VALIDITY OF A COMMERCIAL LINEAR ENCODER TO ESTIMATE BENCH PRESS 1 RM FROM THE FORCE-VELOCITY RELATIONSHIP

The aim of this study was to assess the validity and accuracy of a commercial linear encoder (Musclelab, Ergotest, Norway) to estimate Bench press 1 repetition maximum (1RM) from the force - velocity relationship. Twenty seven physical education students and teachers (5 women and 22 men) with a hete...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Laurent Bosquet, Jeremy Porta-Benache, Jérôme Blais
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Uludag 2010-09-01
Series:Journal of Sports Science and Medicine
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.jssm.org/vol9/n3/15/v9n3-15text.php
id doaj-50f910ee72a248c38da8a707c5d099d6
record_format Article
spelling doaj-50f910ee72a248c38da8a707c5d099d62020-11-24T23:44:04ZengUniversity of UludagJournal of Sports Science and Medicine1303-29682010-09-0193459463VALIDITY OF A COMMERCIAL LINEAR ENCODER TO ESTIMATE BENCH PRESS 1 RM FROM THE FORCE-VELOCITY RELATIONSHIPLaurent BosquetJeremy Porta-BenacheJérôme BlaisThe aim of this study was to assess the validity and accuracy of a commercial linear encoder (Musclelab, Ergotest, Norway) to estimate Bench press 1 repetition maximum (1RM) from the force - velocity relationship. Twenty seven physical education students and teachers (5 women and 22 men) with a heterogeneous history of strength training participated in this study. They performed a 1 RM test and a force - velocity test using a Bench press lifting task in a random order. Mean 1 RM was 61.8 ± 15.3 kg (range: 34 to 100 kg), while 1 RM estimated by the Musclelab's software from the force-velocity relationship was 56.4 ± 14.0 kg (range: 33 to 91 kg). Actual and estimated 1 RM were very highly correlated (r = 0.93, p<0.001) but largely different (Bias: 5.4 ± 5.7 kg, p < 0.001, ES = 1.37). The 95% limits of agreement were ±11.2 kg, which represented ±18% of actual 1 RM. It was concluded that 1 RM estimated from the force-velocity relationship was a good measure for monitoring training induced adaptations, but also that it was not accurate enough to prescribe training intensities. Additional studies are required to determine whether accuracy is affected by age, sex or initial level. http://www.jssm.org/vol9/n3/15/v9n3-15text.phpMuscle strength diagnosisperformance predictioninnovative technology
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Laurent Bosquet
Jeremy Porta-Benache
Jérôme Blais
spellingShingle Laurent Bosquet
Jeremy Porta-Benache
Jérôme Blais
VALIDITY OF A COMMERCIAL LINEAR ENCODER TO ESTIMATE BENCH PRESS 1 RM FROM THE FORCE-VELOCITY RELATIONSHIP
Journal of Sports Science and Medicine
Muscle strength diagnosis
performance prediction
innovative technology
author_facet Laurent Bosquet
Jeremy Porta-Benache
Jérôme Blais
author_sort Laurent Bosquet
title VALIDITY OF A COMMERCIAL LINEAR ENCODER TO ESTIMATE BENCH PRESS 1 RM FROM THE FORCE-VELOCITY RELATIONSHIP
title_short VALIDITY OF A COMMERCIAL LINEAR ENCODER TO ESTIMATE BENCH PRESS 1 RM FROM THE FORCE-VELOCITY RELATIONSHIP
title_full VALIDITY OF A COMMERCIAL LINEAR ENCODER TO ESTIMATE BENCH PRESS 1 RM FROM THE FORCE-VELOCITY RELATIONSHIP
title_fullStr VALIDITY OF A COMMERCIAL LINEAR ENCODER TO ESTIMATE BENCH PRESS 1 RM FROM THE FORCE-VELOCITY RELATIONSHIP
title_full_unstemmed VALIDITY OF A COMMERCIAL LINEAR ENCODER TO ESTIMATE BENCH PRESS 1 RM FROM THE FORCE-VELOCITY RELATIONSHIP
title_sort validity of a commercial linear encoder to estimate bench press 1 rm from the force-velocity relationship
publisher University of Uludag
series Journal of Sports Science and Medicine
issn 1303-2968
publishDate 2010-09-01
description The aim of this study was to assess the validity and accuracy of a commercial linear encoder (Musclelab, Ergotest, Norway) to estimate Bench press 1 repetition maximum (1RM) from the force - velocity relationship. Twenty seven physical education students and teachers (5 women and 22 men) with a heterogeneous history of strength training participated in this study. They performed a 1 RM test and a force - velocity test using a Bench press lifting task in a random order. Mean 1 RM was 61.8 ± 15.3 kg (range: 34 to 100 kg), while 1 RM estimated by the Musclelab's software from the force-velocity relationship was 56.4 ± 14.0 kg (range: 33 to 91 kg). Actual and estimated 1 RM were very highly correlated (r = 0.93, p<0.001) but largely different (Bias: 5.4 ± 5.7 kg, p < 0.001, ES = 1.37). The 95% limits of agreement were ±11.2 kg, which represented ±18% of actual 1 RM. It was concluded that 1 RM estimated from the force-velocity relationship was a good measure for monitoring training induced adaptations, but also that it was not accurate enough to prescribe training intensities. Additional studies are required to determine whether accuracy is affected by age, sex or initial level.
topic Muscle strength diagnosis
performance prediction
innovative technology
url http://www.jssm.org/vol9/n3/15/v9n3-15text.php
work_keys_str_mv AT laurentbosquet validityofacommerciallinearencodertoestimatebenchpress1rmfromtheforcevelocityrelationship
AT jeremyportabenache validityofacommerciallinearencodertoestimatebenchpress1rmfromtheforcevelocityrelationship
AT jeromeblais validityofacommerciallinearencodertoestimatebenchpress1rmfromtheforcevelocityrelationship
_version_ 1725500164127326208