Research article - (2025)24, 303 - 310
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52082/jssm.2025.303
Effects of Repeated 1RM Testing on Strength, Velocity, and Load-Velocity Profiling: A Repeated Measurement Trial
Florian Micke1,, Eduard Isenmann2, Stephan Geisler2, Steffen Held1
1Department of Sport and Management, IST University of Applied Sciences, Duesseldorf, Germany
2Department of Fitness and Health, IST University of Applied Sciences, Duesseldorf, Germany

Florian Micke
✉ Department of Sport and Management, IST University of Applied Sciences, Duesseldorf, Germany
Email: fmicke@ist-hochschule.de
Received: 06-02-2025 -- Accepted: 02-04-2025
Published (online): 01-06-2025

ABSTRACT

Maximal strength assessment, particularly the one-repetition maximum (1RM) test, is essential in resistance training and sports science. Velocity-based metrics like mean concentric velocity (MCV) at 1RM and load-velocity profiling enhance neuromuscular monitoring, yet the stability of parameters such as load-velocity slope (VL-Slope) and peak power position (PP-Position) over repeated tests remains uncertain. Thus, 14 resistance-trained male participants (age: 25.2 ± 3.3 years; training experience: 2.1 ± 2.0 years) performed five 1RM tests in the squat and bench press over a seven-week period. Strength and velocity parameters, including 1RM, MCV at 1RM, VL-Slope, and PP-Position, were assessed using an inertial measurement unit. A repeated-measures ANCOVA was conducted to analyze changes over time, with effect sizes quantified using partial eta squared (ηp2) and standardized mean differences (SMD). No significant training-induced adaptations were observed for 1RM or MCV at 1RM across all testing sessions (p > 0.05). VL-Slope and PP-Position remained stable, indicating no systematic changes over time. However, exercise-specific differences were found, with higher absolute loads and velocities in the squat compared to the bench press. Additionally, PP-Position was significantly higher in the squat, suggesting that peak power output occurs at a higher relative load for lower-body exercises. Repeated 1RM testing does not appear to induce relevant strength or velocity adaptations over time. Coaches and practitioners should consider exercise-specific differences in force-velocity characteristics when designing training programs and interpreting performance diagnostics.

Key words: One-repetition maximum, velocity-based training, load-velocity profiling, strength assessment, resistance training

Key Points
  • No strength gains from repeated 1RM testing: 1RM and MCV remained unchanged across five test sessions.
  • Stable load-velocity and power profiles: VL-Slope and PP-Position showed no systematic changes, confirming their reliability for long-term monitoring.
  • Differences between squat and bench press: Squats exhibited higher loads, velocities, and a significantly higher PP-Position than the bench press.
  • Minimal detectable changes: 10.0 kg for squats, 5.6 kg for bench press – small improvements are detectable earlier in bench press.
  • Relevance for training and diagnostics: Load-velocity profiles remain stable without targeted training.








Back
|
Full Text
|
PDF
|
Share