Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

One-repetition maximum

The one-repetition maximum (1RM), often abbreviated as one-rep max, is defined as the maximum external load an individual can lift for a single complete repetition of a given exercise through a full while maintaining proper technique. This measure serves as the gold standard for assessing maximal dynamic muscular strength in non-laboratory environments due to its simplicity, minimal equipment requirements, and ability to quantify strength levels for exercise prescription and progress monitoring. In strength and conditioning programs, 1RM testing is commonly applied to major resistance exercises such as the , , and to establish baseline strength capacities and tailor training loads, with intensities typically prescribed as percentages of 1RM depending on training goals. Direct 1RM assessment involves a progressive warm-up followed by incremental load increases until failure, but it carries risks including acute cardiovascular strain (e.g., systolic exceeding 300 mmHg) and injury rates of 2.4–19%, particularly for novices or older adults, prompting recommendations for spotters, medical screening, and avoidance of the . To mitigate these hazards, indirect prediction equations—such as those using submaximal loads and repetitions to failure (e.g., 1RM = weight × (1 + 0.0333 × reps) for loads up to 10RM)—are frequently employed, offering reliable estimates with correlations often exceeding 0.90 to traditional testing. The reliability of 1RM testing is high, with coefficients typically above 0.91 across upper- and lower-body exercises, showing no significant differences but slight variations by muscle group in females. Despite its utility, 1RM does not fully capture other strength qualities like or , and repeated testing can induce temporary , necessitating 48–72 hours between sessions for accurate results.

Definition and Fundamentals

Definition

The one-repetition maximum (1RM) is defined as the maximal amount of weight that an individual can lift for one complete of a given exercise using proper and full . This measure serves as the gold standard for assessing maximal dynamic strength in non-laboratory settings within exercise science. It encompasses the concentric (muscle shortening), eccentric (muscle lengthening), and brief (muscle stabilization) phases of the movement, performed without external assistance to ensure the load reflects the lifter's true capability. In scope, the 1RM applies specifically to individual exercises, such as the , , or , rather than representing total-body strength. It differs from multi-repetition maximums (e.g., 10RM, the maximum weight for 10 repetitions) or muscular endurance tests, which involve submaximal loads sustained over multiple reps. This exercise-specific focus makes 1RM a targeted indicator of strength in resistance training modalities like and . The concept of 1RM emerged within principles of early 20th-century strength training, with foundational practices traced to competitions formalized in the , where maximal single lifts determined performance outcomes. The term gained scientific prominence in the 1940s through Thomas L. DeLorme's protocols, which emphasized determining 1RM to prescribe individualized resistance exercise loads. This historical development underscores 1RM's role in quantifying strength for training intensity prescription.

Physiological Significance

The one-repetition maximum (1RM) represents the maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) of , wherein the recruits high-threshold s to achieve peak force output. This process primarily involves the of type II (fast-twitch) muscle fibers, which are specialized for rapid and powerful contractions due to their higher activity and efficiency. Such recruitment follows the size principle of motor unit , escalating from low-threshold type I fibers to high-threshold type II fibers as force demands increase during the lift. Physiologically, 1RM performance reflects a combination of neural efficiency—improved and firing rates of motor units—and structural factors like muscle cross-sectional area (), which determines the potential number of actin-myosin cross-bridges for force generation. Hormonal influences, particularly circulating testosterone, enhance force production by promoting muscle protein synthesis and satellite cell activation, thereby supporting greater 1RM values in individuals with higher baseline levels. These adaptations underscore 1RM as an indicator of integrated neuromuscular function rather than isolated muscular capacity. The energy demands of a 1RM effort are met predominantly by the anaerobic phosphagen system (ATP-PC), which provides immediate high-energy phosphates for the brief, explosive contraction lasting under 10 seconds. This reliance on stored ATP and minimizes contributions from glycolytic or oxidative pathways, emphasizing the test's focus on maximal without fatigue accumulation. As the gold standard for assessing absolute strength—the total force an individual can produce—1RM differs from relative strength (force normalized to body mass) or explosive metrics like the , which incorporate velocity and bodyweight dynamics.

Methods of Assessment

Direct Measurement Protocols

Direct measurement of the one-repetition maximum (1RM) involves performing maximal lifting attempts with progressively increasing loads until the heaviest weight that can be lifted for one complete repetition with proper form is identified. This method serves as the gold standard for assessing maximal strength, providing precise data essential for prescriptions and evaluations. Protocols emphasize , , and minimization of to ensure accurate results. Preparation for 1RM testing begins with a thorough warm-up to enhance performance and reduce risk. Participants typically perform a general warm-up consisting of 5-10 minutes of light aerobic activity, followed by specific warm-up sets using progressive loads estimated at 40-60% of the predicted 1RM for 5-10 repetitions, and then 70-80% for 3-5 repetitions. Rest intervals of 1-2 minutes are observed between these warm-up sets to allow without inducing . This approach prepares the neuromuscular while familiarizing the lifter with the movement pattern. Additionally, participants should be screened for risks, with medical clearance obtained if necessary, and tested in a controlled environment free from distractions. The core testing protocol starts with a submaximal load approximately 80-90% of the estimated 1RM for 2-3 repetitions to gauge readiness, followed by incremental increases of 5-10% for upper-body exercises or 10-20% for lower-body exercises until occurs. Each maximal is limited to one , with the process typically concluding within 3-5 attempts to prevent excessive and central nervous system overload. Rest periods of 3-5 minutes between maximal attempts are standard to facilitate partial recovery of stores and maintain effort quality. For multi-exercise sessions, such as testing and , at least 5 minutes of rest is recommended between different lifts. Standardization is critical to ensure and validity. Proper lifting form must be maintained throughout, including full —for instance, the must touch the chest in and thighs must reach parallel in squats—with consistent grip width, stance, and bar path. Spotters, ideally two for free-weight lifts, provide safety by assisting only if form breaks, using techniques like hand spotting under the bar for . Environmental controls include using calibrated and plates verified for accuracy, stable flooring, and consistent testing times to account for circadian variations in strength. Equipment setup, such as rack height in squats, should remain identical across sessions. As the criterion standard for maximal strength assessment, direct 1RM testing demonstrates high validity when protocols are adhered to, directly measuring the physiological capacity for a single maximal effort. Reliability is excellent, with intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) exceeding 0.90 across various exercises, populations, and testing occasions, provided standardization includes a short warm-up and prior familiarization. For example, test-retest ICC values of 0.91-0.99 have been reported for and in trained individuals. When direct testing poses risks or is impractical, indirect estimation techniques may serve as alternatives.

Indirect Estimation Techniques

Indirect estimation techniques provide a safer, non-maximal to direct 1RM testing by predicting the maximum load based on submaximal lifts performed to failure or near-failure, typically using mathematical formulas derived from load-repetition relationships. These methods rely on the inverse relationship between load intensity and the number of repetitions possible, allowing without attempting a true one-repetition effort. Common approaches include rep-based equations and velocity-based training (VBT) models, which have been validated across various populations and exercises. Among the most widely adopted rep-based formulas is the Brzycki equation, which estimates 1RM as: $1RM = \frac{w}{1.0278 - 0.0278 \times r} where w is the weight lifted and r is the number of repetitions performed to failure. This formula, developed from empirical data on resistance-trained individuals, assumes a . The Epley equation offers a simpler : $1RM = w \times \left(1 + \frac{r}{30}\right) derived from observations in collegiate athletes, emphasizing proportional increases in capacity with repetitions. Another established model is the Wathen equation, incorporating to account for : $1RM = \frac{100 \times w}{48.8 + 53.8 \times e^{-0.075 \times r}} which was formulated for practical application in strength conditioning programs. These equations are best applied within a rep range of 2-10, corresponding to submaximal loads around 85% of 1RM (yielding approximately 6 repetitions), as higher or lower reps introduce greater prediction errors due to non-linear fatigue patterns. Validation studies indicate these formulas achieve accuracy within 5-10% of actual 1RM for upper-body exercises like the bench press, with the Brzycki, Epley, and Wathen models showing the lowest mean errors (around 3-7%) in trained populations. Accuracy diminishes for lower-body exercises such as the squat, where errors can exceed 10%, and is generally lower in novices compared to athletes due to inconsistent technique and fatigue resistance. VBT enhances precision by using linear position transducers to measure bar velocity during submaximal lifts, generating a load-velocity profile; the 1RM is extrapolated by intersecting this profile with a minimum velocity threshold (e.g., 0.16 m/s for bench press). A meta-analysis of VBT applications found estimation errors of 4-8% across exercises, outperforming rep-based methods in dynamic movements by accounting for individual velocity-loss patterns. Practical tools, such as mobile apps and online calculators, implement these formulas for quick estimations; for instance, lifting 100 kg for 5 repetitions on the yields an approximate 1RM of 113 kg using the Brzycki equation, guiding load selection without maximal testing. While indirect methods reduce injury risk, direct confirmation remains advisable for high-precision needs in competitive settings.

Applications in Training and Research

Strength Training Programs

In programs, one-repetition maximum (1RM) serves as a foundational for prescribing loads, allowing coaches to tailor intensity to specific goals such as or maximal strength. For , loads typically range from 60% to 80% of 1RM, paired with 8-12 repetitions per set to optimize muscle growth through metabolic stress and mechanical tension. In contrast, strength development emphasizes higher intensities of 85% to 100% of 1RM, often with 1-5 repetitions to enhance neural adaptations and force production. A representative example is the 5x5 program, which uses approximately 80-85% of 1RM for five sets of five repetitions on compound exercises, promoting progressive strength gains while managing fatigue. Periodization strategies leverage 1RM percentages to structure over time, preventing plateaus and . Linear involves gradual increases in , such as progressing from 70% to 90% of 1RM across weeks or mesocycles, while maintaining or reducing to build toward strength. Undulating , by comparison, varies intensities within shorter cycles, such as alternating days or weeks at 70% 1RM for and 85%+ for strength, which meta-analyses indicate may yield superior strength improvements in trained individuals. Deloading phases, integrated every 4-6 weeks, reduce loads to 50-60% of 1RM or 40-60% of normal to facilitate and supercompensation. Applications of 1RM vary by exercise type to align with biomechanical demands and recovery needs. For compound lifts like the and , which recruit multiple muscle groups, programs often prescribe higher percentages (80-95% of 1RM) with lower repetitions (3-6) to prioritize force development and systemic strength. Isolation exercises, such as the , are typically programmed at moderate intensities (65-80% of 1RM) with higher repetitions (8-15) to target specific muscles for without excessive joint stress, integrating seamlessly into rep schemes that complement compound work. To ensure —the principle of incrementally increasing demands to drive adaptations—trainers re-test 1RM every 4-12 weeks, adjusting subsequent loads based on improvements to maintain optimal stimulus. This periodic reassessment allows for precise scaling, such as raising working sets by 2-5% of the updated 1RM, supporting long-term program efficacy.

