A Novel Approach to 1RM Prediction Using the Load-Velocity Profile: A Comparison of Models

THOMPSON, Steve W, ROGERSON, David, RUDDOCK, Alan, GREIG, Leon, DORRELL, Harry F. and BARNES, Andrew (2021). A Novel Approach to 1RM Prediction Using the Load-Velocity Profile: A Comparison of Models. Sports, 9 (7).

sports-09-00088.pdf - Published Version
Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (880kB) | Preview
Official URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4663/9/7/88
Open Access URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4663/9/7/88/pdf (Published version)
Link to published version:: https://doi.org/10.3390/sports9070088


The study aim was to compare different predictive models in one repetition maximum (1RM) estimation from load-velocity profile (LVP) data. Fourteen strength-trained men underwent initial 1RMs in the free-weight back squat, followed by two LVPs, over three sessions. Profiles were constructed via a combined method (jump squat (0 load, 30–60% 1RM) + back squat (70–100% 1RM)) or back squat only (0 load, 30–100% 1RM) in 10% increments. Quadratic and linear regression modeling was applied to the data to estimate 80% 1RM (kg) using 80% 1RM mean velocity identified in LVP one as the reference point, with load (kg), then extrapolated to predict 1RM. The 1RM prediction was based on LVP two data and analyzed via analysis of variance, effect size (g/), Pearson correlation coefficients (r), paired t-tests, standard error of the estimate (SEE), and limits of agreement (LOA). p < 0.05. All models reported systematic bias < 10 kg, r > 0.97, and SEE < 5 kg, however, all linear models were significantly different from measured 1RM (p = 0.015 <0.001). Significant differences were observed between quadratic and linear models for combined (p < 0.001; = 0.90) and back squat (p = 0.004, = 0.35) methods. Significant differences were observed between exercises when applying linear modeling (p < 0.001, = 0.67–0.80), but not quadratic (p = 0.632–0.929, = 0.001–0.18). Quadratic modeling employing the combined method rendered the greatest predictive validity. Practitioners should therefore utilize this method when looking to predict daily 1RMs as a means of load autoregulation.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: 1106 Human Movement and Sports Sciences
Identification Number: https://doi.org/10.3390/sports9070088
SWORD Depositor: Symplectic Elements
Depositing User: Symplectic Elements
Date Deposited: 24 Jun 2021 11:42
Last Modified: 24 Jun 2021 11:45
URI: https://shura.shu.ac.uk/id/eprint/28780

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item


Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics