Anthropometric Dimensions Do Not Enhance One Repetition Maximum Prediction From the NFL-225 Test in College Football Players

Mayhew, Jerry L.; Jacques, Jeff A.; Ware, John S.; Chapman, Paul; Bemben, Michael G.; Ward, Tom E.; Slovak, Joseph P.

doi:10.1519/1533-4287(2004)18<572:addneo>2.0.co;2

Cited by 12 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The results (i.e. workload and number of reps) of such sets were subsequently used to obtain a prediction of actual 1RM based on Mayhew's equation (LeSuer et al, 1997;Mayhew et al, 2004, Mayhew et al 2008.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The outcomes of the " 1 / 2 body mass" set to fatigue (i.e. weight lifted and repetitions to fatigue) were used to predict the theoretical 1RM using Mayhew's equation (LeSuer et al, 1997;Mayhew et al, 2004, Mayhew et al 2008); Fig. 1.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The one repetition maximum (1RM) technique is largely acknowledged as one of the most valid measurements of maximal strength and it is defined as the maximal weight that can be lifted with a single repetition (Mayhew et al, 2004;LeSuer et al, 1997;Amarante Do Nascimento et al, 2013;Padulo et al, 2012). The 1RM test has been shown to be a reliable strength indicator in various athletic populations (LeSuer et al, 1997;Benton et al, 2013;Seo et al, 2012), and percentages of 1RM are used in sport and exercise to define training loads for conditioning programs (Amarante Do Nascimento et al, 2013;Arazi and Asadi, 2013;Padulo et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

One repetition maximum bench press performance: A new approach for its evaluation in inexperienced males and females: A pilot study

Bianco

Filingeri

Paoli

et al. 2015

Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to evaluate a new method to perform the one repetition maximum (1RM) bench press test, by combining previously validated predictive and practical procedures. Eight young male and 7 females participants, with no previous experience of resistance training, performed a first set of repetitions to fatigue (RTF) with a workload corresponding to ⅓ of their body mass (BM) for a maximum of 25 repetitions. Following a 5-min recovery period, a second set of RTF was performed with a workload corresponding to ½ of participants' BM. The number of repetitions performed in this set was then used to predict the workload to be used for the 1RM bench press test using Mayhew's equation. Oxygen consumption, heart rate and blood lactate were monitored before, during and after each 1RM attempt. A significant effect of gender was found on the maximum number of repetitions achieved during the RTF set performed with ½ of participants' BM (males: 25.0 ± 6.3; females: 11.0x± 10.6; t = 6.2; p < 0.001). The 1RM attempt performed with the workload predicted by Mayhew's equation resulted in females performing 1.2 ± 0.7 repetitions, while males performed 4.8 ± 1.9 repetitions. All participants reached their 1RM performance within 3 attempts, thus resulting in a maximum of 5 sets required to successfully perform the 1RM bench press test. We conclude that, by combining previously validated predictive equations with practical procedures (i.e. using a fraction of participants' BM to determine the workload for an RTF set), the new method we tested appeared safe, accurate (particularly in females) and time-effective in the practical evaluation of 1RM performance in inexperienced individuals.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

One repetition maximum bench press performance: A new approach for its evaluation in inexperienced males and females: A pilot study

Bianco

Filingeri

Paoli

et al. 2015

Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…and conditioning coaches predominantly use the supine bench press to assess upper-body strength in football players [33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40]. One of the most common methods of evaluation is to conduct periodic one repetition maximum (1-RM) testing.…”

Section: Strengthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Estimated-1RM and 225-lb (102-kg) bench press performance between starters and non-starters among a NCAA Division I college football team

Stahl

J.B

Lockie

et al. 2019

Int. J. Phys. Educ. Fit. Sports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The estimated one-repetition maximum (1RM) bench press and NFL-225 (225-lb or 102-kg) repetition test are commonly used to assess upper-body muscular strength and endurance among football players. However, little research has been focused on the relationship of these tests to playing status. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine if significant relationships exist between these tests and playing status in Division I football athletes. Archival data from 31 NCAA Division I football players (age: 20.1±1.4 yrs., height: 188.07 ± 5.93 cm, body mass: 112.4 ± 19.5 kg) on the 1RM Bench press test, NFL-225 test and playing status were utilized for this analysis. A one-way ANOVA was used to detect any differences in 1RM and NFL-225 performance between skill groups: big (linemen), medium (linebackers, quarterbacks, tight ends) and small (receivers, backs, and corners) (p < 0.05). Playing status (starters vs. non-starters) were compared within position groups. A point bi-serial correlation was then utilized to examine the relationship in test performance between groups, as well as between starters and non-starters. Significant differences were discovered in NFL-225 test performance between big and small skill groups. Moderate-to-strong relationships between playing status and performance on the 1RM bench press (r = .660) and the NFL-225 test (r = .685) for the big skills group. The results of this study suggest that playing status and upper-body strength and endurance are strongly related for the big skills position group.

show abstract

“…In addition, long time required for the performance of a 1RM test, muscular discomfort (10) , as well as possible risks of injury (11) , have determined the development of more simple and less injuryprone methods which are still capable of accurately estimating the maximal strength. Thus, with the purpose to predict the maximal strength without maximal physical and emotional stress, several studies have used the validation of submaximal tests based on the maximal number of repetitions for each workload (12)(13) ; on the 1RM percentage (4,15) ; on the maximal workload for a given number of repetitions (16)(17)(18)(19)(20) , or simply on anthropometric characteristics such as height, segmental area, muscular area (21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26) , or body mass (10,27) . Conversely, although the literature is rich in work involving the 1RM estimate, few studies have focused on anthropometric characteristics of the Brazilian population.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modelo de predição de uma repetição máxima (1RM) baseado nas características antropométricas de homens e mulheres

Materko¹,

Neves²,

Santos³

2007

Rev Bras Med Esporte

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of the present study was to develop an equation for predicting the workload of one maximal repetition (1RM) in women and men, based exclusively on anthropometrical characteristics. Forty-four low-risk and experienced in strength training young subjects, being 22 male (23 ± 4 years, 76.6 ± 12.7 kg, 173.9 ± 5.5 cm, 11 ± 4.5% of body fat) and 22 female (22 ± 4 years, 54 ± 6.0 kg, 161 ± 5.8 cm, 18 ± 2.2% of body fat) volunteered for this study. All subjects were submitted to an anthropometrical evaluation followed by a 1RM familiarization test (shoulder press), which was repeated after 48 h. The repeatability was tested using Wilcoxon Matched paired test. Finally, the 1RM workload was modeled in relation to the anthropometrical variables through multiple linear regression (forward stepwise) using as cutoff criteria for the independent variables ∆r 2 < 0.01. The models reliability was expressed by the Bland and Altman analysis. All tests assumed α = 0.05. No significant differences were recorded between the two tests, resulting 44.6 ± 13.2 kg and 12.2 ± 3.2 kg, for male (MS) and female (FS) subjects respectively. The time of practice in strength training was also included in the models. The model resulted in 84% of explained variance and a standard error of 12% for the MS. On the other hand, for the FS the predictive capacity was weaker than for = the MS, resulting in 56% of the explained variance and a standard error of 20%. In conclusion, the obtained models showed acceptable reliability so that they can be currently used as a tool for predicting the 1RM workload.

show abstract

Anthropometric Dimensions Do Not Enhance One Repetition Maximum Prediction From the NFL-225 Test in College Football Players

Cited by 12 publications

References 0 publications

One repetition maximum bench press performance: A new approach for its evaluation in inexperienced males and females: A pilot study

One repetition maximum bench press performance: A new approach for its evaluation in inexperienced males and females: A pilot study

Comparison of Estimated-1RM and 225-lb (102-kg) bench press performance between starters and non-starters among a NCAA Division I college football team

Modelo de predição de uma repetição máxima (1RM) baseado nas características antropométricas de homens e mulheres

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About