You could be reading the full-text of this article now if you...

If you have access to this article through your institution,
you can view this article in

TestRetest Reliability of Barbell Velocity During the Free-Weight Bench-Press Exercise

Stock, Matt S; Beck, Travis W; DeFreitas, Jason M; Dillon, Michael A

Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research:
doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e318201bdf9
Original Research

Stock, MS, Beck, TW, DeFreitas, JM, and Dillon, MA. Test-retest reliability of barbell velocity during the free-weight bench-press exercise. J Strength Cond Res 25(1): 171-177, 2011-The purpose of this study was to calculate test-retest reliability statistics for peak barbell velocity during the free-weight bench-press exercise for loads corresponding to 10-90% of the 1-repetition maximum (1RM). Twenty-one healthy, resistance-trained men (mean ± SD age = 23.5 ± 2.7 years; body mass = 90.5 ± 14.6 kg; 1RM bench press = 125.4 ± 18.4 kg) volunteered for this study. A minimum of 48 hours after a maximal strength testing and familiarization session, the subjects performed single repetitions of the free-weight bench-press exercise at each tenth percentile (10-90%) of the 1RM on 2 separate occasions. For each repetition, the subjects were instructed to press the barbell as rapidly as possible, and peak barbell velocity was measured with a Tendo Weightlifting Analyzer. The test-retest intraclass correlation coefficients (model 2,1) and corresponding standard errors of measurement (expressed as percentages of the mean barbell velocity values) were 0.717 (4.2%), 0.572 (5.0%), 0.805 (3.1%), 0.669 (4.7%), 0.790 (4.6%), 0.785 (4.8%), 0.811 (5.8%), 0.714 (10.3%), and 0.594 (12.6%) for the weights corresponding to 10-90% 1RM. There were no mean differences between the barbell velocity values from trials 1 and 2. These results indicated moderate to high test-retest reliability for barbell velocity from 10 to 70% 1RM but decreased consistency at 80 and 90% 1RM. When examining barbell velocity during the free-weight bench-press exercise, greater measurement error must be overcome at 80 and 90% 1RM to be confident that an observed change is meaningful.

Author Information

Department of Health and Exercise Science, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma

Address correspondence to Matt S. Stock,

© 2011 National Strength and Conditioning Association