Search

Objective: To explore (1) the goodness of fit of generalized and individualized relationships between the maximum number of repetitions performed to failure (RTF) and the fastest mean velocity and peak velocity of the sets (RTF–velocity relationships), (2) the between-sessions reliability of mean velocity and peak velocity values associated with different RTFs, and (3) whether the errors in the prediction of the RTF under fatigued and nonfatigued conditions differ between generalized and individualized RTF–velocity relationships. Methods: Twenty-three sport-science students performed 4 testing sessions with the prone bench pull exercise in a Smith machine: a 1-repetition-maximum [1RM] session, 2 identical sessions consisting of singles sets of RTF against 4 randomized loads (60%–70%–80%–90%1RM), and 1 session consisting of 4 sets of RTF against the 75%1RM. Results: Individualized RTF–velocity relationships presented a higher goodness of fit (r2 = .96–.97 vs .67–.70) and accuracy (absolute errors = 2.1–2.9 repetitions vs 2.8–4.3 repetitions) in the prediction of the RTF than generalized RTF–velocity relationships. The reliability of the velocity values associated with different RTFs was generally high (average within-subject coefficient of variation = 4.01% for mean velocity and 3.98% for peak velocity). The error in the prediction of the RTF increased by ~1 repetition under fatigue (ie, set 1 vs sets 2–4). Conclusions: Individualized RTF–velocity relationships can be used with acceptable precision and reliability to prescribe the loads associated with a given RTF during the match a specific XRM during the prone bench pull exercise, but a lower accuracy is expected in a fatigued state.

We would like to thank all the subjects who selflessly participated in the study. This study was funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (PID2019-110074GB-I00/SRA (State Research Agency)/10.13039/501100011033) and by the grants 451-03-68/2020-14/200015, 451-03-68/2020-14/200021 from the Ministry of education, science, and technological development of Republic of Serbia. The experiments comply with the current laws of the country in which they were performed. The authors have no conflict of interest to declare. The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available, but are available from the corresponding author who was an organizer of the study., This study aimed to compare the between-session reliability of performance and asymmetry variables between unilateral and bilateral standing broad jumps (SBJ). Twenty-four amateur basketball players (12 males and females) completed two identical sessions which consisted of four unilateral SBJs (two with each leg) and two bilateral SBJs. Mean and peak values of force, velocity and power, and impulse were obtained separately for each leg using a dual force platform. Inter-limb asymmetries were computed using the standard percentage difference for the unilateral SBJ, and the bilateral asymmetry index-1 for the bilateral SBJ. All performance variables generally presented an acceptable absolute reliability for both SBJs (CV range = 3.65-9.81%) with some exceptions for mean force, mean power, and peak power obtained with both legs (CV range = 10.00-15.46%). Three out of 14 variables were obtained with higher reliability during the unilateral SBJ (CVratio >= 1.18), and 5 out of 14 during the bilateral SBJ (CVratio >= 1.27). Asymmetry variables always showed unacceptable reliability (ICCrange = -0.40 to 0.58), and slight to fair levels of agreement in their direction (Kappa range = -0.12 to 0.40) except for unilateral SBJ peak velocity [Kappa = 0.52] and bilateral SBJ peak power [Kappa = 0.51]) that showed moderate agreement for both SBJs. These results highlight that single-leg performance variables can be generally obtained with acceptable reliability regardless of the SBJ variant, but the reliability of the inter-limb asymmetries in the conditions examined in the present study is unacceptable to track individual changes in performance., Spanish Government PID2019-110074GB-I00/SRA, Ministry of education, science, and technological development of Republic of Serbia 451-03-68/2020-14/200015 451-03-68/2020-14/200021

Ocular physiology is sensitive to cognitively demanding tasks. However, it is unknown whether the intraocular pressure is also affected by the cognitive demands of military operations. The main objective was to determine the impact of a virtual reality shooting simulation with two levels of complexity on intraocular pressure levels in military personnel. Eighteen active-duty members of the Spanish Army and eighteen civilians performed two 4 min simulated shooting tasks with two levels of complexity using a virtual reality. In the “easy” task participants performed a simulated shoot when the stimulus (military with a rifle) appeared, while in the “difficult” task the stimulus randomly was a military with a rifle or with his hands on the air and participants were instructed to respond only when the military with a rifle appeared. Intraocular pressure was measured with a rebound tonometer before and immediately after each task. Complementarily, perceived levels of mental load and shooting performance (reaction time) were assessed. Intraocular pressure was greater after completing the more complex task in both military personnel (p-value < 0.01, Cohen´s d = 1.19) and civilians (p-value < 0.01, Cohen´s d = 1.16). Also, perceived levels of task load and reaction time were higher in the difficult compared to the easy shooting tasks (both p < 0.001). The rise in intraocular pressure is positively associated with the cognitive demands of simulated military operations. The potential application of this finding is the development of objective tools based on intraocular pressure for the evaluation of the mental state in real-world contexts, permitting to improve soldiers´safety and performance., CEMIX (Centro Mixto UGR-MADOC, Army of Spain) 5/4/20 TR-COMBATE

