Resistance Training, Motor Performance, Athletic Performance, Velocity-based Training
Conditions
Keywords
Velocity-based training, Speed, Agility, Maximal strength, Performance
Brief summary
This study investigated the effects of resistance training applied with a velocity-based approach on selected motor skills in university-level athletes. Participants were randomly assigned to two groups: a velocity-based training (VBT) group and a percentage-based training (PBT) group. Both groups performed lower-body resistance exercises over an 8-week period, three times per week. Pre- and post-training assessments were conducted for countermovement jump (CMJ), sprint (20 m and 40 m), agility (505 test), and one-repetition maximum (1RM) squat performance. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of VBT and PBT on jump, sprint, agility, and strength performance. It was hypothesized that the VBT group would show greater improvements in motor skills compared to the PBT group.
Detailed description
This randomized, parallel-group, interventional trial was designed to examine the effects of resistance training performed using a velocity-based approach on selected motor skills among trained university athletes. A total of 20 male participants (aged 18-30 years) were randomly assigned into two groups: Velocity-Based Training (VBT) group: performed squats, lunges, and similar lower-body exercises using individualized movement velocity feedback obtained from a linear encoder. Percentage-Based Training (PBT) group: performed the same exercises based on traditional fixed-load percentages of one-repetition maximum (1RM). Both training programs lasted 8 weeks and included three sessions per week. Pre- and post-tests included measurements of countermovement jump (CMJ) height and power, sprint times (20 m and 40 m), agility (505 test), and maximal squat strength (1RM). The study was approved by the Istanbul Gelişim University Rectorate Ethics Committee (Approval No: 2024-01-144, Date: 12.01.2024) and conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. All participants provided written informed consent prior to participation. The primary outcome of interest was the change in CMJ performance. Secondary outcomes included sprint, agility, and 1RM strength improvements. The results are expected to contribute to the understanding of how velocity-based resistance training affects neuromuscular adaptations and physical performance in athletes compared to traditional percentage-based training methods.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALPercentage-Based Training (PBT)
The percentage-based training (PBT) group performed the same resistance exercises as the VBT group for 8 weeks, three sessions per week. Training loads were prescribed according to a fixed percentage of each participant's one-repetition maximum (1RM). Exercises included squats, lunges, and other lower-body movements aimed at improving strength and power.
BEHAVIORALVelocity-Based Training (VBT)
The velocity-based training (VBT) group performed lower-body resistance exercises for 8 weeks, three sessions per week. Training loads were adjusted based on real-time barbell velocity feedback measured with a linear encoder. Exercises included squats, lunges, and other multi-joint movements. Each session focused on maintaining optimal movement speed for power development.
Sponsors
Istanbul Gelisim University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Intervention model description
The study employed a parallel-group, randomized design. Participants were randomly assigned to either a percentage-based training (PBT) group or a velocity-based training (VBT) group. Both groups performed resistance training programs for 8 weeks, focusing on lower-body and upper-body exercises. The VBT group trained according to movement velocity feedback, while the PBT group followed loads based on fixed percentages of one-repetition maximum (1RM). Pre- and post-tests were conducted to evaluate changes in motor performance variables such as jump height, sprint time, and maximal strength.
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
MALE
Age
18 Years to 35 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Male university athletes aged 18-35 years * Regular participation in resistance training for at least 1 year * Free from any musculoskeletal injuries during the last 6 months * Willing to participate in all training sessions and testing procedures
Exclusion criteria
* Current or recent musculoskeletal, neurological, or cardiovascular disorders * Missed more than two training sessions during the study period * Use of performance-enhancing drugs or supplements during the study * Any medical condition that prevents participation in resistance training
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Vertical Jump Height | 8 weeks (baseline to post-test) | Countermovement jump height will be measured using a force platform. Jump height (cm) will be calculated from flight time. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| CMJ Peak Power | 8 weeks | Peak power (W) will be calculated using data obtained from the force platform and linear encoder. |
| CMJ Peak Velocity | 8 weeks | Peak velocity (m/s) during countermovement jump will be measured using a linear encoder. |
| 20 m Sprint Time | 8 weeks | Sprint speed will be measured using a 20-meter sprint test with electronic timing gates. |
| CMJ Peak Force | 8 weeks | Peak force (N) during countermovement jump will be measured using a force platform. |
| 505 Agility Test Time | 8 weeks | Change of direction ability will be assessed using the 505 agility test. |
| 1RM Back Squat Strength | 8 weeks | Maximal lower-body strength will be assessed using the one-repetition maximum (1RM) back squat test. |
| 40 m Sprint Time | 8 weeks | Sprint performance will be measured using a 40-meter sprint test with electronic timing gates. |
Countries
Turkey (Türkiye)
Outcome results
None listed