Power and maximum strength relationships during performance of dynamic and static weighted jumps

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship of the 1 repetition maximum (1RM) squat to power output during countermovement and static weighted vertical squat jumps. The training experience of subjects (N = 22, 87.0 +/- 15.3 kg, 14.1 +/- 7.1% fat, 22.2 +/- 3.8 years) ranged from 7 weeks to 15+ years. Based on the 1RM squat, subjects were further divided into the 5 strongest and 5 weakest subjects (p 相似文献   

Assessing lower-body peak power in elite rugby-union players

Resistance training at the load that maximizes peak power (Pmax) may produce greater increases in peak power than other loads. Pmax for lower-body lifts can occur with no loading but whether Pmax can be increased further with negative loading is unclear. The purpose of this investigation was therefore to determine lower-body Pmax (jump squat) using a spectrum of loads. Box squat 1 repetition maximum (1RM) was measured in 18 elite rugby-union players. Pmax was then determined using loads of -28 to 60%1RM. Elastic bands were used to unload body weight for negative loads. Jump squat Pmax occurred with no loading (body weight: 8,880 ± 2,186 W) in all but 2 subjects. There was a discontinuity in the power-load relationship for the jump squat, possibly because of the increased countermovement in the body weight jump. The self-selected depth (dip) before the propulsive phase of the jump was greater by 24 ± 11 to 40 ± 16% (moderate to large effect size) than all positive loads. These findings highlight methodological issues that need to be taken into consideration when comparing power outputs of loaded and unloaded jumps.     

The acute effects of manipulating volume and load of back squats on countermovement vertical jump performance

The acute effects of manipulating the volume and load of back squats on subsequent countermovement vertical jump performance were investigated in the present study. Eleven National Collegiate Athletic Association division II female volleyball players performed 10 countermovement vertical jumps (CMJs) on a force platform 2 minutes after the last squat repetition of a high-load (HL) or high-volume (HV) squat protocol. Two minutes of rest was provided between each CMJ. The HL protocol culminated in the subjects having to perform 3 repetitions with a load equivalent to 90% 1 repetition maximum (1RM) back squat, whereas 12 repetitions with a load equivalent to 37% 1RM were performed in the HV protocol. During an initial familiarization session, knee angles were recorded during a series of CMJs, and these angles were used to control the depth of descent during all subsequent back squats. Jump height (JH) and vertical stiffness (VStiff) were calculated during each of the 10 CMJ, and the change in these variables after the 2 squat protocols was assessed using an analysis of variance model with repeated measures on 2 factors (Protocol [2-levels]; Time [2-levels]). There was no significant difference in JH after the HL and HV protocols (p > 0.05). A significant Protocol × Time interaction for VStiff resulted from the increase after the HL protocol being greater than that after the HV protocol (p = 0.03). The knee angles before the HL and HV protocols were significantly greater than those measured during the initial familiarization session (p = 0.001). Although neither squat protocol provided any benefit in improving JH, the heavy squat protocol produced greater increases in VStiff during the CMJ. Because of the increased VStiff caused by the HL protocol, volleyball coaches may consider using such protocols with their players to improve performance in jumps performed from a run such as the spike and on-court agility.     

Peak power, ground reaction forces, and velocity during the squat exercise performed at different loads

This study examined the changes in peak power, ground reaction force and velocity with different loads during the performance of the parallel squat movement. Twelve experienced male lifters (26.83 +/- 4.67 years of age) performed the standard parallel squat, using loads equal to 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, and 90% of 1 repetition maximum (1RM). Each subject performed all parallel squats with as much explosiveness as possible using his own technique. Peak power (PP), peak ground reaction force (PGRF), peak barbell velocity (PV), force at the time of PP (FPP), and velocity at the time of PP (VPP) were determined from force, velocity, and power curves calculated using barbell velocity and ground reaction force data. No significant differences were detected among loads for PP; however, the greatest PP values were associated with loads of 40 and 50% of 1RM. Higher loads produced greater PGRF and FPP values than lower loads (p < 0.05) in all cases except between loads equal to 60-50, 50-40, and 40-30% of 1RM for PGRF, and between loads equal to 70-60 and 60-50% of 1RM for FPP. Higher loads produced lower PV and VPP values than lower loads (p < 0.05) in all cases except between the 20-30, 70-80, and 80-90% of 1RM conditions. These results may be helpful in determining loads when prescribing need-specific training protocols targeting different areas of the load-velocity continuum.     

