Normally when we return from vacations we usually walk somewhat lost when it comes to planning our training in order to recover the gains of both strength and muscle mass that we may have lost due to mismatching when lifting loads (it always depends on when you have been without to be able to train).
In my case, it was 8 days that I was unable to complete my planned training with sufficient loads and intensities to be able to continue generating adaptations that would benefit the maximum force. In fact, every 2 days I made series of dominated to the chest to be able to continue practicing dominated, trying to lose the minimum possible performance.
What did I find? A loss of yield of 10%. Loads that moved at 0.5 ms were converted into loads whose velocity was associated with 0.45 ms. Well, calm down, nothing happens.
What strategy does it carry out?
Take advantage of the return day to test again my profile of intensity ± velocity and to be able to generate a new equation with which to work during that week whose objective was to adapt again to high loads.
After having analyzed the movement many times, I decided that it was a good time to work to the maximum the point of stagnation and try to decrease to the maximum the difference between the average velocity and the maximum velocity peak.
So the training stayed as follows.
Everything healed as expected and in a week we were at the same point of performance before leaving.
Now what? From now on, the training focuses on improving the maximum strength at high intensities and solving the point of stagnation since it is the greatest limitation.
Also, today I want to explain what are the benefits of estimating the 1 RM daily with the Speed4lifts device (here you can read about how to estimate the 1 RM) that allows me to adjust each day the perfect weight with which I must work in the same session.
I quantify every day how I adapt to training and I have objective data. Now, many of you will ask that if it is really reliable that with a load I can know every day my 1RM…
It has been shown that for a same intensity after strength training, the velocity associated with that intensity just it varies! So with the same equation of my profile intensity ± velocity I can know my 1RM daily. Although if you are a person initiated in strength training or to stagnation point is very marked to recommend taking the data every so often in case there are small variations.
Stay tuned to the blog, I will continue to share all the information and advice about my current training.
La entrada 🏖How to retake training after vacations🏖 se publicó primero en Speed 4 Lifts.
]]>La entrada 🎯Programing using Execution Velocity. PART III – CONCLUSIONS🎯 se publicó primero en Speed 4 Lifts.
]]>3.1. TRADITIONAL APPROACH TO PROGRAMMING
Table 4 shows the programming done under a traditional point of view, regardless of velocity. However, as will be seen in Table 5, the same approach can be followed by using the velocity to determine the load, the work series, etc; with the certainty that we are working more accurately with the programmed intensity or the character of the desired effort.
Table 4. Intensity and volume programmed throughout the 22 sessions.
In this case, the intensity is determined as a function of the velocity associated with each% of the RM, either using our own load/velocity device, the Gonzalez Badillo equations, or the data shown in Table 2 on the back squat.. Let’s say we want to perform session 1 of week 1:
Table 5. Intensity (in the form of velocity) and volume programmed for the 22 sessions.
Based on what has been observed in the results of this programming, at absolute level the improvement has been similar in all loads (Between 10-16 cm / s), while at a percentage level, these improvements have been higher with higher loads. This fact can be explained in two ways:
“My personal opinion is that both possibilities are compatible. A traditional strength programming approach can be combined including velocity as a training control variable.”
REFERENCES
-Conceição, F., Fernandes, J., Lewis, M., Gonzaléz-Badillo, J. J., & Jimenéz-Reyes, P. (2016). Movement velocity as a measure of exercise intensity in three lower limb exercises. Journal of sports sciences, 34(12), 1099-1106.
-González Badillo, J. J. (2017). La velocidad de ejecución como referencia para la programación, control y evaluación del entrenamiento de fuerza. Ergotech.
La entrada 🎯Programing using Execution Velocity. PART III – CONCLUSIONS🎯 se publicó primero en Speed 4 Lifts.
]]>La entrada 📊Programming using the execution velocity Part II- RESULTS 📊 se publicó primero en Speed 4 Lifts.
]]>First, in Figure 1, it shows how the estimate of the 1 has been fluctuating RM throughout the training sessions. As can be seen, they are obtained values between 132kg (session 3) and 151kg (sessions 18 and 22), almost 20kg of variation between the beginning and the end.
It is interesting to note that although the general trend has been the increase in value of the estimated 1RM, there are 7 sessions (32% of the total) where a value is obtained lower than the previous session, so it is vital to be able to adjust the load of training in those days where the body accumulates fatigue in any of its forms and not give a greater stimulus than at that time we can recover from effective form for the next session, unless this overload is planned with anteriority.
Graph 1. Fluctuation of the value of the 1RM over 22 sessions of training.
In Graph 2 the changes in the velocity applied to each load in each heating and PPA can be visualized. It is remarkable the correlation that exists between the loads within each session, being common that the days that the velocity applied to a load increases or decreases, are also those in which a higher or lower mark is obtained than usual in the rest .
Graph 2. Velocity applied to loads 80, 100, 110, 120 and 130 kg throughout the 22 training sessions
It includes the absolute improvement in cm / s for each load, and what percentage of increase represents the same with respect to the initial velocity of the first session
It is interesting to note that, although at an absolute level, the increase in velocity with each load is just 6 cm / s (10-16 cm / s), these changes suppose very different percentages of improvement, due to the decrease in the velocity applied with higher loads.
In this way it can be seen that the improvement has been higher with loads of 80 kg and above, which coincides with the range of weights used during the actual repetitions in the sessions (65-80% RM), so it seems that It improves to a greater extent on the same loads with which you usually work.
Table 3. Comparison of the velocity applied to each load in the PPA of sessions 1 and 22.
References:
-Conceição, F., Fernandes, J., Lewis, M., Gonzaléz-Badillo, J. J., & Jimenéz-Reyes, P. (2016). Movement velocity as a measure of exercise intensity in three lower limb exercises. Journal of sports sciences, 34(12), 1099-1106.
-González Badillo, J. J. (2017). La velocidad de ejecución como referencia para la programación, control y evaluación del entrenamiento de fuerza. Ergotech.
La entrada 📊Programming using the execution velocity Part II- RESULTS 📊 se publicó primero en Speed 4 Lifts.
]]>La entrada 🚀PROGRAMMING USING THE EXECUTION VELOCITY PART 1🚀 se publicó primero en Speed 4 Lifts.
]]>Today we present a real case of 11 weeks programming in the high back bar squat exercise for a male athlete, 27 years old, with previous experience in strength training and amateur competitor of the weightlifting team of the Animal Factory Club.
In the following articles will be exposed:
However, before beginning, an important clarification must be made:
This is a real example, which surrounds some characteristics and specific circumstances, for a specific athlete at a given time of the season. This means that not every person who performs exactly the same will obtain the same results: For somebody it may be insufficient and for another athlete, on the other hand, excessive, although it is a conservative progression in terms of volume and intensity. However, some general conclusions applicable to any design of a training program can be drawn, as will be seen at the end of this article.
Structure of the sessions:
From the beginning of the warm up with the empty bar until the last of the repetitions of each session, the Speed4lifts encoder has been used to accumulate all training data, including the fastest velocitys in each heating load and all the repetitions of the effective series.
The same absolute loads have been used in all the sessions in the PPA, to monitor the performance throughout the programming based on the velocity applied to each load.
The weight is increased until reaching approximately 5% more intensity with which the effective work of the session will be carried out:
Example of post-activation enhancement of the first session (Up to 75% of the RM) and of the Last session (Up to 85% of RM):
Table 1. Velocity achieved on heating loads and PPA.
For example:
Purpose of the session: Make 25 Reps at 70% (Associated velocity 0.72 m/s), losing 15% as maximum of the maximum velocity. That is, we will stop all the work series when a repetition is equal to or less than 0.61 m/s (85% of 0.72 m/s, the maximum velocity).
