残奥会举重中的力-速度关系：确定最大重复次数的两点法或多点法
Force-velocity relationship in Paralympic powerlifting: two or multiple-point methods to determine a maximum repetition.
作者信息
Aidar Felipe J, Brito Ciro José, de Matos Dihogo Gama, de Oliveira Levy Anthony S, de Souza Rapahel Fabrício, de Almeida-Neto Paulo Francisco, de Araújo Tinoco Cabral Breno Guilherme, Neiva Henrique P, Neto Frederico Ribeiro, Reis Victor Machado, Marinho Daniel A, Marques Mário C, Clemente Filipe Manuel, Nobari Hadi
机构信息
Department of Physical Education, Federal University of Sergipe (UFS), São Cristovão, 49100-000, Brazil.
Group of Studies and Research of Performance, Sport, Health and Paralympic Sports (GEPEPS), Federal University of Sergipe (UFS), São Cristovão, 49100-000, Brazil.
出版信息
BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2022 Aug 24;14(1):159. doi: 10.1186/s13102-022-00552-9.
BACKGROUND
Due to the absence of evidence in the literature on Paralympic Powerlifting the present study investigated various methods to assess bench press maximum repetition and the way each method influences the measurement of minimum velocity limit (MVT), load at zero velocity (LD0), and force-velocity (FV).
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the precision of the multi-point method using proximal loads (40, 50, 60, 70, 80, and 90% of one repetition maximum; 1RM) compared to the four-point method (50, 60, 70, and 80% of 1RM) and the two-point method using distant loads (40 and 80% and 50 and 80% of 1RM) in in the MVT, LD0, and FV, in bench press performed by Paralympic Powerlifters (PP).
METHODS
To accomplish this, 15 male elite PP athletes participated in the study (age: 27.7 ± 5.7 years; BM: 74.0 ± 19.5 kg). All participants performed an adapted bench press test (free weight) with 6 loads (40, 50, 60, 70, 80, and 90% 1RM), 4 loads (50, 60, 70, and 80% 1RM), and 2 loads (40-80% and 50-80% 1RM). The 1RM predictions were made by MVT, LD0, and FV.
RESULTS
The main results indicated that the multiple (4 and 6) pointsmethod provides good results in the MVT (R = 0.482), the LD0 (R = 0.614), and the FV (R = 0.508). The two-point method (50-80%) showed a higher mean in MVT [1268.2 ± 502.0 N; ICC95% 0.76 (0.31-0.92)], in LD0 [1504.1 ± 597.3 N; 0.63 (0.17-0.86)], and in FV [1479.2 ± 636.0 N; 0.60 (0.10-0.86)].
CONCLUSION
The multiple-point method (4 and 6 points) and the two-point method (40-80%) using the MVT, LD0, and FV all showed a good ability to predict bench press 1RM in PP.
背景
由于文献中缺乏关于残奥举重的证据，本研究调查了评估卧推最大重复次数的各种方法，以及每种方法对最小速度极限（MVT）、零速度负荷（LD0）和力 - 速度（FV）测量的影响。
目的
评估使用近端负荷（一次重复最大值的40%、50%、60%、70%、80%和90%；1RM）的多点法与四点法（1RM的50%、60%、70%和80%）以及使用远端负荷（1RM的40%和80%以及50%和80%）的两点法在残奥举重运动员（PP）进行卧推时对MVT、LD0和FV的预测精度。
方法
为此，15名男性精英PP运动员参与了该研究（年龄：27.7 ± 5.7岁；体重：74.0 ± 19.5千克）。所有参与者进行了一项适应性卧推测试（自由重量），使用6种负荷（40%、50%、60%、70%、80%和90% 1RM）、4种负荷（50%、60%、70%和80% 1RM）以及2种负荷（40 - 80%和50 - 80% 1RM）。通过MVT、LD0和FV对1RM进行预测。
结果
主要结果表明，多点法（4点和6点）在MVT（R = 0.482）、LD0（R = 0.614）和FV（R = 0.508）方面都能得出较好的结果。两点法（50 - 80%）在MVT [1268.2 ± 502.0 N；组内相关系数95% 0.76（0.31 - 0.92）]、LD0 [1504.1 ± 597.3 N；0.63（0.17 - 0.86）]和FV [1479.2 ± 636.0 N；0.60（0.10 - 0.86）]方面显示出更高的均值。
结论
使用MVT、LD0和FV的多点法（4点和6点）以及两点法（40 - 80%）在预测PP的卧推1RM方面都显示出良好的能力。
Zotero 插件