), and 19 young males aged 21.2Ϯ1.3 years old (G-20). The G-70 group had the slowest shortening velocities under various load conditions, resulting in the lowest force-velocity relationship. The maximum values for force (Fmax), velocity (Vmax), power (Pmax), dynamic constants (a, b), and the a/Fmax ratio were determined using Hill's equation. The a/Fmax ratio determines the degree of concavity in the forcevelocity curve. The a/Fmax ratio was greatest in G-70, followed by those in G-50 and G-20, while the maximum values for force (Fmax), velocity (Vmax), and power (Pmax) were significantly lower in G-70 than in the other groups. Fmax and Pmax per CSA were lowest in G-70, and Vmax per unit muscle length was also lowest in G-70 as compared to the other age groups. The ratio of G-70/G-20 was greatest in Pmax (69.6%), followed by Fmax (75.3%) and Vmax (83.4%). However, there were no significant differences in CSA among the 3 age groups. Our findings suggest that muscle force and shortening velocity may decline gradually in the process of aging attributed to declining muscle function rather than CSA.

show abstract

“…This will change the load-power relationship and accordingly the external load that maximizes mechanical power. Previous studies showed load specificity in the adaptations observed on the force-velocity curve with the greatest increases observed at the portion of the curve with the loads used during training (6,19,23). However, different results were observed in relatively weak individuals (7).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Maximum Power Training Load Determination and Its Effects on Load-Power Relationship, Maximum Strength, and Vertical Jump Performance

Smilios

Sotiropoulos

Christou

et al. 2013

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the changes in maximum strength, vertical jump performance, and the load-velocity and load-power relationship after a resistance training period using a heavy load and an individual load that maximizes mechanical power output with and without including body mass in power calculations. Forty-three moderately trained men (age: 22.7 ± 2.5 years) were separated into 4 groups, 2 groups of maximum power, 1 where body mass was not included in the calculations of the load that maximizes mechanical power (Pmax - bw, n = 11) and another where body mass was included in the calculations (Pmax + bw, n = 9), a high load group (HL-90%, n = 12), and a control group (C, n = 11). The subjects performed 4-6 sets of jump squat and the repeated-jump exercises for 6 weeks. For the jump squat, the HL-90% group performed 3 repetitions at each set with a load of 90% of 1 repetition maximum (1RM), the Pmax - bw group 5 repetitions with loads 48-58% of 1RM and the Pmax + bw 8 repetitions with loads 20-37% of 1RM. For the repeated jump, all the groups performed 6 repetitions at each set. All training groups improved (p < 0.05) maximum strength in the semisquat exercise (HL-90%: 15.2 ± 7.1, Pmax - bw: 6.6 ± 4.7, Pmax + bw: 6.9 ± 7.1, and C: 0 ± 4.3%) and the HL-90% group presented higher values (p < 0.05) than the other groups did. All training groups improved similarly (p < 0.05) squat (HL-90%: 11.7 ± 7.9, Pmax - bw: 14.5 ± 11.8, Pmax + bw: 11.3 ± 7.9, and C: -2.2 ± 5.5%) and countermovement jump height (HL-90%: 8.6 ± 7.9, Pmax - bw: 10.9 ± 9.4, Pmax + bw: 8.8 ± 4.3, and C: 0.4 ± 6%). The HL-90% and the Pmax - bw group increased (p < 0.05) power output at loads of 20, 35, 50, 65, and 80% of 1RM and the Pmax + bw group at loads of 20 and 35% of 1RM. The inclusion or not of body mass to determine the load that maximizes mechanical power output affects the long-term adaptations differently in the load-power relationship. Thus, training load selection will depend on the required adaptations. However, the use of heavy loads causes greater overall neuromuscular adaptations in moderately trained individuals.

show abstract

Effect of Multiple-Load Training on the Force-Velocity Relationship

Cited by 9 publications

References 8 publications

Peak Power, Force, and Velocity During Jump Squats in Professional Rugby Players

Peak Power, Force, and Velocity During Jump Squats in Professional Rugby Players

Effects of Aging on Force, Velocity, and Power in the Elbow Flexors of Males

Maximum Power Training Load Determination and Its Effects on Load-Power Relationship, Maximum Strength, and Vertical Jump Performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About