Does fatigue affect the perception of velocity accuracy during resistance training? J Strength Cond Res 38(7): 1243-1247, 2024 - The purpose of this study was to investigate whether perception of barbell velocity (PV) is affected by fatigue induced by 2 different training protocols. Twenty-two subjects were randomly divided into 2 groups: 10% velocity loss group (VL10) and repetitions to failure group (EX). Both protocols included 5 sets at 75% 1 repetition maximum but differed in the number of repetitions performed (Reps). Perception of barbell velocity was assessed in the back squat exercise during a test with 3 blinded loads (heavy, medium, light) 1 day rested (REST) and 1 day immediately following 1 of the 2 designated training protocols (POST). The accuracy of the PV was analyzed by calculating the delta score (ds), that is, the difference between perceived velocity (Vp) and real velocity of the barbell (Vr). During training, each group performed significantly different Reps per set (VL10: 3.9 ± 1.4; EX: 13.8 ± 6.3, p < 0.001) and consequently reported different levels of perceived exertion and repetitions in reserve (p < 0.001). Real velocity and ds did not change between REST and POST-VL10 conditions at all loads. Although a significant decrease in Vr was found at light and medium loads (p < 0.05) between REST and POST in the EX-Group, no significant differences were detected in the ds. These results demonstrate that Vp is a stable parameter on which practitioners can base their training despite different levels of fatigue.
Does Fatigue Affect the Perception of Velocity Accuracy During Resistance Training?
Romagnoli, Ruggero;
2024-01-01
Abstract
Does fatigue affect the perception of velocity accuracy during resistance training? J Strength Cond Res 38(7): 1243-1247, 2024 - The purpose of this study was to investigate whether perception of barbell velocity (PV) is affected by fatigue induced by 2 different training protocols. Twenty-two subjects were randomly divided into 2 groups: 10% velocity loss group (VL10) and repetitions to failure group (EX). Both protocols included 5 sets at 75% 1 repetition maximum but differed in the number of repetitions performed (Reps). Perception of barbell velocity was assessed in the back squat exercise during a test with 3 blinded loads (heavy, medium, light) 1 day rested (REST) and 1 day immediately following 1 of the 2 designated training protocols (POST). The accuracy of the PV was analyzed by calculating the delta score (ds), that is, the difference between perceived velocity (Vp) and real velocity of the barbell (Vr). During training, each group performed significantly different Reps per set (VL10: 3.9 ± 1.4; EX: 13.8 ± 6.3, p < 0.001) and consequently reported different levels of perceived exertion and repetitions in reserve (p < 0.001). Real velocity and ds did not change between REST and POST-VL10 conditions at all loads. Although a significant decrease in Vr was found at light and medium loads (p < 0.05) between REST and POST in the EX-Group, no significant differences were detected in the ds. These results demonstrate that Vp is a stable parameter on which practitioners can base their training despite different levels of fatigue.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.