Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Superior Changes in Jump, Sprint, and Change-of-Direction Performance but Not Maximal Strength Following 6 Weeks of Velocity-Based Training Compared With 1-Repetition-Maximum Percentage-Based Training.
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2020 Sep 01 [Online ahead of print]IJ

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the effects of velocity-based training (VBT) and 1-repetition-maximum (1RM) percentage-based training (PBT) on changes in strength, loaded countermovement jump (CMJ), and sprint performance.

METHODS

A total of 24 resistance-trained males performed 6 weeks of full-depth free-weight back squats 3 times per week in a daily undulating format, with groups matched for sets and repetitions. The PBT group lifted with fixed relative loads varying from 59% to 85% of preintervention 1RM. The VBT group aimed for a sessional target velocity that was prescribed from pretraining individualized load-velocity profiles. Thus, real-time velocity feedback dictated the VBT set-by-set training load adjustments. Pretraining and posttraining assessments included the 1RM, peak velocity for CMJ at 30%1RM (PV-CMJ), 20-m sprint (including 5 and 10 m), and 505 change-of-direction test (COD).

RESULTS

The VBT group maintained faster (effect size [ES] = 1.25) training repetitions with less perceived difficulty (ES = 0.72) compared with the PBT group. The VBT group had likely to very likely improvements in the COD (ES = -1.20 to -1.27), 5-m sprint (ES = -1.17), 10-m sprint (ES = -0.93), 1RM (ES = 0.89), and PV-CMJ (ES = 0.79). The PBT group had almost certain improvements in the 1RM (ES = 1.41) and possibly beneficial improvements in the COD (ES = -0.86). Very likely favorable between-groups effects were observed for VBT compared to PBT in the PV-CMJ (ES = 1.81), 5-m sprint (ES = 1.35), and 20-m sprint (ES = 1.27); likely favorable between-groups effects were observed in the 10-m sprint (ES = 1.24) and nondominant-leg COD (ES = 0.96), whereas the dominant-leg COD (ES = 0.67) was possibly favorable. PBT had small (ES = 0.57), but unclear differences for 1RM improvement compared to VBT.

CONCLUSIONS

Both training methods improved 1RM and COD times, but PBT may be slightly favorable for stronger individuals focusing on maximal strength, whereas VBT was more beneficial for PV-CMJ, sprint, and COD improvements.

Authors

No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

32871553

Citation

Banyard, Harry G., et al. "Superior Changes in Jump, Sprint, and Change-of-Direction Performance but Not Maximal Strength Following 6 Weeks of Velocity-Based Training Compared With 1-Repetition-Maximum Percentage-Based Training." International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 2020, pp. 1-11.
Banyard HG, Tufano JJ, Weakley JJS, et al. Superior Changes in Jump, Sprint, and Change-of-Direction Performance but Not Maximal Strength Following 6 Weeks of Velocity-Based Training Compared With 1-Repetition-Maximum Percentage-Based Training. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2020.
Banyard, H. G., Tufano, J. J., Weakley, J. J. S., Wu, S., Jukic, I., & Nosaka, K. (2020). Superior Changes in Jump, Sprint, and Change-of-Direction Performance but Not Maximal Strength Following 6 Weeks of Velocity-Based Training Compared With 1-Repetition-Maximum Percentage-Based Training. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2019-0999
Banyard HG, et al. Superior Changes in Jump, Sprint, and Change-of-Direction Performance but Not Maximal Strength Following 6 Weeks of Velocity-Based Training Compared With 1-Repetition-Maximum Percentage-Based Training. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2020 Sep 1;1-11. PubMed PMID: 32871553.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Superior Changes in Jump, Sprint, and Change-of-Direction Performance but Not Maximal Strength Following 6 Weeks of Velocity-Based Training Compared With 1-Repetition-Maximum Percentage-Based Training. AU - Banyard,Harry G, AU - Tufano,James J, AU - Weakley,Jonathon J S, AU - Wu,Sam, AU - Jukic,Ivan, AU - Nosaka,Kazunori, Y1 - 2020/09/01/ PY - 2019/12/16/received PY - 2020/03/14/revised PY - 2020/03/24/accepted PY - 2020/9/2/pubmed PY - 2020/9/2/medline PY - 2020/9/2/entrez KW - load–velocity profile KW - load–velocity relationship KW - resistance training KW - resistance training load monitoring KW - strength training SP - 1 EP - 11 JF - International journal of sports physiology and performance JO - Int J Sports Physiol Perform N2 - PURPOSE: To compare the effects of velocity-based training (VBT) and 1-repetition-maximum (1RM) percentage-based training (PBT) on changes in strength, loaded countermovement jump (CMJ), and sprint performance. METHODS: A total of 24 resistance-trained males performed 6 weeks of full-depth free-weight back squats 3 times per week in a daily undulating format, with groups matched for sets and repetitions. The PBT group lifted with fixed relative loads varying from 59% to 85% of preintervention 1RM. The VBT group aimed for a sessional target velocity that was prescribed from pretraining individualized load-velocity profiles. Thus, real-time velocity feedback dictated the VBT set-by-set training load adjustments. Pretraining and posttraining assessments included the 1RM, peak velocity for CMJ at 30%1RM (PV-CMJ), 20-m sprint (including 5 and 10 m), and 505 change-of-direction test (COD). RESULTS: The VBT group maintained faster (effect size [ES] = 1.25) training repetitions with less perceived difficulty (ES = 0.72) compared with the PBT group. The VBT group had likely to very likely improvements in the COD (ES = -1.20 to -1.27), 5-m sprint (ES = -1.17), 10-m sprint (ES = -0.93), 1RM (ES = 0.89), and PV-CMJ (ES = 0.79). The PBT group had almost certain improvements in the 1RM (ES = 1.41) and possibly beneficial improvements in the COD (ES = -0.86). Very likely favorable between-groups effects were observed for VBT compared to PBT in the PV-CMJ (ES = 1.81), 5-m sprint (ES = 1.35), and 20-m sprint (ES = 1.27); likely favorable between-groups effects were observed in the 10-m sprint (ES = 1.24) and nondominant-leg COD (ES = 0.96), whereas the dominant-leg COD (ES = 0.67) was possibly favorable. PBT had small (ES = 0.57), but unclear differences for 1RM improvement compared to VBT. CONCLUSIONS: Both training methods improved 1RM and COD times, but PBT may be slightly favorable for stronger individuals focusing on maximal strength, whereas VBT was more beneficial for PV-CMJ, sprint, and COD improvements. SN - 1555-0273 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/32871553/Superior_Changes_in_Jump_Sprint_and_Change_of_Direction_Performance_but_Not_Maximal_Strength_Following_6_Weeks_of_Velocity_Based_Training_Compared_With_1_Repetition_Maximum_Percentage_Based_Training_ L2 - https://journals.humankinetics.com/doi/10.1123/ijspp.2019-0999 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -
Try the Free App:
Prime PubMed app for iOS iPhone iPad
Prime PubMed app for Android
Prime PubMed is provided
free to individuals by:
Unbound Medicine.