Mostrar o rexistro simple do ítem

dc.contributor.authorCarballeira, Eduardo
dc.contributor.authorIglesias-Soler, Eliseo
dc.contributor.authorBoullosa, Daniel
dc.contributor.authorDopico-Calvo, Xurxo
dc.date.accessioned2024-05-03T14:30:34Z
dc.date.issued2010-06
dc.identifier.citationIglesias, E., Boullosa, D. A., Dopico, X., & Carballeira, E. (2010). Analysis of factors that influence the maximum number of repetitions in two upper-body resistance exercises: curl biceps and bench press. Journal of strength and conditioning research, 24(6), 1566–1572. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181d8eabees_ES
dc.identifier.issn1064-8011
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2183/36403
dc.description.abstract[Abstract]: Iglesias, E, Boullosa, DA, Dopico, X, and Carballeira, E. Análisis of factors that influence the maximum number of repetitions in two upper-body resistance exercises: curl biceps and bench press. J Strength Cond Res 24(6): 1566–1572, 2010—The purpose of this study was to analyze the influence of exercise type, set configuration, and relative intensity load on relationship between 1 repetition maximum (1RM) and maximum number of repetitions (MNR). Thirteen male subjects, experienced in resistance training, were tested in bench press and biceps curl for 1RM, MNR at 90% of 1RM with cluster set configuration (rest of 30s between repetitions) and MNR at 70% of 1RM with traditional set configuration (no rest between repetitions). A lineal encoder was used for measuring displacement of load. Analysis of variance analysis revealed a significant effect of load (p , 0.01) and a tendency in exercise factor (p = 0.096), whereas the interaction effect was not significant. MNR at 70% of 1RM was lower for biceps curl (16.31 6 2.59 vs. 8.77 6 3 in bench press and biceps curl, respectively; p , 0.05) and at 90% of 1RM (21.85 611.06 vs. 18.54 612.84 in bench press and biceps curl, respectively; p . 0.05). Correlation between 1RM and MNR was significant for medium-intensity in biceps curl (r = 20.574; p , 0.05) and between MNR and 1RM/body mass (r = 20.574; p , 0.05). Neither 1RM nor 1RM/body mass correlated with velocity along set, so velocity seems to be similar at a same relative intensity for subjects with differences in maximum strength levels. From our results, we suggest the employment of MNR rather than % of 1RM for training monitoring. Furthermore, we suggest the introduction of cluster set configuration for upper-body assessment of MNR and for upper-body muscular endurance training at high-intensity loads, as it seems an efficient approach in looking for sessions with greater training volumes. This could be an interesting approach for such sports as wrestling or weightlifting.es_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherNational Strength and Conditioning Associationes_ES
dc.relation.urihttps://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181d8eabees_ES
dc.rightsCopyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkinses_ES
dc.subjectSet configurationes_ES
dc.subjectResistance traininges_ES
dc.subjectBench presses_ES
dc.subjectBiceps curles_ES
dc.titleAnalysis of factors that influence the maximum number of repetitions in two upper-body resistance exercises: curl biceps and bench presses_ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees_ES
dc.rights.accessinfo:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccesses_ES
dc.date.embargoEndDate9999/99/99es_ES
dc.date.embargoLift9999
UDC.journalTitleJournal of Strength and Conditioning Researches_ES
UDC.volume24es_ES
UDC.issue6es_ES
UDC.startPage1566es_ES
UDC.endPage1572es_ES
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181d8eabe


Ficheiros no ítem

Thumbnail

Este ítem aparece na(s) seguinte(s) colección(s)

Mostrar o rexistro simple do ítem