Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 31, 2025
Improving Strength, Power, Muscle Aerobic Capacity, and Glucose Tolerance through Short-term Progressive Strength Training Among Elderly People
Published on: July 5, 2017
Estimating the relative load from movement velocity in the seated chest press exercise in older adults
Diogo Luís Marques1, Henrique Pereira Neiva1,2, Daniel Almeida Marinho1,2
1Department of Sport Sciences, University of Beira Interior, Covilhã, Portugal.
Aim:
This study aimed to i) determine the load-velocity relationship in the seated chest press in older adults, ii) compare the magnitude of the relationship between peak and mean velocity with the relative load, and iii) analyze the differences between sexes in movement velocity for each relative load in the chest press.
Material And Methods:
Thirty-two older adults (17 women and 15 men; 79.6±7.7 years) performed a chest press progressive loading test up to the one-repetition maximum (1RM). The fastest peak and mean velocity reached with each weight were analyzed. Quadratic equations were developed for both sexes and the effectiveness of the regression model was analyzed through a residual analysis. The equations were cross-validated, considering the holdout method. The independent samples t-test analyzed i) the differences in the magnitude of the relationship between peak and mean velocity with the relative load and ii) the differences between sexes in the peak and mean velocity for each relative load.
Results:
It was possible to observe very strong quadratic load-velocity relationships in the seated chest press in women (peak velocity: r2 = 0.97, standard error of the estimate (SEE) = 4.5% 1RM; mean velocity: r2 = 0.96, SEE = 5.3% 1RM) and men (peak velocity: r2 = 0.98, SEE = 3.8% 1RM; mean velocity: r2 = 0.98, SEE = 3.8% 1RM) without differences (p>0.05) in the magnitude of the relationship between peak and mean velocity with the relative load. Furthermore, there was no overfitting in the regression models due to the high and positive correlation coefficients (r = 0.98-0.99). Finally, men presented higher (p<0.001) lifting velocities than women in almost all relative loads, except for 95-100% 1RM (p>0.05).
Conclusion:
Measuring repetition velocity during the seated chest press is an objective approach to estimating the relative load in older adults. Furthermore, given the velocity differences between older women and men at submaximal loads, it is recommended to use sex-specific equations to estimate and prescribe the relative loads in older adults.
