Cross-Validation of Original and Modified Equations for Estimating Bench Press One-Repetition Maximum from Repetitions to Failure in Recreationally Active Men

The purpose of this study was to cross-validate four (two original and two modified) equations (EQs) that estimate 1-repetition maximum (1RM) from repetitions to failure (RTF) for the bench press (BP). Thirty-five recreationally active men (mean SD: age = 20.5 1.4 yrs; height = 181.3 6.4 cm; body mass = 84.8 12.5 kg) with previous resistance training experience (5.0 2.9 yrs) participated in this study. Each participant completed BP 1RM testing followed by a single set of RTF at ~80% 1RM. The values from the RTF at ~80% 1RM were inputted into the EQs for estimating BP 1RM. The cross-validation analyses consisted of examining the constant error (CE) values using paired t-tests, Pearson Correlation Coefficients (r), standard error of estimate (SEE), and total error (TE) values. The RTF at 80% 1RM ranged from 4-11 repetitions. The results revealed that EQs 2, 3, and 4 significantly (p p = 0.091) from the measured 1RM values (CE = -0.57 kg). The cross-validation analyses indicated that modified EQ 3 (TE = 2.12 kg) did not improve the accuracy of BP 1RM estimations compared to original EQ 1 (TE = 1.99 kg). Modified EQ 4, however, exhibited slightly more accurate BP 1RM values (TE = 3.27 kg) than original EQ 2 (TE = 3.51). In addition, EQ 1 provided the lowest CE and TE values as well as the smallest difference between TE and SEE values (0.03 kg). Therefore, EQ1 (RTF0.1 x weight) is recommended for estimating BP 1RM with a weight that results in 4-11 RTF in recreationally active men when directly testing 1RM is not feasible or to assist in training intensity prescription.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
American journal of sports science and medicine
Published
2025-03-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.12691/ajssm-13-1-1
Primary Topic
Sports Performance and Training
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Cross-Validation of Original and Modified Equations for Estimating Bench Press One-Repetition Maximum from Repetitions to Failure in Recreationally Active Men

Dolores G. Ortega, Richard J. Schmidt, Trevor D. Roberts, Jocelyn E. Arnett et al.
1 links
American journal of sports science and medicine
Sports Performance and Training
article

Cross-Validation of Original and Modified Equations for Estimating Bench Press One-Repetition Maximum from Repetitions to Failure in Recreationally Active Men

Dolores G. Ortega, Richard J. Schmidt, Trevor D. Roberts, Jocelyn E. Arnett, Terry J. Housh, Justin S. Pioske
article en

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to cross-validate four (two original and two modified) equations (EQs) that estimate 1-repetition maximum (1RM) from repetitions to failure (RTF) for the bench press (BP). Thirty-five recreationally active men (mean SD: age = 20.5 1.4 yrs; height = 181.3 6.4 cm; body mass = 84.8 12.5 kg) with previous resistance training experience (5.0 2.9 yrs) participated in this study. Each participant completed BP 1RM testing followed by a single set of RTF at ~80% 1RM. The values from the RTF at ~80% 1RM were inputted into the EQs for estimating BP 1RM. The cross-validation analyses consisted of examining the constant error (CE) values using paired t-tests, Pearson Correlation Coefficients (r), standard error of estimate (SEE), and total error (TE) values. The RTF at 80% 1RM ranged from 4-11 repetitions. The results revealed that EQs 2, 3, and 4 significantly (p p = 0.091) from the measured 1RM values (CE = -0.57 kg). The cross-validation analyses indicated that modified EQ 3 (TE = 2.12 kg) did not improve the accuracy of BP 1RM estimations compared to original EQ 1 (TE = 1.99 kg). Modified EQ 4, however, exhibited slightly more accurate BP 1RM values (TE = 3.27 kg) than original EQ 2 (TE = 3.51). In addition, EQ 1 provided the lowest CE and TE values as well as the smallest difference between TE and SEE values (0.03 kg). Therefore, EQ1 (RTF0.1 x weight) is recommended for estimating BP 1RM with a weight that results in 4-11 RTF in recreationally active men when directly testing 1RM is not feasible or to assist in training intensity prescription.

American journal of sports science and medicineVol. 13(1)
University of Nebraska–Lincoln (US)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 93%
Sports Performance and Training
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.