Applications of the Critical Power Model to Dynamic Constant External Resistance Exercise: A Brief Review of the Critical Load Test

Muscle typology influences the number of repetitions to failure during resistance training

This study examined whether muscle typology (muscle fibre type composition) is related to maximal strength and whether it can explain the high inter-individual variability in number of repetitions to failure during resistance training. Ninety-five resistance training novices (57 males) were assessed for their maximal isometric knee extension strength and muscle typology. Muscle typology was estimated by measuring carnosine in the soleus, gastrocnemius and/or vastus lateralis using proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Forty-four subjects (22 males) performed dynamic strength tests (1RM) and 3 sets of leg extensions and curls to failure (60%1RM) to determine the association between muscle typology and (total) number of repetitions. Twenty-one subjects performed additional biceps curls and triceps extensions (60%1RM) to assess influence of exercise, 23 subjects performed additional leg extensions and curls at 80% and 40%1RM to evaluate influence of training load. There was a weak but significant relationship between muscle typology and maximal isometric strength (r = 0.22, p = 0.03) favouring the fast typology individuals. Slow and fast typology individuals did not differ in upper arm and upper leg 1RM. Total number of repetitions was related to muscle typology at 80% (r = -0.42; p = 0.04) and 60% (p = -0.44; p = 0.003) but not at 40%1RM. Slow typology individuals performed more repetitions to failure at 60%1RM in the leg extension (p = 0.03), leg curl (p = 0.01) and biceps curl (p = 0.02). In conclusion, muscle typology has a small contribution to maximal isometric strength but not dynamic strength and partly determines the number of repetitions to failure during resistance training. This insight can help individualizing resistance training prescriptions.

Modeling the Relationship between Load and Repetitions to Failure in Resistance Training: A Bayesian Analysis

PURPOSE

To identify the relationship between load and the number of repetitions performed to momentary failure in the pin press exercise, the present study compared different statistical model types and structures using a Bayesian approach.

METHODS

Thirty resistance-trained men and women were tested on two separate occasions. During the first visit, participants underwent assessment of their one-repetition maximum (1-RM) in the pin press exercise. On the second visit, they performed sets to momentary failure at 90%, 80% and 70% of their 1-RM in a fixed order during a single session. The relationship between relative load and repetitions performed to failure was fitted using linear regression, exponential regression and the critical load model. Each model was fitted according to the Bayesian framework in two ways: using an across-subjects pooled data structure and using a multilevel structure. Models were compared based on the variance explained (R²) and leave-one-out cross-validation information criterion (LOOIC).

RESULTS

Multilevel models, which incorporate higher-level commonalities into individual relationships, demonstrated a substantially better fit (R²: 0.97-0.98) and better predictive accuracy compared to generalized pooled-data models (R²: 0.89-0.93). The multilevel 2-parameter exponential regression emerged as the best representation of data in terms of model fit, predictive accuracy and model simplicity.

CONCLUSION

The relationship between load and repetitions performed to failure follows an individually expressed exponential trend in the pin press exercise. To accurately predict the load that is associated with a certain repetition maximum, the relationship should therefore be modeled on a subject-specific level.

Reproducibility of strength performance and strength-endurance profiles: A test-retest study

The present study was designed to evaluate the test-retest consistency of repetition maximum tests at standardized relative loads and determine the robustness of strength-endurance profiles across test-retest trials. Twenty-four resistance-trained males and females (age, 27.4 ± 4.0 y; body mass, 77.2 ± 12.6 kg; relative bench press one-repetition maximum [1-RM], 1.19 ± 0.23 kg•kg-1) were assessed for their 1-RM in the free-weight bench press. After 48 to 72 hours, they were tested for the maximum number of achievable repetitions at 90%, 80% and 70% of their 1-RM. A retest was completed for all assessments one week later. Gathered data were used to model the relationship between relative load and repetitions to failure with respect to individual trends using Bayesian multilevel modeling and applying four recently proposed model types. The maximum number of repetitions showed slightly better reliability at lower relative loads (ICC at 70% 1-RM = 0.86, 90% highest density interval: [0.71, 0.93]) compared to higher relative loads (ICC at 90% 1-RM = 0.65 [0.39, 0.83]), whereas the absolute agreement was slightly better at higher loads (SEM at 90% 1-RM = 0.7 repetitions [0.5, 0.9]; SEM at 70% 1-RM = 1.1 repetitions [0.8, 1.4]). The linear regression model and the 2-parameters exponential regression model revealed the most robust parameter estimates across test-retest trials. Results testify to good reproducibility of repetition maximum tests at standardized relative loads obtained over short periods of time. A complementary free-to-use web application was developed to help practitioners calculate strength-endurance profiles and build individual repetition maximum tables based on robust statistical models.

A critical review of critical power

The elegant concept of a hyperbolic relationship between power, velocity, or torque and time to exhaustion has rightfully captivated the imagination and inspired extensive research for over half a century. Theoretically, the relationship's asymptote along the time axis (critical power, velocity, or torque) indicates the exercise intensity that could be maintained for extended durations, or the "heavy-severe exercise boundary". Much more than a critical mass of the extensive accumulated evidence, however, has persistently shown the determined intensity of critical power and its variants as being too high to maintain for extended periods. The extensive scientific research devoted to the topic has almost exclusively centered around its relationships with various endurance parameters and performances, as well as the identification of procedural problems and how to mitigate them. The prevalent underlying premise has been that the observed discrepancies are mainly due to experimental 'noise' and procedural inconsistencies. Consequently, little or no effort has been directed at other perspectives such as trying to elucidate physiological reasons that possibly underly and account for those discrepancies. This review, therefore, will attempt to offer a new such perspective and point out the discrepancies' likely root causes.