Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Main Objectives in Velocity-based Training
As the name implies, velocity-based training (VBT) is an intensity strategy that stresses the speed with which a load is moved rather than the weight of that load. During a training session, the speed output is constantly monitored by equipment that can provide instantaneous feedback to the lifter and assess whether the load is appropriate for the session’s purpose (Dorrell et al., 2020). Coaches and athletes can employ Velocity-Based Training to analyze real-time movement speed and alter the weight or activity as needed. Athletes have been increasingly focused on their respective sports in recent years.
Instead of competing in a variety of sports, the participants concentrate on a single one. Competition has increased, and athletes are beginning to train at an earlier age. Athletes who wish to achieve success in sports should improve their speed, agility, and strength. Physical Training is beneficial to athletes since it helps them to enhance their endurance, strength, and mobility (Orange et al., 2019). Improved self-esteem, increased self-confidence, and increased self-discipline are just a few of the psychological advantages of exercising. The ability to sprint, lift, and maintain endurance conditioning is essential in developing a well-trained young athlete who will become a more disciplined player.
Different ways in which Velocity-Based Training can be implemented
Velocity Based Training can be implemented by establishing a uniform standard and providing immediate feedback. This treatment enhances neuromuscular performance, which improves physical well-being. Better inter-and intra-competitive situations and the capacity to track data and improve over time benefit individuals and teams. VBT’s instantaneous feedback increased sports performance measures compared to non-feedback Training. Velocity Based Training decreases the chance that occurs during training sessions by anticipating loads based on athlete preparedness. This allows one to train more precisely. Travel, family life, sleep quality, schooling, career, and Training are significant sources of stress for collegiate and professional athletes.
Limitations of using Velocity-Based Training
Velocity-Based Training is among the most popular techniques for planning training programs. However, the same comes with a lot of challenges, especially in implementation. Many people do not understand or adequately interpret this concept. According to McCarthy (2019), the value of Velocity-Based Training should show the highest load an individual can lift when in dynamic motion. This is the reason why IRM is regarded as the absolute maximum dynamic effort. A lack of understanding of how these concept works are one of the main limitations of Velocity-Based Training.
A common misconception in the powerlifting community is experienced lifters, particularly those who perform complex multi-joint actions. They can move a 1RM-loaded barbell slower than their less-trained or experienced counterparts (Nagata et al., 2020). Because of inexperience, failure to exert maximum effort, or to have experience but avoid situations where maximal loads represent a danger of damage, the 1RM is usually under-measured. This means that the recommended load will be insufficient to achieve the desired results.
Is Velocity-Based Training a proper substitute for traditional load prescription
Coaches have long used percentage Based Training (PBT) and planned sets and reps to establish the burden of a training session for their athletes. The one-rep maximum (1RM) of its athletes is routinely tested at the beginning of the training season. Coaches use the results to establish the percentages to be used during the training cycle. These percentages can range from 67 to 100 percent, depending on the training phase, the time of year, and the goals of the session in question (Weakley et al., 2021). The problem is that, according to one study, an individual’s resting metabolic rate (RM) might vary by as much as 18 percent from day to day.
References
Dorrell, H. F., Smith, M. F., & Gee, T. I. (2020). Comparison of velocity-based and traditional percentage-based loading methods on maximal strength and power adaptations. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 34(1), 46-53.
Orange, S. T., Metcalfe, J. W., Robinson, A., Applegarth, M. J., & Liefeith, A. (2019). Effects of in-season velocity-versus percentage-based Training in academy rugby league players. International journal of sports physiology and performance, 15(4), 554-561.
McCarty, A. (2019). The Validity of Wearable Technology for Velocity-Based Training.
Nagata, A., Doma, K., Yamashita, D., Hasegawa, H., & Mori, S. (2020). The effect of augmented feedback type and frequency on velocity-based training-induced adaptation and retention. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 34(11), 3110-3117. Web.
Weakley, J., Mann, B., Banyard, H., McLaren, S., Scott, T., & Garcia-Ramos, A. (2021). Velocity-based Training: From theory to application. Strength & Conditioning Journal, 43(2), 31-49. Web.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.