Jiménez-Alonso, A, García-Ramos, A, Cepero, M, Miras-Moreno, S, Rojas, FJ, and Pérez-Castilla, A. Effect of augmented feedback on velocity performance during strength-oriented and power-oriented resistance training sessions. J Strength Cond Res 36(6): 1511-1517, 2022-This study examined the effects of providing instantaneous velocity feedback (knowledge of results [KR]) on velocity maintenance across multiple sets during strength-oriented and power-oriented resistance training (RT) sessions. Seventeen men completed 2 strength-oriented RT sessions (4 sets of 5 repetitions at 75% of 1 repetition maximum [1RM] during the back squat [SQ] and bench press [BP] exercises) in 1 week and 2 power-oriented RT sessions (4 sets of 5 repetitions at 30% of 1RM during the countermovement jump [CMJ] and BP throw [BPT] exercises) in another week. Subjects received verbal velocity performance feedback in 1 session (KR) and no KR was provided in another session. Greater velocities during the 4 sets of both strength-oriented (from 4.6 to 11.6%) and power-oriented (from 1.4 to 3.5%) RT sessions were observed. The increments in velocity performance during the KR condition were greater for the CMJ (2.25 ± 0.14 vs. 2.18 ± 0.17 m·s-1; 3.0%) than the BPT (2.33 ± 0.13 vs. 2.29 ± 0.16 m·s-1; 1.7%) and similarly for the SQ (0.59 ± 0.07 vs. 0.55 ± 0.06 m·s-1; 7.5%) and BP (0.47 ± 0.09 vs. 0.44 ± 0.07 m·s-1; 7.8%). The raw differences in the RT velocity for BPT were positively correlated with the raw differences in the RT velocity for SQ (r = 0.524; p = 0.031) and CMJ (r = 0.662; p = 0.004), but the remaining correlations did not reach a statistical significance (r ≤ 0.370; p ≥ 0.123). Although these results support the provision of velocity performance feedback to increase training quality regardless of the type of RT session, the positive effect of KR seems to be more accentuated during strength-oriented compared with power-oriented RT sessions.

This study explored the impact of different frequencies of knowledge of results (KR) on velocity performance during ballistic training. Fifteen males completed four identical sessions (three sets of six repetitions at 30% one-repetition maximum during the countermovement jump and bench press throw) with the only difference of the KR condition provided: no feedback, velocity feedback after the first half of repetitions of each set (HalfKR), velocity feedback immediately after each repetition (ImKR), and feedback of the average velocity of each set (AvgKR). When compared with the control condition, the ImKR reported the highest velocity performance (1.9–5.3%), followed by the HalfKR (1.3–3.6%) and AvgKR (0.7–4.3%). These results support the verbal provision of velocity performance feedback after every repetition to induce acute improvements in velocity performance.

Jiménez-Alonso, A, García-Ramos, A, Cepero, M, Miras-Moreno, S, Rojas, FJ, and Pérez-Castilla, A. Velocity performance feedback during the free-weight bench press testing procedure: An effective strategy to increase the reliability and one repetition maximum accuracy prediction. J Strength Cond Res 36(4): 1077-1083, 2022-This study aimed to determine whether the verbal provision of velocity performance feedback during the free-weight bench press (BP) exercise influences (a) the within-session reliability and magnitude of mean concentric velocity (MCV) values recorded against a range of submaximal loads and (b) the accuracy of the individualized load-velocity profile to estimate the BP 1 repetition maximum (1RM). Fifteen men (BP 1RM relative to body mass = 1.08 ± 0.22) performed an incremental loading test until reaching the 1RM on 2 separate sessions. Subjects received verbal velocity performance feedback in 1 session (knowledge of results [KR]), and no KR was provided in another session (Control). A linear velocity transducer was used to collect the MCV against 4 loads (40-55-70-85% 1RM), and the BP 1RM was estimated from the individualized load-velocity relationship modeled through the multiple-point (40-55-70-85% 1RM) and 2-point methods (40-85% 1RM). The KR condition provided a higher reliability (coefficient of variation [CV]: KR = 2.41%, Control = 3.54%; CV ratio = 1.47) and magnitude (p = 0.001; effect size [ES] = 0.78) of MCV for the 40% 1RM, but no significant differences in reliability (CV ratio ≤1.15) nor in the magnitude (p ≥ 0.058; ES range = 0.00-0.32) were observed for higher loads. The accuracy in the estimation of the 1RM was higher for the KR (absolute errors: multiple-point = 3.1 ± 2.3 kg; 2-point = 3.5 ± 2.1 kg) compared with the Control condition (absolute errors: 4.1 ± 1.9 kg for both multiple-point and 2-point methods). These results encourage the provision of verbal velocity performance feedback during BP testing procedures.