Reliability, Validity, and Comparison of Barbell Velocity Measurement Devices during the Jump Shrug and Hang High Pull

被引:6
|
作者
Suchomel, Timothy J. [1 ,2 ]
Techmanski, Baylee S. [3 ]
Kissick, Cameron R. [4 ]
Comfort, Paul [2 ]
机构
[1] Carroll Univ, Dept Human Movement Sci, Waukesha, WI 53186 USA
[2] Univ Salford, Directorate Sport Exercise & Physiotherapy, Salford M6 6PU, England
[3] Athlete Performance, Mequon, WI 53092 USA
[4] New York Mets, Queens, NY 11368 USA
关键词
weightlifting; power clean; velocity-based training; load-velocity profile; FORCE-TIME CHARACTERISTICS; PROGRESSIVE EXERCISE; KINEMATIC VARIABLES; KINETIC VARIABLES; LOAD ABSORPTION; POWER OUTPUT; PEAK POWER; DERIVATIVES; BODY;
D O I
10.3390/jfmk8010035
中图分类号
G8 [体育];
学科分类号
04 ; 0403 ;
摘要
This study examined the reliability, potential bias, and practical differences between the GymAware Powertool (GA), Tendo Power Analyzer (TENDO), and Push Band 2.0 (PUSH) during the jump shrug (JS) and hang high pull (HHP) performed across a spectrum of loads. Fifteen resistance-trained men performed JS and HHP repetitions with 20, 40, 60, 80, and 100% of their 1RM hang power clean, and mean (MBV) and peak barbell velocity (PBV) were determined by each velocity measurement device. Least-products regression and Bland-Altman plots were used to examine instances of proportional, fixed, and systematic bias between the TENDO and PUSH compared to the GA. Hedge's g effect sizes were also calculated to determine any meaningful differences between devices. The GA and TENDO displayed excellent reliability and acceptable variability during the JS and HHP while the PUSH showed instances of poor-moderate reliability and unacceptable variability at various loads. While the TENDO and PUSH showed instances of various bias, the TENDO device demonstrated greater validity when compared to the GA. Trivial-small differences were shown between the GA and TENDO during the JS and HHP exercises while trivial-moderate differences existed between GA and PUSH during the JS. However, despite trivial-small effects between the GA and PUSH devices at 20 and 40% 1RM during the HHP, practically meaningful differences existed at 60, 80, and 100%, indicating that the PUSH velocity outputs were not accurate. The TENDO appears to be more reliable and valid than the PUSH when measuring MBV and PBV during the JS and HHP.
引用
收藏
页数:19
相关论文
共 20 条
  • [11] Criterion Validity, and Interunit and Between-Day Reliability of the FLEX for Measuring Barbell Velocity During Commonly Used Resistance Training Exercises
    Weakley, Jonathon
    Chalkley, Daniel
    Johnston, Rich
    Garcia-Ramos, Amador
    Townshend, Andrew
    Dorrell, Harry
    Pearson, Madison
    Morrison, Matthew
    Cole, Michael
    JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH, 2020, 34 (06) : 1519 - 1524
  • [12] Reliability and concurrent validity of the PUSH Band™ 2.0 to measure barbell velocity during the free-weight and Smith machine squat exercises
    Perez-Castilla, Alejandro
    Garcia-Ramos, Amador
    Gijon-Nieto, Luis Miguel
    Marcos-Blanco, Aitor
    Garcia-Pinillos, Felipe
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE INSTITUTION OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS PART P-JOURNAL OF SPORTS ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY, 2022, 236 (04) : 351 - 359
  • [13] Concurrent validity of VmaxPro, Kinovea, and Speedograph for the assessment of peak barbell velocity during the bench press: A comparison of technological approaches and historical evolutions
    Sandau, Ingo
    Ritterbusch, Arne
    Schelenz, Adrian
    Witt, Maren
    JOURNAL OF HUMAN SPORT AND EXERCISE, 2023, 18 (03): : 612 - 621
  • [14] Validity and reliability of smartphone high-speed camera and Kinovea for velocity-based training measurement
    Manuel Jimenez-Olmedo, Jose
    Penichet-Tomas, Alfonso
    Villalon-Gasch, Lamberto
    Pueo, Basilio
    JOURNAL OF HUMAN SPORT AND EXERCISE, 2021, 16 (04): : 878 - 888
  • [15] Reliability and Concurrent Validity of Seven Commercially Available Devices for the Assessment of Movement Velocity at Different Intensities During the Bench Press
    Perez-Castilla, Alejandro
    Piepoli, Antonio
    Delgado-Garcia, Gabriel
    Garrido-Blanca, Gabriel
    Garcia-Ramos, Amador
    JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH, 2019, 33 (05) : 1258 - 1265
  • [16] Comparison of two measurement devices for obtaining horizontal force-velocity profile variables during sprint running
    Feser, Erin
    Lindley, Kyle
    Clark, Kenneth
    Bezodis, Neil
    Korfist, Christian
    Cronin, John
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPORTS SCIENCE & COACHING, 2022, 17 (06) : 1455 - 1461
  • [17] Comparison of the two most commonly used gold-standard velocity monitoring devices (GymAware and T-Force) to assess lifting velocity during the free-weight barbell back squat exercise
    Janicijevic, Danica
    Garcia-Ramos, Amador
    Luis Lamas-Cepero, Juan
    Garcia-Pinillos, Felipe
    Marcos-Blanco, Aitor
    Javier Rojas, Francisco
    Weakley, Jonathon
    Perez-Castilla, Alejandro
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE INSTITUTION OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS PART P-JOURNAL OF SPORTS ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY, 2023, 237 (03) : 205 - 212
  • [18] Concurrent validity and between-unit reliability of a foot-mounted inertial measurement unit to measure velocity during team sport activity
    Myhill, Naomi
    Weaving, Dan
    Robinson, Mark
    Barrett, Steve
    Emmonds, Stacey
    SCIENCE AND MEDICINE IN FOOTBALL, 2024, 8 (04) : 308 - 316
  • [19] A New Foot-Mounted Inertial Measurement System in Soccer: Reliability and Comparison to Global Positioning Systems for Velocity Measurements During Team Sport Actions
    Waldron, Mark
    Harding, Jamie
    Barrett, Steve
    Gray, Adrian
    JOURNAL OF HUMAN KINETICS, 2021, 77 (01) : 37 - 50
  • [20] On-field concurrent validity of flight time-based countermovement jump height during fatigue: A comparison between inertial measurement units worn at different locations on the body
    de Ruiter, Cornelis J.
    Haller, Svea
    van den Hoff, Tessa J. A.
    Wilmes, Erik
    JOURNAL OF SPORTS SCIENCES, 2024, 42 (19) : 1859 - 1866