Evaluating the Field 2-Point Method for the Relative Load-Velocity Relationship Monitoring in Free-Weight Back Squats
- PMID: 40463315
- PMCID: PMC12127943
- DOI: 10.5114/jhk/193975
Evaluating the Field 2-Point Method for the Relative Load-Velocity Relationship Monitoring in Free-Weight Back Squats
Abstract
This study investigated the between-session variability and concurrent validity of the relative load-velocity relationship obtained from different methods during the free-weight back squat. In counterbalanced order, 39 resistance-trained male participants performed two sessions with six different loads (i.e., a multiple-point test) and two sessions with two different loads (i.e., a 2-point test) followed by the actual one-repetition maximum (1RM) attempts. The mean velocity (MV) corresponding to various %1RMs (at every 5% interval from 40 to 90%1RM) was determined through individualized linear regression models using three methods: (i) multiple-point: data of ~40, 50, 60, 70, 80, and 90%1RM from the multiple-point test, (ii) non-field 2-point: data of the lightest and heaviest loads from the multiple-point test, and (iii) field 2-point: data of ~40 and 90%1RM from the 2-point test. The main findings revealed that the between-session variability of the MVs derived from the %1RM-MV relationships was low (absolute differences = 0.02‒0.03 m•s-1) and similar (p = 0.074‒0.866) across the three methods. Additionally, when compared to the multiple-point method, both the non-field and field 2-point methods showed high correlations (pooled r across all %1RMs = 0.95 ± 0.01 and 0.72 ± 0.09, respectively) and small systematic biases (ranging from -0.01 to 0.01 m•s-1). Therefore, we recommend that strength and conditioning practitioners use the %1RM-MV relationship, modeled by the field 2-point method, as a quicker and fatigue-free procedure for prescribing the relative load during the free-weight back squat. Specifically, a light load near 40%1RM and a heavy load near 90%1RM are suggested for this method.
Keywords: exercise intensity; field conditions; velocity-based training.
Copyright: © Academy of Physical Education in Katowice.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Figures

Similar articles
-
Optimization of applied loads for assessing load-velocity relationship during back squat.PLoS One. 2025 Jul 18;20(7):e0328772. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0328772. eCollection 2025. PLoS One. 2025. PMID: 40680015 Free PMC article.
-
An Efficient and Accurate Approach for Estimating the Free-Weight Back Squat 1-Repetition Maximum Based on the 2-Point Method and Optimal Minimal Velocity Threshold.J Strength Cond Res. 2025 Apr 1;39(4):e530-e537. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000005040. Epub 2024 Dec 19. J Strength Cond Res. 2025. PMID: 39705159
-
Reliability and Validity of the Load-Velocity Relationship to Predict the 1RM Back Squat.J Strength Cond Res. 2017 Jul;31(7):1897-1904. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001657. J Strength Cond Res. 2017. PMID: 27669192
-
The Predictive Validity of Individualised Load-Velocity Relationships for Predicting 1RM: A Systematic Review and Individual Participant Data Meta-analysis.Sports Med. 2023 Sep;53(9):1693-1708. doi: 10.1007/s40279-023-01854-9. Epub 2023 Jul 26. Sports Med. 2023. PMID: 37493929 Free PMC article.
-
Resistance Training Intensity Prescription Methods Based on Lifting Velocity Monitoring.Int J Sports Med. 2024 Apr;45(4):257-266. doi: 10.1055/a-2158-3848. Epub 2023 Aug 22. Int J Sports Med. 2024. PMID: 37607576 Review.
Cited by
-
Optimization of applied loads for assessing load-velocity relationship during back squat.PLoS One. 2025 Jul 18;20(7):e0328772. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0328772. eCollection 2025. PLoS One. 2025. PMID: 40680015 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Brotherton, E. J., Moseley, S. E., Langan-Evans, C., Pullinger, S. A., Robertson, C. M., Burniston, J. G. & Edwards, B. J. (2019). Effects of two nights partial sleep deprivation on an evening submaximal weightlifting performance; are 1 h powernaps useful on the day of competition? Chronobiology International, 36(3), 407–426. 10.1080/07420528.2018.1552702 - DOI - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources