This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
This research analyzed the validity of the level of effort method to practically prescribe relative intensity (%1RM) and velocity loss (%VL) in women. We examined the (i) inter- and intrasubject (test–retest) variabilities in the number of repetitions to failure (nRM) at different%1RMs and (ii) the relationship between the repetitions being completed and%VL being incurred. Analyses covered three%1RMs (65–75–85%1RM), two exercises [bench press (BP) and squat (SQ)], and two groups of women with different strength levels (high and low, n=12 per group). To analyze the inter- and intrasubject variabilities, women completed two rounds of repetition-to-failure tests against the aforementioned%1RMs. Velocity was monitored to examine the relationship between the repetitions being completed and%VL incurred. For both strength groups, exercises, and%1RMs examined, the nRM showed very low inter- (95% confidence interval≤4 repetitions) and intrasubject (standard error of measurement≤1.7 repetitions) variabilities. Very close fits were found for individual’s relationships between the repetitions being completed and the%VL incurred for the low (BP, mean R 2=0.975, SQ, mean R 2=0.938) and high (BP, mean R 2=0.975, SQ, mean R 2=0.934) strength groups. In conclusion, the level of effort method is a technology-free approach to program%1RM and%VL in women.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Borrego et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: