Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 May;32(5):1245-1253.
doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001969.

Evaluation of Muscle Mechanical Capacities Through the Two-Load Method: Optimization of the Load Selection

Affiliations

Evaluation of Muscle Mechanical Capacities Through the Two-Load Method: Optimization of the Load Selection

Alejandro Pérez-Castilla et al. J Strength Cond Res. 2018 May.

Abstract

Pérez-Castilla, A, Jaric, S, Feriche, B, Padial, P, and García-Ramos, A. Evaluation of muscle mechanical capacities through the 2-load method: Optimization of the load selection. J Strength Cond Res 32(5): 1245-1253, 2018-Recent research has revealed that the force-velocity relationship obtained from the "2-load method" (i.e., functional movements tested against just 2 external loads) could be a feasible method for the selective assessment of muscle force, velocity, and power-producing capacities. The study investigated the reliability and concurrent validity of the outcomes of the 2-load method observed from (a) farther vs. closer data points (20-70% 1 repetition maximum [1RM], 30-60% 1RM, and 40-50% 1RM) and (b) force-biased (50-70% 1RM) vs. velocity-biased (20-40% 1RM) data points. Twenty-two men were tested on a ballistic bench press throw performed against 6 incremental loads ranging from 20 to 70% of the bench press 1RM. The 2-load methods were constructed based on pairs of individually selected external loads and compared with the outcome of the force-velocity regression method applied to all 6 loads. The reliability and validity of the force-velocity relationship parameters decreased with the proximity of the data points (40-50% 1RM < 30-60% 1RM < 20-70% 1RM). The velocity-biased and force-biased loads (i.e., lighter and heavier loads, respectively) revealed a similar but relatively moderate reliability and validity. Overall, the farthest pair of loads (i.e., 20% 1RM and 70% 1RM) revealed the highest reliability (CV = 5.5%, ICC = 0.89) and validity (r = 0.98) among all the 2-load methods evaluated. These results demonstrate that the 20-70% 1RM 2-load method could be a feasible approach for testing individual muscle mechanical capacities, whereas the observed outcomes could be most reliable and valid when obtained from the farthest pairs of applied loads.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

LinkOut - more resources