Bar Velocity And Final Five Repetitions To Failure Relationship Across Multiple Hang Clean Sets

Bar velocity metrics are associated with fatigue during resistance exercise, but these relationships may be dependent on resistance exercise modality. PURPOSE: To determine if absolute velocity at a given number of repetitions to failure (RF) is consistent across differing resistance levels and multiple sets during the hang clean resistance exercise. METHODS: Nineteen Division II male athletes (20.1 ± 1.1 yr) completed a standardized warm-up followed by 3 sets to failure on the hang clean at two intensity (70% and 80% 1RM) levels. Bar velocity was measured for each repetition via a RepOne movement sensor. A series of repeated measures ANOVAs were applied to analyze changes in velocity of the final 5 reps to failure (i.e. final 5 reps of each set) and maximum mean velocity loss (fastest repetition vs. slowest repetition). Pairwise differences were assessed via Bonferroni follow-up analysis. Differences were considered significant at the α ≤ 0.05 level. RESULTS: No differences in mean velocity between any set at any resistance were observed for 5, 3, or 1 RF. Pairwise differences were observed during RF 4 (80% set 3 (1.13 ± .09 m/s) vs 70% set 2 (1.2 ± .12 m/s)) and RF 2 (80% RM Set 2 (1.06 ± .15 m/s) vs. 70% RM Set 2 (1.15 ± .13 m/s), 80% RM Set 3 (1.04 ± .12 m/s) vs. 70% RM Set 1 (1.12 ± .15 m/s) and 70% RM Set 2 (1.15 ± .13 m/s), and 70% RM Set 2 (1.15 ± .13 m/s) vs. 70% RM Set 3 (1.09 ± .14 m/s). A significant difference in maximum percent mean velocity loss averaged across sets was observed between resistance levels (80% 1RM: 14.8 ± 6.1% vs 70% 1RM: 19.1 ± 6.9%) with no significant difference between sets. Data are means and standard deviations. CONCLUSION: Results indicate that mean velocity at a given RF was not on the whole affected by set number or resistance level during the hang clean exercise. While several pairwise comparisons were significant, most involved one particular repetition in one set (RF 2 70% RM Set 2) and there were no systematic trends. Thus, one could expect that mean velocity at a given number of RF would be constant throughout a training session.