Download PDF
Int J Sports Med 2024; 45(10): 767-774
DOI: 10.1055/a-2339-2217
Training & Testing

Sex and Equipment Impact on Lifting Velocity and the Maximum Repetitions in Bench Press

Alejandro Pérez-Castilla
1   SPORT Research Group (CTS-1024), CIBIS (Centro de Investigación para el Bienestar y la Inclusión Social) Research Center, University of Almería, Almería, Spain
2   Department of Education, Faculty of Education Sciences, University of Almería, Almería, Spain
,
Carlos Martínez-Rubio
1   SPORT Research Group (CTS-1024), CIBIS (Centro de Investigación para el Bienestar y la Inclusión Social) Research Center, University of Almería, Almería, Spain
2   Department of Education, Faculty of Education Sciences, University of Almería, Almería, Spain
,
Andrés Baena-Raya
1   SPORT Research Group (CTS-1024), CIBIS (Centro de Investigación para el Bienestar y la Inclusión Social) Research Center, University of Almería, Almería, Spain
2   Department of Education, Faculty of Education Sciences, University of Almería, Almería, Spain
,
David M. Díez-Fernández 
1   SPORT Research Group (CTS-1024), CIBIS (Centro de Investigación para el Bienestar y la Inclusión Social) Research Center, University of Almería, Almería, Spain
2   Department of Education, Faculty of Education Sciences, University of Almería, Almería, Spain
,
Alba Hernández-Martínez
1   SPORT Research Group (CTS-1024), CIBIS (Centro de Investigación para el Bienestar y la Inclusión Social) Research Center, University of Almería, Almería, Spain
2   Department of Education, Faculty of Education Sciences, University of Almería, Almería, Spain
,
Manuel Antonio Rodríguez-Pérez
1   SPORT Research Group (CTS-1024), CIBIS (Centro de Investigación para el Bienestar y la Inclusión Social) Research Center, University of Almería, Almería, Spain
2   Department of Education, Faculty of Education Sciences, University of Almería, Almería, Spain
› Author Affiliations Funding Information Andrés Baena-Raya and David M. Díez-Fernández are currently funded by the Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities of the government of Spain under a predoctoral grant (grant number: FPU20/05746; FPU19/04608, respectively).
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

This study investigated how equipment and sex affect the prediction accuracy of the maximum number of repetitions performed to failure (RTF) using the fastest mean velocity of the set (MVfastest). Sixteen men and twelve women completed four sessions (two using free-weight equipment and two sessions using the Smith machine). Each session involved three sets of repetitions to failure against the 65%, 75%, and 85% of the one-repetition maximum, interspersed by 10-min of rest. The goodness-of-fit of the individualized RTF-MVfastest relationships was comparable between both equipment types and sexes (P≥0.510). Moreover, there were not significant differences in the MVfastest associated with RTF between equipment types (P≥0.258). However, the MVfastest associated with RTF was higher for men than for women in repetitions 6 to 15 (P≤0.043; ES≥0.69). In addition, the absolute errors when predicting RTF showed no significant differences between equipment types and loads (P<0.444). Specifically, these RTF estimates were within an acceptable range for men (<2 repetitions), but not for women (≥2 repetitions) (main effect of sex: P≤0.018; ES≥0.58). These findings suggest that individualized RTF-MVfastest equations estimate the RTF with an acceptable precision in men during bench press exercises in both equipment types but exhibit lower precision for women.

Keywords

exercise prescription - exercise monitoring - resistance training - strength training - velocity-based training