Lower-body work capacity and one-repetition maximum squat prediction in college football players

The purpose of this study was to assess lower-body muscular strength and work capacity after off-season resistance training and the efficacy of predicting maximal squat strength (1 repetition maximum [1RM]) from repetitions to fatigue. National Collegiate Athletic Association Division-II football players (n = 58) were divided into low-strength (LS, 1RM < 365 lb, n = 32) and high-strength (HS, 1RM ≥ 365 lb, n = 26) groups before training based on median 1RM squat performance. Maximal repetitions to failure (RTFs) were performed with a relative load of 70% of 1RM before training and 60, 70, 80, and 90% of 1RM after 12 weeks of a linear periodization resistance training program. As a team, 1RM squat (32 ± 27 lb), 70% RTF (4.5 ± 4.5 reps), and work capacity at 70% 1RM load (1,482 ± 1,181 lb reps) increased significantly after training. Likewise, training resulted in significant increases in 1RM, RTF at 70% 1RM, and work capacity (load × reps) in both LS (8 ± 33 lb, 3.9 ± 4.7 reps, 1,736 ± 1,521 lb reps, respectively) and HS (27 ± 21 lb, 4.9 ± 4.4 reps, 2,387 ± 1,767 lb reps, respectively), with no significant difference between groups. There was no relationship between the change in work capacity and the change in muscular strength for either the LS (r = 0.02) or HS (r = 0.06) group. Predicted 1RMs were best when RTFs were performed using 80% 1RM (5-17 RTFs), with an error of ±5% in 95% of the subjects. In conclusion, the changes in muscular strength associated with an off-season training program appear to have a positive influence on squat work capacity at 70% of 1RM and allow favorable prediction of 1RM using submaximal loads.     

The acute effects of heavy-load squats and loaded countermovement jumps on sprint performance

The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether performing high force or explosive force movements prior to sprinting would improve running speed. Fifteen NCAA Division III football players performed a heavy-load squat (HS), loaded countermovement jump (LCMJ), or control (C) warm-up condition in a counterbalanced randomized order over the course of 3 weeks. The HS protocol consisted of 1 set of 3 repetitions at 90% of the subject's 1 repetition maximum (1RM). The LCMJ protocol was 1 set of 3 repetitions at 30% of the subject's 1RM. At 4 minutes post-warm-up, subjects completed a timed 40-m dash with time measured at 10, 30, and 40 m. The results of the study indicated that when preceded by a set of HS, subjects ran 0.87% faster (p < or = 0.05) in the 40-m dash (5.35 +/- 0.32 vs. 5.30 +/- 0.34 seconds) in comparison to C. No significant differences were observed in the 10-m or 30-m split times between the 3 conditions. The data from this study suggest that an acute bout of low-volume heavy lifting with the lower body may improve 40-m sprint times, but that loaded countermovement jumps appear to have no significant effect.     

Acute effects of augmented eccentric loading on jump squat performance

The purpose of this study was to determine the acute effects of a spectrum of eccentric loads on force, velocity, and power during the concentric portion of maximal-effort jump squats utilizing a repeated measures design. Thirteen resistance-trained men (age = 22.8 +/- 2.9 years, weight = 87.1 +/- 11.8 kg, 163.5 +/- 28.6 kg squat 1 repetition maximum [1RM]; mean +/- SD), who routinely incorporated back squats into their training, participated as subjects in this investigation. Jump squat performance was assessed using 4 experimental conditions. The first of these conditions consisted of an isoinertial load equal to 30% of back squat 1RM. The remaining conditions consisted of jump squats with a concentric load of 30% 1RM, subsequent to the application of experimental augmented eccentric loading (AEL) conditions of 20, 50, and 80% of back squat 1RM, respectively. All subjects performed 2 sets of 1RM of maximum-effort jump squats with all experimental conditions in a counter-balanced sequence. Forty-eight hours after completing the first testing session, subjects repeated the experimental testing protocol to establish stability reliability. Peak performance values for the reliable variables of force, velocity, and power, as well as force and power values obtained at 20-ms intervals during the initial 400 ms of the concentric jump squat range of motion, showed no statistical difference (p > 0.05) across the experimental AEL loads. These results suggest that load-spectrum AEL prior to a 30% 1RM jump squat fails to acutely enhance force, velocity, and power.     

