Search

This study aimed to elucidate whether ballistic, maximal strength and strength-endurance performances are affected by the sex of the evaluator. Sixteen young male handball players attended two testing sessions that only differed in the sex of the evaluators (2 women vs. 2 men). The two sessions were performed in a counterbalanced order. Ballistic performance (countermovement jump height and throwing velocity), maximal strength performance (squat and bench press [BP] one-repetition maximum [1RM]), and strength-endurance performance (number of repetitions-to-failure in BP and average velocity of the set in the squat) were assessed in both sessions. BP 1RM was greater in the presence of women evaluators (p = 0.036, ES = 0.09), whereas no differences were observed for the remaining variables (p ≥ 0.254, ES ≤ 0.19). Low correlations (r median [range] = -0.074 [-0.693, 0.326]) were observed between the different performance tests for the percent differences between both testing sessions. The sex of the evaluators has minimal influence on a number of physical traits in young male handball players when they are tested in the presence of other members of the team, while the low correlations indicate that a higher performance in one test under the presence of women does not imply a higher performance under the presence of women in other performance tests.

This study aimed to evaluate the between-session reliability of single-leg performance and asymmetry variables during unilateral and bilateral countermovement jumps (CMJ). Twenty-three basketball players completed two identical sessions which consisted of four unilateral CMJs (two with each leg) and two bilateral CMJs. Mean and peak values of force, velocity and power, impulse, and jump height were obtained separately for each leg using a dual force platform. All performance variables presented an acceptable reliability (CVrange = 4.05-9.98%) with the exceptions of jump height for the unilateral CMJs and mean power, peak velocity, peak power, and impulse for the left leg during the bilateral CMJ (CV≥11.0%). Nine out of 14 variables were obtained with higher reliability during the unilateral CMJ (CVratio≥1.16), and 4 out of 14 during the bilateral CMJ (CVratio≥1.32). Asymmetry variables always showed an unacceptable reliability (ICCrange = 0.15-0.64) and poor/slight levels of agreement in direction (Kapparange = -0.10 to 0.15) for the unilateral CMJ, while an acceptable reliability (ICCrange = 0.74-0.77) and substantial levels of agreement in direction (Kapparange = 0.65 to 0.74) were generally obtained for the bilateral CMJ. These results suggest that single-leg performance can be obtained with higher reliability during the unilateral CMJ, while the bilateral CMJ provides more consistent measures of inter-limb asymmetries.

This aims of this study were (I) to determine the velocity variable and regression model which best fit the load-velocity relationship during the free-weight prone bench pull exercise, (II) to compare the reliability of the velocity attained at each percentage of the one-repetition maximum (1RM) between different velocity variables and regression models, and (III) to compare the within- and between-subject variability of the velocity attained at each %1RM. Eighteen men (14 rowers and four weightlifters) performed an incremental test during the free-weight prone bench pull exercise in two different sessions. General and individual load-velocity relationships were modelled through three velocity variables (mean velocity [MV], mean propulsive velocity [MPV] and peak velocity [PV]) and two regression models (linear and second-order polynomial). The main findings revealed that (I) the general (Pearson's correlation coefficient [r] range = 0.964-0.973) and individual (median r = 0.986 for MV, 0.989 for MPV, and 0.984 for PV) load-velocity relationships were highly linear, (II) the reliability of the velocity attained at each %1RM did not meaningfully differ between the velocity variables (coefficient of variation [CV] range = 2.55-7.61% for MV, 2.84-7.72% for MPV and 3.50-6.03% for PV) neither between the regression models (CV range = 2.55-7.72% and 2.73-5.25% for the linear and polynomial regressions, respectively), and (III) the within-subject variability of the velocity attained at each %1RM was lower than the between-subject variability for the light-moderate loads. No meaningful differences between the within- and between-subject CVs were observed for the MV of the 1RM trial (6.02% vs. 6.60%; CVratio = 1.10), while the within-subject CV was lower for PV (6.36% vs. 7.56%; CVratio = 1.19). These results suggest that the individual load-MV relationship should be determined with a linear regression model to obtain the most accurate prescription of the relative load during the free-weight prone bench pull exercise.