and

In sports such as , the one-repetition maximum (1RM) serves as a key benchmark for performance evaluation, with the (IPF) competitions emphasizing maximal efforts in the , , and to determine athlete classifications and records. For instance, elite male powerlifters in the 83 kg class typically achieve squat 1RMs exceeding 250 kg, reflecting advanced relative strength greater than 2.5 times body weight. In , 1RM testing establishes baselines for programming mixed-modal workouts, where athletes must handle loads from 20% to 90% of their 1RM across lifts like the clean and jerk to optimize work capacity and scaling. Similarly, in team sports like , 1RM assessments of the and provide strength baselines for position-specific demands, such as linemen targeting bench 1RMs over 180 kg to correlate with on-field power output. In scientific research, 1RM functions as a primary dependent variable to quantify the efficacy of interventions, including nutritional supplements and protocols. Studies on supplementation, for example, demonstrate that 5-20 g daily combined with resistance training yields 5-15% greater 1RM gains compared to , particularly in the and , due to enhanced stores and training volume. Training interventions often track 1RM changes to evaluate and recovery outcomes, with protocols showing 10-20% improvements in and 1RMs over 12 weeks in recreationally active adults. In injury recovery research, 1RM deficits post- (e.g., 15-25% reductions in lower-body lifts after reconstruction) serve as metrics to assess return-to-play readiness. Normative 1RM data from large cohorts, such as those compiled by the National Strength and Conditioning Association (NSCA) and databases, enable comparisons across demographics. For adult males aged 20-39 weighing approximately 80-90 kg, average 1RMs range from 70-100 kg (intermediate level), while elite 1RMs exceed 180 kg or 2 times body weight. Longitudinal tracking in these cohorts reveals typical gains of 10-20% in multi-joint 1RMs after 12 weeks of in recreationally active adults, supporting periodized program efficacy.
LiftSex/Age GroupAverage 1RM (kg, relative to ~80 kg BW)Elite Percentile (>95th)
Male, 20-3980-100 (1.0-1.25x BW)>140 (1.75x BW)
Male, 20-39120-150 (1.5-1.9x BW)>200 (2.5x BW)
, 20-3940-60 (0.5-0.75x BW)>90 (1.1x BW)
Comparative metrics highlight 1RM's integration with other assessments for holistic performance profiling. The isometric mid-thigh pull (IMTP) correlates moderately with 1RM (r=0.7-0.8) but underestimates dynamic strength by 10-20%, making it a safer field alternative for frequent monitoring without full 1RM risks. In endurance-dominant sports, 1RM complements testing; concurrent strength-endurance training preserves 1RM gains (e.g., 10-15% in lower limbs) while improving aerobic capacity, with no interference effect in adults.

Factors and Considerations

Variables Influencing 1RM

Several demographic factors significantly influence one-repetition maximum (1RM) values. affects 1RM, with younger individuals demonstrating greater potential for strength increases compared to older adults during interventions. Strength typically peaks in the 20-30 range and begins to decline thereafter, with aging attenuating hypertrophic responses to resistance when loads are proportional to baseline strength. Post-40, annual declines in muscle strength are estimated at 1-2%, influenced by and reduced neural efficiency. differences also play a key role, as males generally exhibit approximately 50% higher 1RM values than females, primarily due to greater muscle mass and fat-free mass. Even when adjusted for body mass and fat-free mass, men show superior strength and power outputs across various loads. further correlates with 1RM performance, where higher , particularly in the lower limbs, is associated with greater 1RM in exercises like extensions (R² = 0.56). Training status markedly impacts 1RM development and progression. Novices experience faster initial gains in 1RM, largely driven by neural adaptations that enhance and firing rates, allowing rapid improvements without substantial . Optimal intensities for maximal gains differ by experience level, with untrained individuals responding best to loads around 60% of 1RM, while trained athletes require 80% or higher. Advanced athletes, in contrast, reach plateaus in 1RM more quickly due to diminished neural and hypertrophic potential, necessitating periodized programs for continued progress. specificity is crucial, as exercises targeting particular muscle groups yield greater 1RM improvements in those movements; for instance, -specific training enhances 1RM more effectively than 1RM, reflecting movement-pattern adaptations. External variables can acutely alter 1RM performance. Fatigue from prior exercise reduces 1RM capacity, with recovery typically requiring 48-72 hours or more for full across major exercises such as back squats, bench presses, and deadlifts. influences outcomes, as adequate protein intake (e.g., 24 g daily of or ) supports greater 1RM gains during resistance training programs, though shows mixed effects on acute strength. Circadian rhythms affect 1RM, with performance often peaking in the evening due to higher core temperature and hormonal levels, though some studies indicate minimal time-of-day impact at loads above 25% 1RM. Recovery status post-injury or eccentric damage impairs 1RM, with muscle force recovery delayed by days to weeks; supplementation like can accelerate of knee extensor strength. Measurement variability introduces additional influences on 1RM reliability. Intra-day fluctuations typically range from ±2.4% to 9.7% , affected by warm-up protocols and immediate fatigue. Inter-day variability is slightly higher, around ±3.2% to 8.6%, due to factors like and minor recovery differences. Equipment type contributes to discrepancies, with 1RM often higher on machines like Hammer Strength or Smith machines compared to free weights for squats, but lower for bench presses, reflecting stabilization demands.