Front squat data reproducibility collected with a triple-axis accelerometer

The purpose of our study was to assess data reproducibility from 2 consecutive front squat workouts, spaced 1 week apart, performed by American college football players (n = 18) as they prepared for their competitive season. For each workout, our methods entailed the performance of 3-6 front squat repetitions per set at 55, 65, and 75% of subject's 1 repetition maximum (1RM) load. In addition, a fourth set was done at a heavier load, with a resistance equal to 80 and 83% of their 1RM values, for the first and second workouts, respectively. A triple-axis accelerometer was affixed to a barbell to quantify exercise performance. Per load, the accelerometer measures peak values for the following indices: force, velocity, and power. To assess data reproducibility, inter-workout comparisons were made for 12 performance indices with 4 statistical test-retest measures: intraclass correlation coefficients, coefficients of variation (CVs), and the SEM expressed in both absolute and relative terms. Current results show that the majority of performance indices exceeded intraclass correlation (0.75-0.80) and CV (10-15%) values previously deemed as acceptable levels of data reproducibility. The 2 indices with the greatest variability were power and velocity values obtained at 55% of the 1RM load; thus, it was concluded that higher movement rates at the lightest load were the most difficult aspect of front squat performance to repeat successfully over time. Our practical applications imply lighter loads, with inherently higher rates of barbell movement, yield lower data reproducibility values.     

Effect of a submaximal half-squats warm-up program on vertical jumping ability

The purpose of the current research was to study the effect of a warm-up program including submaximal half-squats on vertical jumping ability. Twenty physically active men participated in the study. Each subject performed 5 sets of half-squats with 2 repetitions at each of the following intensities: 20, 40, 60, 80, and 90% of the 1 repetition maximum (1RM) load. Prior to the first set and immediately after the end of the last set, the subjects performed 2 countermovement jumps on a Kistler force platform; the primary goal was to jump as high as possible. The results showed that mean vertical jumping ability improved by 2.39% after the warm-up period. Subjects were then divided into 2 groups according to their 1RM values for the half-squat. Subjects with greater maximal strength ability improved their vertical jumping ability (4.01%) more than did subjects with lower maximal strength (0.42%). A warm-up protocol including half-squats with submaximal loads and explosive execution can be used for short-term improvements of vertical jumping performance, and this effect is greater in athletes with a relatively high strength ability.     

Short-term effects of selected exercise and load in contrast training on vertical jump performance

The present study examined the short-term effects of loaded half squats (HSs) and loaded jump squats (JSs) with low and moderate loads on the squat jump (SJ) and the countermovement jump (CMJ) performance using a contrast training approach. Ten men (mean +/- SD age, 23 +/- 1.8 years) performed the HS and JS exercises twice with loads of 30% of 1 repetition maximum (1RM) (HS30% and JS30%, respectively) and 60% of 1RM (HS60% and JS60%, respectively). On each occasion, 3 sets of 5 repetitions with 3 minutes of rest were performed as fast as possible. Vertical jump performance was measured before exercise, 1 minute after each set, and at the fifth and 10th minutes of recovery. The CMJ increased significantly after the first and second set (3.9%; p < 0.05) compared with preexercise values following the JS30% protocol and 3.3% after the second and third sets of the JS60% protocol. Following the HS60% protocol, CMJ increased after the first and the second sets (3.6%; p < 0.05) compared with preexercise values, whereas SQ increased only after the first set (4.9%; p < 0.05) in this condition. These data show that contrast loading with the use of low and moderate loads can cause a short-term increase in CMJ performance. The applied loads do not seem to present different short-term effects after loaded JSs. When the classic form of dynamic HS exercise is performed, however, at least a moderate load (60% of 1RM) needs to be applied.     

