These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Lifting velocity predicts the maximum number of repetitions to failure with comparable accuracy during the Smith machine and free-weight prone bench pull exercises.
    Author: Miras-Moreno S, Pérez-Castilla A, Rojas-Ruiz FJ, García-Ramos A.
    Journal: Heliyon; 2023 Sep; 9(9):e19628. PubMed ID: 37809849.
    Abstract:
    This study compared the accuracy of the fastest mean velocity from set (MVfastest) to predict the maximum number of repetitions to failure (RTF) between 2 variants of prone bench pull (PBP) exercise (Smith machine and free-weight) and 3 methods (generalized, individualized multiple-point, and individualized 2-point). Twenty-three resistance-trained males randomly performed 2 sessions during Smith machine PBP and 2 sessions during free-weight PBP in different weeks. The first weekly session determined the RTF-MVfastest relationships and subjects completed single sets of repetitions to failure against 60-70-80-90%1RM. The second weekly session explored the accuracy of RTFs prediction under fatigue conditions and subjects completed 2 sets of 65%1RM and 2 sets of 85%1RM with 2 min of rest. The MVfastest associated with RTFs from 1 to 15 were greater for Smith machine compared to free-weight PBP (F ≥ 42.9; P < 0.001) and for multiple-point compared to 2-point method (F ≥ 4.6; P ≤ 0.043). The errors when predicting RTFs did not differ between methods and PBP variants, whereas all RTF-MVfastest relationships overestimated the RTF under fatigue conditions. These results suggest that RTF-MVfastest relationships present similar accuracy during Smith machine and free-weight PBP exercises and it should be constructed under similar training conditions.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]