Since we do not know in what repetition within a series we will reach 0.61 m/s, we do as many as necessary to complete the total volume of the session (in this case, 25 repetitions).
* If you do not know your velocity strength pertl or your RM equation, the best thing you can do is calculate them, and in this blog there are already articles related to these same questions.
* Similarly, if for programming reasons you cannot perform a test to obtain your pertl, since it will be more accurate the closer you get to charges close to the 1RM, you can use Table 2 (Obtained from: Conceicao et al., 2016) to estimate your RM and work based on the velocity. Today is the only one I know obtained in the exercise of full back squat and free weight (Not in the Smith machine), and I can personally say that it fits quite accurately to reality.
Table 2. Velocitys associated with the back squat with free weight according to Conceicao, F., Fernandes, J., Lewis, M., Gonzalez-Badillo, J. J., & Jimenez-Reyes, P. (2016).
La entrada 🚀PROGRAMMING USING THE EXECUTION VELOCITY PART 1🚀 se publicó primero en Speed 4 Lifts.
]]>Before starting with force planning it is necessary to be clear about the basic concepts that define the orientation of strength training at present.
We must forget about old and outdated classifications that distinguished between maximum, submaximal and explosive force under the load criterion used. Where the maximum force was understood as the ability to lift a maximum weight (referring to 1 RM, I leave HERE a reminder), submaximum loads similar to 80-90% and explosive loads much lower, around 40-50%.
The first step in understanding this current definition of force is to review some basic concepts. For example, from the point of view of mechanics, force is any cause capable of modifying the state of rest or movement of another body. While for physiology, it is understood as the ability to produce tension that the muscle has when activated.
The first focuses on the external effect while the second, in the internal, from the same muscle contraction. Both definitions are not exclusive, they simply represent an approach, a different perspective, before the same phenomenon.
From what we have just seen, there are two sources of forces in relation: internal and external forces. As a result of this interaction, a third concept arises: The applied force.
It is the result of the muscular action on external resistances, which in the case of training are variable: the corporal weight, some foreign implement and even the technique of a movement will affect this production of force.
What interests us in the sport context is therefore to improve the capacity to produce applied force, since the power that can be generated depends on it.
Here I present a well-known example of the variations of force applied in the squat exercise:
Figure 1.1. Badillo, J. J. G., & Serna, J. R. (2002). Basics of strength training programming
In the Y axis we see the force data measured in Newtons and in the X axis, the time (ms) Analyzing this graph we see two very clear details:
This relationship between force and time is vital in the sport context, where in most gestures the limiting factor is the time we have.
In future publications we will discover more and more of this F-T relationship.
References:
Badillo, J. J. G., & Serna, J. R. (2002). Bases de la programación del entrenamiento de fuerza (Vol. 308). Inde.
Izquierdo, M., Häkkinen, K., Gonzalez-Badillo, J. J., Ibanez, J., & Gorostiaga, E. M. (2002). Effects of long-term training specificity on maximal strength and power of the upper and lower extremities in athletes from different sports. European journal of applied physiology, 87(3), 264-271.
La entrada !! Strength training ? 💪🏻 se publicó primero en Speed 4 Lifts.
]]>La entrada How to predict 1 RM se publicó primero en Speed 4 Lifts.
]]>In one of the first articles, he explained, very briefly, how placing in a graph the kilos of the surveys (on one axis) and the speed (on the other axis), and putting together with a line the points, we obtained an equation that allowed us to know the RM.
Next, I will describe how the RM is calculated with said graph:
1.-The first thing we must do to know our 1RM is to incorporate some surveys in a graph in which one of the axes is the speed and the other the weight that we have raised. It will not be difficult, since all the surveys are done with a few kilos and at a specific speed.
2.-Once we have done this, we will notice, how the points form something similar to a straight line, that is, we could draw a straight line above the points, and join them in that way. In many cases we will not be able to unite all, some points will be higher and others lower than this line, but they will be close of the straight line that we have drawn.
