Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Investigates barbell velocity stability across sets and intensities in male athletes, implying practical training implications.
Barbell velocity decreases as proximity to exercise endpoint approaches. This study aimed to determine if mean velocity at a given number of repetitions in reserve (RIR) was stable across differing intensity levels and multiple sets during hang clean exercise. Nineteen Division II male athletes (20.1 ± 1.1 years) completed two trials (3 sets to failure at 70% and 80% 1RM). The final five RIR of each set were analyzed with repeated measures ANOVAs (p ≤ .05). No differences in mean velocity between any set or intensity were observed for 5 RIR, 3 RIR, or 1 RIR. Pairwise differences were observed during 4 RIR (80% 1RM set 3 (1.13 ± 0.09 m/s) vs. 70% 1RM set 2 (1.20 ± 0.12 m/s)) and 2 RIR (80% 1RM set 2 (1.06 ± 0.15 m/s) vs. 70% RM set 2 (1.15 ± 0.13 m/s), 80% 1RM set 3 (1.04 ± 0.12 m/s) vs. 70% 1RM set 1 (1.12 ± 0.15 m/s) and set 2 (1.15 ± 0.13 m/s), and 70% 1RM set 2 (1.15 ± 0.13 m/s) vs. 70% 1RM set 3 (1.09 ± 0.14 m/s)). Effect sizes for significant pairwise differences ranged from 0.44-0.79. While several pairwise differences existed, lack of systematic trends indicated mean velocity at a given RIR was not generally influenced by set number or intensity. Thus, velocity for a given RIR appears stable across multiple sets and intensities in the hang clean. These velocities can be utilized to identify remaining RIR and adjust training.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kraft et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: