Cargando…
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
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-p...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
PeerJ Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8898007/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35256919 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.13013 |
_version_ | 1784663549927227392 |
---|---|
author | Çetin, Onat Akyildiz, Zeki Demirtaş, Barbaros Sungur, Yılmaz Clemente, Filipe Manuel Cazan, Florin Ardigò, Luca Paolo |
author_facet | Çetin, Onat Akyildiz, Zeki Demirtaş, Barbaros Sungur, Yılmaz Clemente, Filipe Manuel Cazan, Florin Ardigò, Luca Paolo |
author_sort | Çetin, Onat |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8898007 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | PeerJ Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88980072022-03-06 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 Çetin, Onat Akyildiz, Zeki Demirtaş, Barbaros Sungur, Yılmaz Clemente, Filipe Manuel Cazan, Florin Ardigò, Luca Paolo PeerJ Kinesiology 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. PeerJ Inc. 2022-03-02 /pmc/articles/PMC8898007/ /pubmed/35256919 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.13013 Text en © 2022 Çetin et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited. |
spellingShingle | Kinesiology Çetin, Onat Akyildiz, Zeki Demirtaş, Barbaros Sungur, Yılmaz Clemente, Filipe Manuel Cazan, Florin Ardigò, Luca Paolo 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 |
title | 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 |
title_full | 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 |
title_fullStr | 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 |
title_full_unstemmed | 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 |
title_short | 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 |
title_sort | 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 |
topic | Kinesiology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8898007/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35256919 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.13013 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cetinonat reliabilityandvalidityofthemultipointmethodandthe2pointmethodsvariationsofestimatingtheonerepetitionmaximumfordeadliftandbacksquatexercises AT akyildizzeki reliabilityandvalidityofthemultipointmethodandthe2pointmethodsvariationsofestimatingtheonerepetitionmaximumfordeadliftandbacksquatexercises AT demirtasbarbaros reliabilityandvalidityofthemultipointmethodandthe2pointmethodsvariationsofestimatingtheonerepetitionmaximumfordeadliftandbacksquatexercises AT sunguryılmaz reliabilityandvalidityofthemultipointmethodandthe2pointmethodsvariationsofestimatingtheonerepetitionmaximumfordeadliftandbacksquatexercises AT clementefilipemanuel reliabilityandvalidityofthemultipointmethodandthe2pointmethodsvariationsofestimatingtheonerepetitionmaximumfordeadliftandbacksquatexercises AT cazanflorin reliabilityandvalidityofthemultipointmethodandthe2pointmethodsvariationsofestimatingtheonerepetitionmaximumfordeadliftandbacksquatexercises AT ardigolucapaolo reliabilityandvalidityofthemultipointmethodandthe2pointmethodsvariationsofestimatingtheonerepetitionmaximumfordeadliftandbacksquatexercises |