3.-If the surveys are in the form of a straight line, the surveys that we would do with other kilos that we have not measured, are somewhere in the line that we have drawn among the points that we have.
4.-In many cases the lines are quite far from the real points we have measured, Our surveys do not form a straight line! Well maybe they should join with a line that is not straight … so that it looks more like the line formed by the points that we have.
(Incised: We can describe how a straight line is with a first degree polynomial, a equation that describes straight lines. In contrast, a polynomial of the second degree, is a line that forms a curve. Therefore, we also know that the polynomials of second degree approach, in many cases, more to the points we have of the surveys.)
5.-Going back to the previous thing, if we drew a line between the points, we could get the polynomial of first, or second degree that describes that line, that is to say, we obtain an equation. And if we have an equation with two unknowns, and we give a value to one of them, We can solve the equation and get the other one. In other words, if we give the speed of a survey to the equation (first incognita), we could get the weight we raise at that speed (second incognita).
6.-Then, if we know the speed at which we raise our 1 RM, or an approximation, we can know our RM that day! Solving the equation with the value we have given it. This is the method that most of the MR calculation devices use to obtain the daily MR.
Although the ideal would be to obtain an ideal prediction of the RM is to obtain the equation on a daily basis, because of the discomfort that supposes we could have a fairly good approximation using the equation of previous days.
Although the accuracy is quite high, it is only a mathematical prediction. There are many factors that influence an RM survey that the prediction of the RM with the speed of execution does not take into account, such as the fear that we may have to fail, a failure in the technique, the accumulated fatigue, an unfavorable environment, or lack of concentration.
. To finish I would like to emphasize that it is a reliable method to know the state of form every day, but I would not use it to know the precise MRI, since there are countless variables that these predictions do not take into account.
La entrada How to predict 1 RM se publicó primero en Speed 4 Lifts.
]]>La entrada How to measure fatigue by the velocity of execution? se publicó primero en Speed 4 Lifts.
]]>
The involuntary and inevitable reduction of the force applied after an effort. (Enoka & Stuart, 1992). The velocity of execution under the same load decreases as we train, we are no longer able to apply so much force. The loss of velocity, It is a good expression of fatigue that occurs in a workout. (Gonzalez-Badillo, Sanchez-Medina, Pareja-Blanco, & Rod riguez-Rosell, 2017)
Then, if we measure the velocity of execution of the fastest repetition (which is where we apply more force), and the slowest (which is the least force applied), knowing that we have done all the repetitions at the maximum velocity , we can have a reference value of what stimulus we have given to the body.
For example, in a series of 8 repetitions of bench press, if my first repetition was at 0.65 m/s and my last repetition at 0.4 m/s, making a simple rule of three, I know I have lost 39 % of the execution velocity, also known as 39% of inter-series fatigue.
Today it is demonstrated that this loss of velocity is related to changes in some indicators of fatigue in our body, to be more specific: lactate and amium.
In a classic paper of the velocity of execution, it was shown that the average of the loss of velocity of the three series that were made had a very high correlation (for the squat r=0.97, and for the bench r=0, 95) with the post-exercise lactate peak (Sanchez-Medina & Gonzalez-Badillo, 2011).
What does this mean? We know that lactate is an indicator of fatigue, because it is shown that it INCREASES according to fatigue. It is not the cause of fatigue, but we know that as intensity increases, lactate increases in our body. So if it has been shown that the higher the velocity loss, the higher the post-exercise lactate peak, means that the % velocity lost is a very good way to measure the real fatigue that the body has.
Inter-fatigue: % of fatigue that we have accumulated in an exercise. If the fastest repetition is 0.4 m/s and the slowest 0.3 m/s, we will have lost 25% velocity.
Inter-Serial Fatigue: Average of all percentages of intra or inter serial fatigue. If I have accumulated 15%, 20% and 25% in the three series that I have made, it opens accumulated a 20% loss of velocity (fatigue).
