Suppr超能文献

竞技力量举运动员中平板卧推和上斜卧推在 1 次最大重复重量和负荷-速度曲线方面的差异。

Differences in the one-repetition maximum and load-velocity profile between the flat and arched bench press in competitive powerlifters.

机构信息

Department of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Granada , Granada, Spain.

Department of Sports Sciences and Physical Conditioning, Faculty of Education, CIEDE, Catholic University of the Most Holy Concepción , Concepción, Chile.

出版信息

Sports Biomech. 2021 Apr;20(3):261-273. doi: 10.1080/14763141.2018.1544662. Epub 2018 Dec 11.

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the one-repetition maximum (1RM) and the velocity outcomes obtained against the same absolute and relative (%1RM) loads between the flat and arched bench press (BP) variants. Eleven competitive male powerlifters were evaluated in one session with the flat BP (natural lumbar arch and moderate scapular retraction) and in another session with the arched BP (pronounced lumbar arch and scapular retraction). An incremental loading test was used to determine the 1RM as well as the barbell's velocity against the different external loads. The main findings revealed that the 1RM did not significantly differ between the flat (115.9 ± 17.9 kg) and arched (115.7 ± 18.4 kg) BP variants ( = 0.942, effect size = 0.01), while there were no significant differences between BP variants either for the velocity outcomes obtained against the individual loads nor for the velocities associated with each %1RM ( > 0.05). These results suggest that competitive powerlifters do not necessarily present their higher 1RM performance using the arched BP variant. Finally, both BP variants could be used interchangeably when using movement velocity for testing upper-body strength as well as for prescribing the load during velocity-based resistance training routines.

摘要

本研究旨在比较在平坦和拱形卧推(BP)变体下,相同绝对和相对(%1RM)负荷下的 1 次重复最大重量(1RM)和速度结果。11 名有竞争力的男性力量举重运动员在一次会议中评估了平坦 BP(自然腰椎拱和适度肩胛回缩),在另一次会议中评估了拱形 BP(明显腰椎拱和肩胛回缩)。使用递增负荷测试确定 1RM 以及杠铃在不同外部负荷下的速度。主要发现表明,1RM 在平坦(115.9 ± 17.9 公斤)和拱形(115.7 ± 18.4 公斤)BP 变体之间没有显著差异( = 0.942,效应量 = 0.01),而 BP 变体之间在针对个体负荷获得的速度结果或与每个 %1RM 相关的速度方面也没有显著差异( > 0.05)。这些结果表明,竞技力量举重运动员不一定使用拱形 BP 变体来表现出更高的 1RM 表现。最后,当使用运动速度测试上半身力量以及在基于速度的阻力训练例程中规定负荷时,可以交替使用这两种 BP 变体。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验