↓ Skip to main content

Effect of Loading on Unintentional Lifting Velocity Declines During Single Sets of Repetitions to Failure During Upper and Lower Extremity Muscle Actions

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Sports Medicine, September 2006
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
155 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
395 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effect of Loading on Unintentional Lifting Velocity Declines During Single Sets of Repetitions to Failure During Upper and Lower Extremity Muscle Actions
Published in
International Journal of Sports Medicine, September 2006
DOI 10.1055/s-2005-872825
Pubmed ID
Authors

M. Izquierdo, J. González-Badillo, K. Häkkinen, J. Ibáñez, W. Kraemer, A. Altadill, J. Eslava, E. Gorostiaga

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of different loads on repetition speed during single sets of repetitions to failure in bench press and parallel squat. Thirty-six physical active men performed 1-repetition maximum in a bench press (1 RM (BP)) and half squat position (1 RM (HS)), and performed maximal power-output continuous repetition sets randomly every 10 days until failure with a submaximal load (60 %, 65 %, 70 %, and 75 % of 1RM, respectively) during bench press and parallel squat. Average velocity of each repetition was recorded by linking a rotary encoder to the end part of the bar. The values of 1 RM (BP) and 1 RM (HS) were 91 +/- 17 and 200 +/- 20 kg, respectively. The number of repetitions performed for a given percentage of 1RM was significantly higher (p < 0.001) in half squat than in bench press performance. Average repetition velocity decreased at a greater rate in bench press than in parallel squat. The significant reductions observed in the average repetition velocity (expressed as a percentage of the average velocity achieved during the initial repetition) were observed at higher percentage of the total number of repetitions performed in parallel squat (48 - 69 %) than in bench press (34 - 40 %) actions. The major finding in this study was that, for a given muscle action (bench press or parallel squat), the pattern of reduction in the relative average velocity achieved during each repetition and the relative number of repetitions performed was the same for all percentages of 1RM tested. However, relative average velocity decreased at a greater rate in bench press than in parallel squat performance. This would indicate that in bench press the significant reductions observed in the average repetition velocity occurred when the number of repetitions was over one third (34 %) of the total number of repetitions performed, whereas in parallel squat it was nearly one half (48 %). Conceptually, this would indicate that for a given exercise (bench press or squat) and percentage of maximal dynamic strength (1RM), the pattern of velocity decrease can be predicted over a set of repetitions, so that a minimum repetition threshold to ensure maximal speed performance is determined.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 395 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 4 1%
Brazil 3 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 382 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 81 21%
Student > Bachelor 59 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 43 11%
Student > Postgraduate 28 7%
Professor 26 7%
Other 74 19%
Unknown 84 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 210 53%
Social Sciences 16 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 3%
Other 29 7%
Unknown 99 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 October 2015.
All research outputs
#18,345,702
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Sports Medicine
#1,834
of 2,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,388
of 67,784 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Sports Medicine
#8
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,308 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 67,784 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.