Strength and power predictors of sports speed

For many sporting activities, initial speed rather than maximal speed would be considered of greater importance to successful performance. The purpose of this study was to identify the relationship between strength and power and measures of first-step quickness (5-m time), acceleration (10-m time), and maximal speed (30-m time). The maximal strength (3 repetition maximum [3RM]), power (30-kg jump squat, countermovement, and drop jumps), isokinetic strength measures (hamstring and quadriceps peak torques and ratios at 60 degrees .s(-1) and 300 degrees .s(-1)) and 5-m, 10-m, and 30-m sprint times of 26 part-time and full-time professional rugby league players (age 23.2 +/- 3.3 years) were measured. To examine the importance of the strength and power measures on sprint performance, a correlational approach and a comparison between means of the fastest and slowest players was used. The correlations between the 3RM, drop jump, isokinetic strength measures, and the 3 measures of sport speed were nonsignificant. Correlations between the jump squat (height and relative power output) and countermovement jump height and the 3 speed measures were significant (r = -0.43 to -0.66, p < 0.05). The squat and countermovement jump heights as well as squat jump relative power output were the only variables found to be significantly greater in the fast players. It was suggested that improving the power to weight ratio as well as plyometric training involving countermovement and loaded jump-squat training may be more effective for enhancing sport speed in elite players.     

Acute effects of plyometric exercise on maximum squat performance in male athletes

This study examines the acute effects of plyometric exercise on 1 repetition maximum (RM) squat performance in trained male athletes. Twelve men (mean age +/- SD: 20.5 +/- 1.4 years) volunteered to participate in 3 testing sessions separated by at least 6 days of rest. During each testing session the 1RM was assessed on back squat exercise. Before all 3 trials subjects warmed up on a stationary cycle for 5 minutes and performed static stretching. Subjects then performed 5 submaximal sets of 1-8 repetitions before attempting a 1RM lift. Subjects rested for at least 4 minutes between 1RM trials. During the first testing session (T1) subjects performed a series of sets with increasing load until their 1RM was determined. During the second and third testing sessions subjects performed in counterbalanced order either 3 double-leg tuck jumps (TJ) or 2 depth jumps (DJ) 30 seconds before each 1RM attempt. The average 1RM lifts after T1 and testing sessions with TJ or DJ were 139.6 +/- 29.3 kg, 140.5 +/- 25.6 kg, and 144.5 +/- 30.2 kg, respectively (T1 < DJ; p < 0.05). These data suggest that DJ performed before 1RM testing may enhance squat performance in trained male athletes.     

Relationship between traditional and ballistic squat exercise with vertical jumping and maximal sprinting

The purpose of this study was to quantify the magnitude of the relationship between vertical jumping and maximal sprinting at different distances with performance in the traditional and ballistic concentric squat exercise in well-trained sprinters. Twenty-one men performed 2 types of barbell squats (ballistic and traditional) across different loads with the aim of determining the maximal peak and average power outputs and 1 repetition maximum (1RM) values. Moreover, vertical jumping (countermovement jump test [CMJ]) and maximal sprints over 10, 20, 30, 40, 60, and 80 m were also assessed. In respect to 1RM in traditional squat, (a) no significant correlation was found with CMJ performance; (b) positive strong relationships (p < 0.01) were obtained with all the power measures obtained during both ballistic and traditional squat exercises (r = 0.53-0.90); (c) negative significant correlations (r = -0.49 to -0.59, p < 0.05) were found with sprint times in all the sprint distances measured when squat strength was expressed as a relative value; however, in the absolute mode, no significant relationships were observed with 10- and 20-m sprint times. No significant relationship was found between 10-m sprint time and relative or absolute power outputs using either ballistic or traditional squat exercises. Sprint time at 20 m was only related to ballistic and traditional squat performance when power values were expressed in relative terms. Moderate significant correlations (r = -0.39 to -0.56, p < 0.05) were observed between sprint times at 30 and 40 m and the absolute/relative power measures attained in both ballistic and traditional squat exercises. Sprint times at 60 and 80 m were mainly related to ballistic squat power outputs. Although correlations can only give insights into associations and not into cause and effect, from this investigation, it can be seen that traditional squat strength has little in common with CMJ performance and that relative 1RM and power outputs for both squat exercises are statistically correlated to most sprint distances underlying the importance of strength and power to sprinting.     

