Purpose: To examine the validity of 2 kinematic systems for assessing mean velocity (MV), peak velocity (PV), mean force (MF), peak force (PF), mean power (MP), and peak power (PP) during the full-depth free-weight back squat performed with maximal concentric effort. Methods: Ten strength-Trained men (26.1 ± 3.0 y, 1.81 ± 0.07 m, 82.0 ± 10.6 kg) performed three 1-repetition-maximum (1RM) trials on 3 separate days, encompassing lifts performed at 6 relative intensities including 20%, 40%, 60%, 80%, 90%, and 100% of 1RM. Each repetition was simultaneously recorded by a PUSH band and commercial linear position transducer (LPT) (GymAware [GYM]) and compared with measurements collected by a laboratory-based testing device consisting of 4 LPTs and a force plate. Results: Trials 2 and 3 were used for validity analyses. Combining all 120 repetitions indicated that the GYM was highly valid for assessing all criterion variables while the PUSH was only highly valid for estimations of PF (r = .94, CV = 5.4%, ES = 0.28, SEE = 135.5 N). At each relative intensity, the GYM was highly valid for assessing all criterion variables except for PP at 20% (ES = 0.81) and 40% (ES = 0.67) of 1RM. Moreover, the PUSH was only able to accurately estimate PF across all relative intensities (r = .92-.98, CV = 4.0-8.3%, ES = 0.04-0.26, SEE = 79.8-213.1 N). Conclusions: PUSH accuracy for determining MV, PV, MF, MP, and PP across all 6 relative intensities was questionable for the back squat, yet the GYM was highly valid at assessing all criterion variables, with some caution given to estimations of MP and PP performed at lighter loads.

Abstract Investigation into Characteristics of Bench Press using PUSH™ Band Peters, Avery1 and Sato, Kimitake1 Department of Sport, Exercise, Recreation, and Kinesiology, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN1 Introduction: Sport scientist and strength coaches use resistance training to increase athletic performance and muscle hypertrophy. Improving muscular strength is the most essential task for these scientists, however, how best to identify weakness has yet to be established. The popularity of velocity-based resistance training has recently increased as a method to prescribe resistance training intensity, therefore, the purpose of the study was to identify the characteristics of bench press concentric velocity. It is hypothesized that the velocity output will decrease during the change from the 75% relative load of the 1RM to the 85% relative load of 1RM. It is believed that there will be a greater output of velocity during the 75% set than the 85% set. Methods: Nine female collegiate athletes (18-21 yrs), participated in this study. PUSH™ bands were used to measure barbell velocity during the bench press exercise. Each female was expected to preform 3 sets of 5 repetitions (3x5) at an intensity of 75% and 85% of their 1 repetition maximum (1RM). Only data from repetition 2-4 were used for analysis. Results: The results drawn from data collected supported our hypothesis showing a decrease in velocity among the 85% 1RM test when compared to the 75% 1RM test group. Comparisons were drawn using a t-Test table comprised of PUSH™ Band data. Conclusion: The results supported the hypothesis that this type of technology can identify the load specific velocity to help strength coaches to identify the optimal resistance for certain training program and goals by using collected data with the PUSH™ Band to identify weakness in strength and/or endurance.