Advanced Search

Home > Journals > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness > Past Issues > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2001 March;41(1) > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2001 March;41(1):39-45



A Journal on Applied Physiology, Biomechanics, Preventive Medicine,
Sports Medicine and Traumatology, Sports Psychology

Indexed/Abstracted in: Chemical Abstracts, CINAHL, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 1,111

Frequency: Monthly

ISSN 0022-4707

Online ISSN 1827-1928


The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2001 March;41(1):39-45

    Original articles

Multiple-joint velocity-spectrum strength/power development consequent to repetition manipulation

Weiss L. W., Relyea G. E. *

From the Mus­cu­los­kel­etal ­Dynamics Labor­a­tory
* Sta­tis­tical Ser­vices, The Uni­ver­sity of Mem­phis, Mem­phis, TN, USA

Back­ground. Var­ious rep­e­ti­tion strat­e­gies are ­employed in typ­ical ­weight-­training pro­grams. ­Strength is pur­port­edly ­best devel­oped ­using rel­a­tively few rep­e­ti­tions ­against ­great resis­tance. ­Strength in ­this con­text has typ­i­cally ­been meas­ured iso­ton­i­cally (­dynamic con­stant ­external resis­tance or ­DCER) by per­forming a one-rep­e­ti­tion max­imum (1 RM). Mul­tiple-­joint iso­ki­netic (­velocity con­trolled) ­strength assess­ments are now avail­able ­which may ­enable us to emu­late move­ment pat­terns and veloc­ities ­with ­those occur­ring in ­everyday activ­ities ­while pro­viding us ­with ­force and ­power infor­ma­tion ­that here­to­fore has ­been dif­fi­cult to ­obtain. There­fore, we ­assessed the ­effects of var­ious rep­e­ti­tion ­schemes ­during ­heavy-resis­tance ­training on mul­tiple-­joint iso­ki­netic per­for­mance.
­Methods. Set­ting: vol­un­teers par­tic­i­pated in 12 ­weeks (36 ses­sions) of var­i­able-resis­tance ­weight ­training (8 dif­ferent exer­cises) in one of the fol­lowing pro­grams: I-3 ­sets x 3-4 RM; II-3 x 9-10 RM; III-3 x 15-16 RM; IV, con­trol. Par­tic­i­pants: 48 appar­ently-­healthy ­young men (18 to 34 ­years of age, ×−= 23.2) who had not par­tic­i­pated in system­atic ­heavy-resis­tance ­training ­during the pre­vious ­year. Meas­ures: pre and ­post ­velocity-spec­trum ­tests ­were con­ducted for ­both the ­squat (0.41, 0.65, 0.90, 1.14, and 1.39 m·s-1) and ­bench ­press (0.50, 0.79, 1.09, 1.39 and 1.69 m·s-1) at ­which ­time ­peak ­force and ­peak ­power ­were meas­ured. ­Force and ­power meas­ure­ments ­were ­adjusted to con­trol for ­body ­weight (N/kg and W/kg, respec­tively). ­Change (­delta) ­scores ­were ­used for com­par­i­sons.
­Results. One-way ­ANOVA’s indi­cated ­that ­when com­pared to con­trols, improve­ments in ­force ­were significantly (p<0.05) ­greater ­only at the ­slowest ­velocity (­squats: ­Group II > Con­trol; ­bench ­presses: ­Groups I, II, III > Con­trol). How­ever, ­changes in ­power ­were significantly (p<0.05) ­greater ­than for con­trols at all 5 veloc­ities ­tested (­squats: ­Groups I, II > Con­trol; ­bench ­presses: ­Groups I, II > Con­trol ­except at 1.69 m·sec-1) ­where ­only ­Group I > Con­trol).
Con­clu­sions. Due to the ­mixed find­ings for ­force improve­ments con­se­quent to the var­ious rep­e­ti­tion ­schemes, con­clu­sions are some­what ten­ta­tive. It ­appears, how­ever, ­that ­strength ­increases ­only for ­slow veloc­ities in ­young, pre­vi­ously ­untrained men con­se­quent to 3 ­months of a rel­a­tively ­wide ­range of RM ­schemes ­using var­i­able-resis­tance equip­ment. ­Power, on the ­other ­hand, ­appears to ­increase in the ­same sub­jects ­across a ­velocity spec­trum for ­both ­squats and ­bench ­presses ­when no more than 10 RM are per­formed per set.

language: English


top of page