The influence of familiarization on the reliability of force variables measured during unloaded and loaded vertical jumps

The purpose of this study was to determine the number of familiarization sessions required to obtain an accurate measure of reliability associated with force variables recorded during unloaded and loaded (30 and 60% of 1 repetition maximum squat [1RM]) static vertical jumps (SJ). Nine physically active men attended 4 separate testing sessions over a 2-week period. Force platform recordings of peak force, peak rate of force development (pRFD), average rate of force development, takeoff velocity, average power, and peak power were obtained for each jump. During each of the 4 testing sessions, 3 jumps were performed under each of the load conditions. The average of the force variables were used in the analysis. Familiarization was assessed using the scores obtained during the 4 separate testing sessions. Reliability was assessed by calculating intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and coefficient of variation (CV) associated with the force variables. No significant differences (p > 0.05) were obtained between the testing sessions for any of the force variables. With the exception of pRFD, the force variables showed reasonably good levels of test-retest reliability (ICC range: 0.75-0.99; CV range: 1.2-7.6%). High levels of reliability can be achieved in a variety of force variables without the need for familiarization sessions when performing SJ under unloaded conditions and with loads of 30 and 60% of 1RM squat with physically active men.     

Peak power, force, and velocity during jump squats in professional rugby players

Training at the optimal load for peak power output (PPO) has been proposed as a method for enhancing power output, although others argue that the force, velocity, and PPO are of interest across the full range of loads. The aim of this study was to examine the influence of load on PPO, peak barbell velocity (BV), and peak vertical ground reaction force (VGRF) during the jump squat (JS) in a group of professional rugby players. Eleven male professional rugby players (age, 26 ± 3 years; height, 1.83 ± 6.12 m; mass, 97.3 ± 11.6 kg) performed loaded JS at loads of 20-100% of 1 repetition maximum (1RM) JS. A force plate and linear position transducer, with a mechanical braking unit, were used to measure PPO, VGRF, and BV. Load had very large significant effects on PPO (p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.915); peak VGRF (p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.854); and peak BV (p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.973). The PPO and peak BV were the highest at 20% 1RM, though PPO was not significantly greater than that at 30% 1RM. The peak VGRF was significantly greater at 1RM than all other loads, with no significant difference between 20 and 60% 1RM. In resistance trained professional rugby players, the optimal load for eliciting PPO during the loaded JS in the range measured occurs at 20% 1RM JS, with decreases in PPO and BV, and increases in VGRF, as the load is increased, although greater PPO likely occurs without any additional load.     

Change in power output across a high-repetition set of bench throws and jump squats in highly trained athletes

Athletes experienced in maximal-power and power-endurance training performed 1 set of 2 common power training exercises in an effort to determine the effects of moderately high repetitions upon power output levels throughout the set. Twenty-four and 15 athletes, respectively, performed a set of 10 repetitions in both the bench throw (BT P60) and jump squat exercise (JS P60) with a resistance of 60 kg. For both exercises, power output was highest on either the second (JS P60) or the third repetition (BT P60) and was then maintained until the fifth repetition. Significant declines in power output occurred from the sixth repetition onwards until the 10th repetition (11.2% for BT P60 and 5% for JS P60 by the 10th repetition). These findings suggest that athletes attempting to increase maximal power limit their repetitions to 2 to 5 when using resistances of 35 to 45% 1RM in these exercises.     

Maximal power at different percentages of one repetition maximum: influence of resistance and gender

National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I athletes were tested to determine the load at which maximal mechanical output is achieved. Athletes performed power testing at 30, 40, 50, 60, and 70% of individual 1 repetition maximum (1RM) in the squat jump, bench press, and hang pull exercises. Additionally, hang pull power testing was performed using free-form (i.e., barbell) and fixed-form (i.e., Smith machine) techniques. There were differences between genders in optimal power output during the squat jump (30-40% of 1RM for men; 30-50% of 1RM for women) and bench throw (30% of 1RM for men; 30-50% of 1RM for women) exercises. There were no gender or form interactions during the hang pull exercise; maximal power output during the hang pull occurred at 30-60% of 1RM. In conclusion, these results indicate that (a) gender differences exist in the load at which maximal power output occurs during the squat jump and bench throw; and (b) although no gender or form interactions occurred during the hang pull exercise, greater power could be generated during fixed-form exercise. In general, 30% of 1RM will elicit peak power outputs for both genders and all exercises used in this study, allowing this standard percentage to be used as a starting point in order to train maximal mechanical power output capabilities in these lifts in strength trained athletes.     

