IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i9p4626-d544185.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of Back-Squat Performance at Submaximal Loads: Is the Reliability Affected by the Variable, Exercise Technique, or Repetition Criterion?

Author

Listed:
  • Alejandro Pérez-Castilla

    (Department of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Granada, 18010 Granada, Spain)

  • Danica Janicijevic

    (Research Academy of Human Biomechanics, The Affiliated Hospital of Medical School of Ningbo University, Ningbo University, Ningbo 315020, China
    Faculty of Sports Science, Ningbo University, Ningbo 315211, China
    Faculty of Sport and Physical Education, The Research Centre, University of Belgrade, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia)

  • Zeki Akyildiz

    (Movement and Training Science Department, Gazi University, Ankara 06560, Turkey)

  • Deniz Senturk

    (School of physical education of sports department, Gelişim University, Istanbul 34310, Turkey)

  • Amador García-Ramos

    (Department of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Granada, 18010 Granada, Spain
    Faculty of Education, Department of Sports Sciences and Physical Conditioning, Universidad Católica de la Santísima Concepción, Concepción 4070129, Chile)

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the between-session reliability of different performance variables during 2 variants of the Smith machine back-squat exercise. Twenty-six male wrestlers performed 5 testing sessions (a 1-repetition maximum [1RM] session, and 4 experimental sessions [2 with the pause and 2 with the rebound technique]). Each experimental session consisted of performing 3 repetitions against 5 loads (45–55–65–75–85% of the 1RM). Mean velocity (MV), mean power (MP), peak velocity (PV), and peak power (PP) variables were recorded by a linear position transducer (GymAware PowerTool). The best and average scores of the 3 repetitions were considered for statistical analyses. The coefficient of variation (CV) ranged from 3.89% (best PV score at 55% 1 RM using the pause technique) to 10.29% (average PP score at 85% 1 RM using the rebound technique). PP showed a lower reliability than MV, MP, and PV (CV ratio ≥ 1.26). The reliability was comparable between the exercise techniques (CV ratio = 1.08) and between the best and average scores (CV ratio = 1.04). These results discourage the use of PP to assess back-squat performance at submaximal loads. The remaining variables (MV, MP, or PV), exercise techniques (pause or rebound), and repetition criteria (best score or average score) can be indistinctly used due to their acceptable and comparable reliability.

Suggested Citation

  • Alejandro Pérez-Castilla & Danica Janicijevic & Zeki Akyildiz & Deniz Senturk & Amador García-Ramos, 2021. "Assessment of Back-Squat Performance at Submaximal Loads: Is the Reliability Affected by the Variable, Exercise Technique, or Repetition Criterion?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-14, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:9:p:4626-:d:544185
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/9/4626/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/9/4626/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Indya del-Cuerpo & Daniel Jerez-Mayorga & Pedro Delgado-Floody & María Dolores Morenas-Aguilar & Luis Javier Chirosa-Ríos, 2023. "Test–Retest Reliability of the Functional Electromechanical Dynamometer for Squat Exercise," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-13, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:9:p:4626-:d:544185. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.