Kevser Ermin Applied Physiology Laboratory, Department of Health, Exercise Science, and Recreation Management, The University of Mississippi, 231 Turner Cente, University, MS, 38677, USA.
Sports Med. 2017 Feb;47(2):193-195. doi: 10.1007/s40279-016-0580-3.
Muscle strength is often measured through the performance of a one-repetition maximum (1RM). However, we that feel a true measurement of 'strength' remains elusive. For example, low-load alternatives to traditional resistance training result in muscle hypertrophic changes similar to those resulting from traditional high-load resistance training, with less robust changes observed with maximal strength measured by the 1RM. However, when strength is measured using a test to which both groups are 'naive', differences in strength become less apparent. We suggest that the 1RM is a specific skill, which will improve most when training incorporates its practice or when a lift is completed at a near-maximal load. Thus, if we only recognize increases in the 1RM as indicative of strength, we will overlook many effective and diverse alternatives to traditional high-load resistance training. We wish to suggest that multiple measurements of strength assessment be utilized in order to capture a more complete picture of the adaptation to resistance training.
肌肉力量通常通过一次最大重复次数(1RM)的表现来衡量。然而,我们认为真正的“力量”衡量标准仍然难以捉摸。例如,低负荷的传统抗阻训练替代方法会导致类似于传统高负荷抗阻训练的肌肉肥大变化,而使用 1RM 测量的最大力量则观察到变化不那么明显。然而,当使用两组都“不熟悉”的测试来测量力量时,力量的差异就不那么明显了。我们认为,1RM 是一种特定的技能,当训练中包含其练习或当举重接近最大负荷时,它会最有效地提高。因此,如果我们只将 1RM 的增加视为力量的指标,我们将忽略许多有效且多样化的传统高负荷抗阻训练的替代方法。我们希望建议使用多种力量评估测量方法,以更全面地了解对抗阻训练的适应。