Anthropometrical, physiological, and tracked power profiles of elite taekwondo athletes 9 weeks before the Olympic competition phase

Physiological, anthropometric, and power profiling data were retrospectively analyzed from 4 elite taekwondo athletes from the Australian National Olympic team 9 weeks from Olympic departure. Power profiling data were collected weekly throughout the 9-week period. Anthropometric skinfolds generated a lean mass index (LMI). Physiological tests included a squat jump and bench throw power profile, bleep test, 20-m sprint test, running VO2max test, and bench press and squat 3 repetition maximum (3RM) strength tests. After this, the athletes power, velocity, and acceleration profile during unweighted squat jumps and single-leg jumps were tracked using a linear position transducer. Increases in power, velocity, and acceleration between weeks and bilateral comparisons were analyzed. Athletes had an LMI of 37.1 ± 0.4 and were 173.9 ± 0.2 m and 67 ± 1.1 kg. Relatively weaker upper body (56 ± 11.97 kg 3RM bench press) compared to lower body strength (88 ± 2.89 kg 3RM squat) was shown alongside a VO2max of 53.29 ml(-1)·min(-1)·kg, and a 20-m sprint time of 3.37 seconds. Increases in all power variables for single-leg squat and squat jumps were found from the first session to the last. Absolute peak power in single-leg squat jumps increased by 13.4-16% for the left and right legs with a 12.9% increase in squat jump peak power. Allometrically scaled peak power showed greater increases for single-leg (right leg: 18.55%; left: 23.49%) and squat jump (14.49%). The athlete's weight did not change significantly throughout the 9-week mesocycle. Progressions in power increases throughout the weeks were undulating and can be related to the intensity of the prior week's training and athlete injury. This analysis has shown that a 9-week mesocycle before Olympic departure that focuses on core lifts has the ability to improve power considerably.     

Effect of load positioning on the kinematics and kinetics of weighted vertical jumps

One of the most popular exercises for developing lower-body muscular power is the weighted vertical jump. The present study sought to examine the effect of altering the position of the external load on the kinematics and kinetics of the movement. Twenty-nine resistance-trained rugby union athletes performed maximal effort jumps with 0, 20, 40, and 60% of their squat 1 repetition maximum (1RM) with the load positioned (a) on the posterior aspect of the shoulder using a straight barbell and (b) at arms' length using a hexagonal barbell. Kinematic and kinetic variables were calculated through integration of the vertical ground reaction force data using a forward dynamics approach. Performance of the hexagonal barbell jump resulted in significantly (p < 0.05) greater values for jump height, peak force, peak power, and peak rate of force development compared with the straight barbell jump. Significantly (p < 0.05) greater peak power was produced during the unloaded jump compared with all trials where the external load was positioned on the shoulder. In contrast, significantly (p < 0.05) greater peak power was produced when using the hexagonal barbell combined with a load of 20% 1RM compared with all other conditions investigated. The results suggest that weighted vertical jumps should be performed with the external load positioned at arms' length rather than on the shoulder when attempting to improve lower-body muscular performance.     

Relationship between the number of repetitions and selected percentages of one repetition maximum in free weight exercises in trained and untrained men

Resistance exercise intensity is commonly prescribed as a percent of 1 repetition maximum (1RM). However, the relationship between percent 1RM and the number of repetitions allowed remains poorly studied, especially using free weight exercises. The purpose of this study was to determine the maximal number of repetitions that trained (T) and untrained (UT) men can perform during free weight exercises at various percentages of 1RM. Eight T and 8 UT men were tested for 1RM strength. Then, subjects performed 1 set to failure at 60, 80, and 90% of 1RM in the back squat, bench press, and arm curl in a randomized, balanced design. There was a significant (p < 0.05) intensity x exercise interaction. More repetitions were performed during the back squat than the bench press or arm curl at 60% 1RM for T and UT. At 80 and 90% 1RM, there were significant differences between the back squat and other exercises; however, differences were much less pronounced. No differences in number of repetitions performed at a given exercise intensity were noted between T and UT (except during bench press at 90% 1RM). In conclusion, the number of repetitions performed at a given percent of 1RM is influenced by the amount of muscle mass used during the exercise, as more repetitions can be performed during the back squat than either the bench press or arm curl. Training status of the individual has a minimal impact on the number of repetitions performed at relative exercise intensity.