4.4 Article

A Simple Method for Assessing Upper-Limb Force-Velocity Profile in Bench Press

Journal

Publisher

HUMAN KINETICS PUBL INC
DOI: 10.1123/ijspp.2016-0814

Keywords

bench throw; explosive exercise; force-velocity relationship; maximal power

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To analyze the reliability and validity of a field computation method based on easy-to-measure data to assess the mean force ((F) over bar) and velocity ((v) over bar) produced during a ballistic bench-press movement and to verify that the force-velocity profile (F-v) obtained with multiple loaded trials is accurately described. Methods: Twelve participants performed ballistic bench presses against various lifted mass from 30% to 70% of their body mass. For each trial, and (v) over bar were determined from an accelerometer (sampling rate 500 Hz; reference method) and a simple computation method based on upper-limb mass, barbell flight height, and push-off distance. These (F) over tilde and (v) over bar data were used to establish the F-v relationship for each individual and method. Results: A strong to almost perfect reliability was observed between the 2 trials (ICC > .90 for (F) over bar and .80 for (v) over bar, CV% < 10%), whatever the considered method. The mechanical variables (<(F)over bar>, (v) over bar) measured with the 2 methods and all the variables extrapolated from the F-v relationships were strongly correlated (r(2) > .80, P < .001). The practical differences between the methods for the extrapolated mechanical parameters were all <5%, indicating very probably no differences. Conclusion: The findings suggest that the simple computation method used here provides valid and reliable information on force and velocity produced during ballistic bench press, in line with that observed in laboratory conditions. This simple method is thus a practical tool, requiring only 3 simple parameters (upper-limb mass, barbell flight height, and push-off distance).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available