Interesting data
In the study that we mentioned before, they also realized that lactate and ammonium levels did not go off until more than half of the repetitions could be done. Which means, that probably, if we work with those volumes, the recovery will be faster. This does not mean that it is the optimal, but it is a point to take into account to include work that does not produce much fatigue to our body.
Through the Speed4lifts encoder we can modify and establish a velocity loss as a target. Instantly we can know when we reach that velocity. So we could stop the training, modify the load or the number of repetitions to achieve the perfect stimulus for that training.
Referencias
La entrada How to measure fatigue by the velocity of execution? se publicó primero en Speed 4 Lifts.
]]>La entrada The intensity: Velocity of execution and character of the effort. se publicó primero en Speed 4 Lifts.
]]>But how can the velocity of execution help us express the effort that really involves doing repetitions with a burden for us?
The character of effort is the expression of intensity or effort that is a burden for us (Gonzalez-Badillo & Gorostiaga Ayestaran, 1995, Gonzalez-Badillo & Gorostiaga Ayestaran, 1993). In weight training, the character of effort EC is defined by showing the number of repetitions we make, with respect to the total of repetitions that we could do with a specific load. It is expressed as follows: first the repetitions that have been made are written, for example, 6, and then, in parentheses, those that could have been reached as maxim. Let’s say that they are 10. Result: 6 (10).
This is a very good reference to know the real effort that is a burden for us, since, if we know how many repetitions we can do with each 0/0 of the MR, we could plan the training based on it. For example, knowing that I can do 10 repetitions with 70%, I could schedule to do 6 repetitions, and I would know that I have to leave 4 without doing. This raises an interesting method to express the effort that a load supposes for us: the repetitions made with respect to the total could be a good method to program the training based on a concrete effort.
But there are some problems:
-Not everyone is able to perform the same number of repetitions with% MR. Which means that there are no previous rules or guidelines that can be used on this method.
-When performing series with a % of the MR, in case of doing the same number of repetitions, some subjects will perform a greater effort than others, since they will work with a higher EC. That is, if two people do series with 70% of the MR, and one is able to do 10 repetitions and the other is able to do 8, but the two do 6, one will have done 6 (10) and the other 6 (8). As you can see, one remains at 2 of the failure and the other at 4. This has its implications in terms of adaptations, since they have made a very different effort despite having made the same number of repetitions.
-As a solution to that, we could make everyone stay the same number of repetitions to the failure. Following with the previous example, with 70% of the MR: 6 (10), and 4 (8). But this is also a problem, because one of the people would do the series with half their EC, and the other would do it with more than half. What again, involves different adaptations: the effort they have made is not comparable.
The EC represents the effort that a load imposes on us, but quantifying it using the repetitions that are made with respect to those that can be done can be deceptive: for example 1 (2) and 4 (8) represent 50% of the EC, but the adaptations that are achieved with each one are different.
Training based on the velocity of execution solves this problem. In a study it is demonstrated that there is a very high correlation between the repetitions that we left in the bedroom (expressed as a percentage), and the velocity that is lost during the series (Gonzalez-Badillo, Manuel, Mora-Custodio, & Rodriguez-Rosell, 2017) . That is, assuming that two people work with the same% of the RM, if one does 50% of the possible repetitions and the other also, they will have lost the same% velocity, and also, they will have made the same effort. Although they have made a different number of repetitions.
From what we can conclude:
-If two people have lost the same% velocity, they have made the same effort. (Sanchez-Moreno, Rodriguez-Rosell, Pareja-Blanco, Mora-Custodio, & Gonzalez-Badillo, 2017) (Sanchez-Moreno et al., 2017)
-If we get to know that% of the execution velocity we have lost, we have a reference to know the fatigue that we have accumulated in the training. (Sanchez-Medina & Gonzalez-Badillo, 2011). The% of repetitions that we have made with respect to the total, also gives us a good reference of the effort made. (Gonzalez-Badillo et al., 2017)
La entrada The intensity: Velocity of execution and character of the effort. se publicó primero en Speed 4 Lifts.
]]>La entrada How to calculate the 1RM from the velocity se publicó primero en Speed 4 Lifts.
]]>So we have a problem: We need to know our physical form every day, because it changes daily. We have a method, the 1RM, but knowing it is harmful and we could tire ourselves excessively by doing it.
We could change the method… Or we could have simpler ways and without so many negative consequences to get to know the MR. It is already proven that the MR is a good method to get to know the physical form of a person, and why change it? Which is that simpler way, to find out our MR to do an MR test? By doing a submaximal repetition before starting the training, measuring the velocity of that repetition, and obtaining a very precise calculation of my MR that day.
It is simple, it is precise, it does not tire, and hardly takes up time.
The execution velocity is the best expression of the intensity that a given weight represents for a person (Juan Jose Gonzalez-Badillo, Sanchez-Medina, Pareja-Blanco, & Rodriguez-Rosell, 2017). We must not forget that the more force applied, the faster we will move a load, which means that depending on the velocity at which the bar moves, I am able to apply more, or less force. There is a very high correlation between the velocity at which we move the bar, and the % of MR that is a load for us, as long as we move the bar as fast as we can (J Gonzalez, Badillo & Sanchez-Medina, 2010)
This does, that we can do in a graph, a curve, joining each % of the MR of an exercise with the velocity at which we have moved it. This is known as force-velocity profile. And from this curve, we can draw an equation, which is what will allow us to calculate the MR.
Some authors have published equations that could be used to calculate our MR based on the execution velocity. But knowing that each person has a different strength-velocity profile, it makes more sense that we have our own equation. Thus we would increase still more the precision of the calculation of the MR based on the velocity of a repetition with a load of a% of the MR.
In any case, the formulas that exist to our disposition, for the exercises of bench press, squat and rowing (JJ Gonzalez-Badillo & Sanchez-Medina, 2010, Sanchez-Medina, Pallares, Perez, Moran-Navarro, & Gonzalez- Badillo, 2017; Sanchez-Moreno, Rodriguez-Rosell, Pareja-Blanco, Mora-Custodio, & Gonzalez-Badillo, 2017) can also serve us. They are equations based on studies with very large and diverse samples, not will be the most accurate, but it will be interesting as an approach to our RM.
Bench press
% 1 RM = 8.4326x VMP2-73.501x VM P + 112.33
Squatting
% 1 RM = -5.961x VM P2- 50.71x VMP +117
Remo lying down
% 1 RM = 13.2596x VM P2-93,867x VM P + 144.38
Therefore, based on the data from these three studies, we could also know the velocity that we would have with each% of the MR. It is wrong to say that the data that comes out of AHL is your velocity of execution. But leaving a study with such a large sample, we serve as a reference to know where part of the population moves, with said% of the MR. Creating our own curve.
But that is not real. Scientists have long understood that the force-velocity curve is different for each subject (Cormie, McCaulley, & McBride, 2007, Jimenez-Reyes, Samozino, Brughelli, & Morin, 2017), so the best thing is to have our own force-velocity curve to obtain data based on our own performance. Fortunately, some velocity measurement devices, such as velocity4lifts, give us the option of creating our own equation. How? Velocity4lifts asks us to do a load progression until the MR, and from the points in the graph, creates a custom equation. Quantifying the lifting with Velocity4lifts we can calculate the 1MR from the velocity, and the other data of interest that we can obtain from this equation.
Be careful, the force-velocity curve is trained (Cormie et al., 2007), therefore, it is convenient to renew it every few months, because otherwise it could happen that our velocity at a % of the MR changes, and the data that we obtain from the measurements of the velocity of execution distense from reality.
Brzycki, M. (1993). Strength Testing-Predicting a One-Rep Max from Reps-to-Fatigue. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 64(1), 88-90. https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.1993.10606684
Cormie, P., McCaulley, G. O., & McBride, J. M. (2007). Power versus strength-power jump squat training: Influence on the load-power relationship. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 39(6), 996-1003. https://doi.org/10.1097/mss.0b013e3180408e0c
González-Badillo, J. J., & Sánchez-Medina, L. (2010). Movement velocity as a measure of loading intensity in resistance training. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 31(5), 347-352. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0030-1248333
González-Badillo, J. J., Sánchez-Medina, L., Pareja-Blanco, F., & Rodríguez-Rosell, D. (2017). LA VELOCIDAD DE EJECUCIÓN COMO REFERENCIA PARA LA PROGRAMACIÓN, CONTROL Y EVALUACIÓN DEL ENTRENAMIENTO DE FUERZA. Madrid: ERGOTECH.
Jiménez-Reyes, P., Samozino, P., Brughelli, M., & Morin, J. B. (2017). Effectiveness of an individualized training based on force-velocity profiling during jumping. Frontiers in Physiology, 7(JAN). https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2016.00677
Reynolds, J. M., Gordon, T. J., & Robergs, R. A. (2006). Prediction of one repetition maximum strength from multiple repetition maximum testing and anthropometry. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 20(3), 584-592. https://doi.org/10.1519/R-15304.1
Sánchez-Medina, L., Pallarés, J., Pérez, C., Morán-Navarro, R., & González-Badillo, J. (2017). Estimation of Relative Load From Bar Velocity in the Full Back Squat Exercise. Sports Medicine International Open, 1, E80-E88. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-102933
Sánchez-Moreno, M., Rodríguez-Rosell, D., Pareja-Blanco, F., Mora-Custodio, R., & González-Badillo, J. J. (2017). Movement velocity as indicator of relative intensity and level of effort attained during the set in pull-up exercise. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 12(10), 1378-1384. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2016-0791
La entrada How to calculate the 1RM from the velocity se publicó primero en Speed 4 Lifts.
]]>La entrada Physical basis of training based on velocity se publicó primero en Speed 4 Lifts.
]]>Force (F) = Mass (M) x Acceleration (A)
By parts.
Mass (M) of an object is the amount of matter it has. It is measured in kilograms. It should not be confused with weight, which is simply the mass of a body multiplied gravity, and is measured in Newtons (N).
Acceleration (A): It is the change of velocity of a body per unit of time. That is, how much the velocity of a body changes in a certain amount of time. For example, if an object passes from 0 to 50 km/h in two seconds, it will have less acceleration than if an object passes from 0 to 100 km/h in two seconds.
Force (F): What we should know about Force (F), is that it is represented in the acceleration that an object, with a determined mass, carries:
-The higher acceleration, the more strength. Therefore, the greater the acceleration, the more force we are applying.
– Knowing that we start from a still position (velocity 0), the higher the velocity we reach, the more force we will have applied (because we have achieved greater acceleration).
-Conclusion: If a person moves 100 kilograms in the bench press at 0.4 m/s2 and another person moves them at 0.5 m/s2, the second person is applying more force.
This is the basis of training based on the velocity of execution. If the same person measures the velocity of execution of the bar every day when training in the same exercise, and one day, moves that weight faster, that day will have applied more force. Given that the force is something that the human being can train (and improve) we can know the force that we are applying if we measure the acceleration of the object that we are moving.
Until recently, in training, methods such as 1RM and its percentages were used to train. This method consisted in, basically, knowing the maximum amount of kilograms that can be lifted in each exercise, and deciding what intensity to train during a cycle based on a percentage of that amount of kilograms.
But this posed a series of problems: The first of them is that the maximum amount of kilograms that a person can lift a day varies a lot. So if you had to raise 70% of RM to three months ago, you probably would have gained strength, and training with a weight that, although three months ago was 70%, now is 60%. The second is that we cannot perform 1RM tests every day to know what it is, because this would fatigue the athlete, and it is also very harmful. These are the most complicated problems to face, but this method has other drawbacks as well.
Then, they began to investigate about the velocity of the bar, and discovered, in an interesting article made with the bench press exercise, that each person could move a 0/0 of the RM, at a certain velocity. That is, for example, in bench press, all subjects raised their RM to approximately 0.16 m/s2. After analyzing all the data, they realized that there was a very high relation between the velocity at which the bar moved in the bench press, and the 0/0 of the RM that was being used. (Gonzalez-Badillo & Sanchez-Medina, 2010). And they made a graph relating the data of both variables for all the subjects of the study, this one here:
Table 1. Propulsive average velocity Ratio -% load 1RM
Where it can be observed, that as the percentage of the RM increases, the velocity decreases, following a clear pattern. The study was repeated 8 weeks later, in which 56 subjects who had done the first test, made a second equal test, and saw that although their training level had changed, the velocity at which they moved the % RM bar had changed little. Although it has been concluded later, athletes can have a very different force-velocity curve in the same exercise. (Cormie, McBride, & McCaulley, 2007; Meylan et al., 2015)
With that researchers concluded, each person moved a %RM at a specific velocity in a particular exercise. And if we make a graph by putting a point at the height of the velocity at which we have moved the bar for each %RM, we get a drawing similar to the one above. This is known as the “force-velocity profile”.
The force-velocity profile, defined by the % RM or load that we are using, and the velocity at which we move it, could be defined for each subject in the bench press, and later it was also discovered that there is a very similar relationship in the squat and inverted row exercises (Sanchez-Medina, PaHares, Perez, Moran-Navarro, & Gonzalez-Badillo, 2017; Sanchez-Moreno, Rodriguez-Rosell, Pareja-Blanco, Mora-Custodio, & Gonzalez-Badillo, 2017 ). Therefore, if we knew the velocity of the bar, we could know that% of the RM was using the person, and if we know its force-velocity profile (since not all people move a % RM at the same velocity), the maximum weight that person can have in a particular exercise. A new paradigm was born.
Conclusions:
-Each person has an individual strength-velocity profile that varies according to the exercise, sex, age, sport that is practiced, and more factors. That force-velocity profile also varies by exercise, that is, although in bench press you move 70% at 0.5 m/s2, it is possible that in the squat you move to 70% of the RM at 0.7 m/s, for example, by factors of which we will speak in another article.
-Measuring the velocity is an effective way to know what the state of an athlete is one day, and know what load should handle based on that.
In future articles we will talk more about training based on velocity and why the velocity4lifts encoder is a great option if you want to improve your workouts.
Bibliography
Cormie, P., McBride, J. M., & McCaulley, G. O. (2007). Validation of power measurement techniques in dynamic lower body resistance exercises. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 23(2), 103–118. https://doi.org/10.1123/jab.23.2.103 González-Badillo, J. J., & Sánchez-Medina, L. (2010). Movement velocity as a measure of loading intensity in resistance training. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 31(5), 347–352. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0030-1248333 Meylan, C. M. P., Cronin, J. B., Oliver, J. L., Hughes, M. M. G., Jidovtseff, B., & Pinder, S. (2015). The reliability of isoinertial force–velocity–power profiling and maximal strength assessment in youth. Sports Biomechanics, 14(1), 68–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/14763141.2014.982696 Sánchez-Medina, L., Pallarés, J., Pérez, C., Morán-Navarro, R., & González-Badillo, J. (2017). Estimation of Relative Load From Bar Velocity in the Full Back Squat Exercise. Sports Medicine International Open, 1, E80–E88. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-102933 Sánchez-Moreno, M., Rodríguez-Rosell, D., Pareja-Blanco, F., Mora-Custodio, R., & González-Badillo, J. J. (2017). Movement velocity as indicator of relative intensity and level of effort attained during the set in pull-up exercise. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 12(10), 1378–1384. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2016-0791
La entrada Physical basis of training based on velocity se publicó primero en Speed 4 Lifts.
]]>