Reliability and validity of the multi-point method and the 2-point method's variations of estimating the one-repetition maximum for deadlift and back squat exercises

Cetin O., Akyildiz Z., Demirtas B., SUNGUR Y., Clemente F. M., Cazan F., ...Daha Fazla

PEERJ, cilt.10, 2022 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 10
  • Basım Tarihi: 2022
  • Doi Numarası: 10.7717/peerj.13013
  • Dergi Adı: PEERJ
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, BIOSIS, CAB Abstracts, EMBASE, Veterinary Science Database, Directory of Open Access Journals
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: Load-velocity relationship, Multipoint method, Two-point method, Velocity-based training, LOAD-VELOCITY RELATIONSHIP, BENCH PRESS, MOVEMENT VELOCITY, DYNAMIC STRENGTH, PERFORMANCE, PREDICTION, 1RM, INTENSITY, FORCE
  • Gazi Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

This study aimed at examining the concurrent validity and reliability of the multi-point method and the two-point method's variations for estimating the one-repetition maximum (1RM) in the deadlift and squat exercises and to determine the accuracy of which optimal two loads can be used for the two-point method protocol. Thirteen resistance-trained men performed six sessions that consisted of two incremental loading tests (multi-point method: 20-40-60-80-90% and two-point method variations: 40-60%, 40-80%, 40-90%,60-80%, 60-90%) followed by 1RM tests. Both the multi-point method and the two-point method load variations showed reliable results for 1RM estimation (CV < 10%) squat and deadlift exercises. Session-session reliability was found to be low in deadlift (ICC: 0.171-0.335) and squat exercises (ICC: 0.235-0.479) of 40-60% and 60-80% in two-point methods. Deadlift (ICC: 0.815-0.996) and squat (ICC: 0.817-0.988) had high session-to-session reliability in all other methods. Regarding the validity of deadlift exercise, the multipoint method (R-2 = 0.864) and two variations of the two-point method (R-2 = 0.816 for 40-80%, R-2 = 0.732 for 60-80%) showed very large correlations, whereas other two variations of the two-point method (R-2 = 0.945 for 40-90%, R-2 = 0.914 for 60-90%) showed almost perfect correlations with the actual 1RM. Regarding the validity of squat exercise, the multi-point method (R-2 = 0.773) and two variations of the two-point method (R-2 = 0.0847 for 60-80%, R-2 = 0.705 for 40-90%) showed very large correlations, whereas 40-60% variation showed almost perfect correlation (R-2 = 0.962) with the actual 1RM. In conclusion, whereas both the multi-point method and the two-point method load variations showed reliable results, the multiple-point method and most of the two-point methods' load variations examined in this research provided an accurate (from large-moderate to perfect) estimate of the 1RM. Therefore, we recommend using the multi-point method and especially the two-point methods variations including higher relative loads to estimate 1RM.