Superior Changes in Jump, Sprint, and Change-of-Direction Performance but Not Maximal Strength Following 6 Weeks of Velocity-Based Training Compared With 1-Repetition-Maximum Percentage-Based Training
Abstrakt
Purpose: This study compared the effects of velocity-based training (VBT) and one-repetition maximum (1RM) percent-based training (PBT) on changes in strength, loaded countermovement jump (CMJ) and sprint performance. Methods: Twenty-four resistance-trained males performed 6-weeks of full-depth free-weight back squats 3-times/week in a daily undulating format, with groups matched for sets and repetitions.
PBT group lifted with fixed relative loads varying from 59-85% of pre-intervention 1RM. VBT group aimed for a sessional target velocity that was prescribed from pre-training individualized load-velocity profiles.
Thus, real-time velocity feedback dictated the VBT set-by-set training load adjustments. Pre- and post-training assessments included 1RM, peak velocity for CMJ @30%1RM (PV-CMJ), 20-m sprint (including 5-m and 10-m), and 505 change-of-direction test (COD).
Results: VBT group maintained faster (Effect Size [ES]=1.25) training repetitions with less perceived difficulty (ES=0.72) compared to PBT group. VBT group had likely to very likely improvements in COD (ES=-1.20--1.27), 5-m sprint (ES=-1.17), 10-m sprint (ES=-0.93), 1RM (ES=0.89) and PV-CMJ (ES=0.79).
PBT group had almost certain improvements in 1RM (ES=1.41), and possibly beneficial COD (ES=-0.86). Very likely favorable between group effects were observed for VBT than PBT in PV-CMJ (ES=1.81), 5-m sprint (ES=1.35), and 20-m sprint (ES=1.27); likely favorable 10-m sprint (ES=1.24) and NDL-COD (ES=0.96); whilst DL-COD (ES=0.67) was possibly favorable.
PBT had small (ES=0.57) but unclear differences for 1RM improvement than VBT. Conclusions: Both training methods improved 1RM and COD times, but PBT may be slightly favorable for stronger individuals focusing on maximal strength, whilst VBT was more beneficial for PV-CMJ, sprint and COD improvements.