Publication History

Received: 24 February 2024

Accepted: 23 May 2024

Article published online:
26 June 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Bird SP, Tarpenning KM, Marino FE. Designing resistance training programmes to enhance muscular fitness: a review of the acute programme variables. Sports Med 2005; 35: 841-851
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Kraemer WJ, Ratamess NA. Fundamentals of resistance training: Progression and exercise prescription. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2004; 36: 674-688
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Niewiadomski W, Laskowska D, Gąsiorowska A. et al. Determination and prediction of one repetition maximum (1RM): Safety considerations. J Hum Kinet 2008; 19: 109-120
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Wood TM, Maddalozzo GF, Harter RA. Accuracy of seven equations for predicting 1-RM performance of apparently healthy, sedentary older adults. Meas Phys Educ Med 2002; 6: 67-94
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 García-Ramos A, Haff GG, Pestaña-Melero FL. et al. Feasibility of the 2-point method for determining the 1-repetition maximum in the bench press exercise. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2018; 13: 474-481
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Rodríguez-Rosell D, Yáñez-García JM, Sánchez-Medina L. et al. Relationship between velocity loss and repetitions in reserve in the bench press and back squat exercises. J Strength Cond Res 2020; 34: 2537-2547
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Pelland JC, Robinson ZP, Remmert JF. et al. Methods for controlling and reporting resistance training proximity to failure: Current issues and future directions. Sports Med 2022; 52: 1461-1472
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Refalo MC, Helms ER, Hamilton DL. et al. Towards an improved understanding of proximity-to-failure in resistance training and its influence on skeletal muscle hypertrophy, neuromuscular fatigue, muscle damage, and perceived discomfort: A scoping review. J Sports Sci 2022; 40: 1369-1391
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Pérez-Castilla A, Suzovic D, Domanovic A. et al. Validity of different velocity-based methods and repetitions-to-failure equations for predicting the 1 repetition maximum during 2 upper-body pulling exercises. J Strength Cond Res 2021; 35: 1800-1808
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 García-Ramos A, Torrejón A, Feriche B. et al. Prediction of the maximum number of repetitions and repetitions in reserve from barbell velocity. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2018; 13: 353-359
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Miras-Moreno S, Pérez-Castilla A, García-Ramos A. Lifting velocity as a predictor of the maximum number of repetitions that can be performed to failure during the prone bench pull exercise. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2022; 17: 1213-1221
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Jukic I, Helms ER, McGuigan MR. The fastest repetition in a set predicts the number of repetitions completed to failure during resistance training: The impact of individual characteristics. Physiol Behav 2023; 265: 114158
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Haff GG. Roundtable discussion: Machines versus free weights. Strength Cond J 2000; 22: 18
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Heidel KA, Novak ZJ, Dankel SJ. Machines and free weight exercises: A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing changes in muscle size, strength, and power. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 2022; 61: 1061-1070
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Miller RM, Freitas ED, Heishman AD. et al. Test-retest reliability between free weight and machine-based movement velocities. The J Strength Cond Res 2020; 34: 440-444
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Miras-Moreno S, Pérez-Castilla A, Rojas-Ruiz FJ. et al. Lifting velocity predicts the maximum number of repetitions to failure with comparable accuracy during the Smith machine and free-weight prone bench pull exercises. Heliyon 2023; 9: e19628
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Pérez-Castilla A, Fernandes JF, Garcia-Ramos A. Validity of the bench press one-repetition maximum test predicted through individualized load-velocity relationship using different repetition criteria and minimal velocity thresholds. Isokinet Exerc Sci 2021; 29: 369-377
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Jiménez-Alonso A, García-Ramos A, Cepero M. et al. Velocity performance feedback during the free-weight bench press testing procedure: an effective strategy to increase the reliability and one repetition maximum accuracy prediction. J Strength Cond Res 2022; 36: 1077-1083
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Pérez-Castilla A, Miras-Moreno S, Janicijevic D. et al. Velocity loss is not an accurate predictor of the percentage of completed repetitions during the prone bench pull exercise. J Strength Cond Res 2023; 37: 1001-1008
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Hopkins W, Marshall S, Batterham A. et al. Progressive statistics for studies in sports medicine and exercise science. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2009; 41: 3
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Ronai P, Taber C. The barbell bench pull. ACSM’s Health Fit J 2021; 25: 33-36
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 García-Ramos A, Suzovic D, Pérez-Castilla A. The load-velocity profiles of three upper-body pushing exercises in men and women. Sports Biomech 2021; 20: 693-705
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Nuzzo JL. Narrative review of sex differences in muscle strength, endurance, activation, size, fiber type, and strength training participation rates, preferences, Motivations, injuries, and neuromuscular adaptations. J Strength Cond Res 2023; 37: 494-536
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Hernández-Belmonte A, Courel-Ibáñez J, Conesa-Ros E. et al. Level of effort: A reliable and practical alternative to the velocity-based approach for monitoring resistance training. J Strength Cond Res 2022; 36: 2992-2999
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar