VBT vs %
Comparison of Velocity-Based and Traditional Percentage-Based Loading Methods on Maximal Strength and Power Adaptations
Harry F. Dorrell, Mark F. Smith, and Thomas I. Gee Human Performance Centre, School of Sport and Exercise Science, College of Social Sciences, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, UK
This study explored the effects of velocity-based training (VBT) on maximal strength and jump height. Sixteen trained males (22.8 ± 4.5 years) completed a countermovement jump test (CMJ), and one repetition maximum (1-RM) assessment on back squat, bench press, strict overhead press, and deadlift, before and after six weeks of resistance training. Participants were assigned to VBT, or percentage-based training (PBT) groups. The VBT group’s load was dictated via real-time velocity monitoring, as opposed to pre-testing 1-RM data (PBT). No significant differences were present between groups for pre-testing data (p > 0.05). Training resulted in significant increases (p < 0.05) in maximal strength for back squat (VBT 9%, PBT 8%), bench press (VBT 8%, PBT 4%), strict overhead press (VBT 6%, PBT 6%), and deadlift (VBT 6%). Significant increases in CMJ were witnessed for the VBT group only (5%). A significant interaction effect was witnessed between training groups for bench press (p = 0.004) and CMJ (p = 0.018). Furthermore, for back squat (9%), bench press (6%), and strict overhead press (6%), a significant difference was present between the total volume lifted. The VBT intervention induced favourable adaptations in maximal strength and jump height in trained males when compared to a traditional PBT approach. Interestingly the VBT group achieved these positive outcomes despite a significant reduction in total training volume compared to the PBT group. This has potentially positive implications for the management of fatigue during resistance training.
Click below to download and read the full research paper READ THE RESEARCH