Safety and Limitations

Performing one-repetition maximum (1RM) testing involves lifting maximal loads, which can impose significant strain on muscles and joints, potentially leading to injury. For instance, in exercises like the , improper technique or excessive loads above 85% of 1RM may cause shoulder impingement by compressing structures within the , resulting in and . Muscle damage and soreness are also common, persisting up to 72 hours post-test due to the high mechanical stress on muscle fibers. In older adults, while 1RM testing is generally feasible, it can exacerbate joint instability or preexisting conditions, with reports of minor injuries in about 2.4% of cases among elderly participants. Certain populations face contraindications for 1RM testing owing to elevated risks. Beginners lack the technique proficiency to handle maximal loads safely, increasing the likelihood of acute injuries from form breakdown. Individuals with cardiovascular issues, such as uncontrolled or recent , are at risk of adverse hemodynamic responses like abnormal spikes during maximal efforts, making medical clearance essential prior to testing. To mitigate these risks, several precautions are recommended. Mandatory use of spotters ensures immediate assistance during failed lifts, while thorough warm-ups and emphasis on proper reduce joint and muscle . Gradual progression from submaximal loads allows , particularly for those returning from detraining. For de-trained individuals, alternatives like 3-repetition maximum (3RM) testing are safer, as they involve lower intensities while still providing reliable strength estimates without the full risks of a true 1RM attempt. Despite its utility, 1RM testing has notable limitations, rendering it unsuitable as a universal measure. It is not ideal for or elderly populations, where reduced stability and capacity heighten potential; guidelines advise caution or avoidance of maximal testing in children to prevent growth plate stress. As a metric of maximal static strength, 1RM serves as a poor proxy for functional strength in dynamic, real-world tasks or explosive speed, as it overlooks and coordination components critical to athletic . Overemphasis on 1RM in programs can lead to through chronic high-intensity exposure, causing mental fatigue, stalled progress, and heightened rates from inadequate . Research on 1RM also reveals ethical and methodological gaps, including underrepresentation of and diverse populations in normative data, with many studies historically focusing on males, limiting applicability across genders where strength responses differ. Post-2020 studies highlight the need for updated norms, as COVID-19-induced remote and detraining periods significantly impacted 1RM levels, particularly in team sports, necessitating revised benchmarks to account for these disruptions.

References

  1. [1]
    A Novel Approach to 1RM Prediction Using the Load-Velocity Profile
    A one repetition maximum (1RM) is defined as the maximum external load (kg) an individual can lift for a single repetition [1]. Further, 1RM tests have ...<|separator|>
  2. [2]
    The reliability of the 1RM strength test for untrained middle-aged ...
    The one-repetition maximum (1RM) test is considered the gold standard for assessing muscle strength in non-laboratory situations. Since most previous 1RM ...
  3. [3]
    Determination and Prediction of One Repetition Maximum (1RM)
    Aug 8, 2025 · One repetition maximum (1RM) is an established measure of muscular strength and is defined as the value of resistance against which a given ...
  4. [4]
    [PDF] PREDICTION OF ONE REPETITION MAXIMUM STRENGTH FROM ...
    —The purpose of this study was to quantify the decrease in the load lifted from 1 to 5, 10, and 20 repetitions to failure for the flat barbell bench press ( ...
  5. [5]
    Reliability of the One-Repetition Maximum Test Based on Muscle ...
    The one repetition maximum (1RM) test is considered the gold standard for assessing muscle strength in non-laboratory situations. This study was done to examine ...
  6. [6]
    [PDF] Muscle Performance and Physical Function Core
    The one-repetition maximum (1RM) is defined as the maximal amount of weight an individual can lift one time, and one time only, through their ...
  7. [7]
    [PDF] Comparison Between 1 Repetition Maximum Barbell and 1 ...
    on a 1-repetition maximum (1RM). One RM is defined as the maximal amount of weight that can be lifted only one time through a full range of motion and with ...
  8. [8]
    [PDF] Repetition Maximum (1RM) Strength Assessment: a Systematic ...
    A commonly used field- based test of strength is the one-repetition maximum. (1RM) test [15]. As suggested by the name, the 1RM is defined as the maximal weight ...
  9. [9]
    Comparison Between Isotonic 1 Repetition Maximum Measurement ...
    Mar 28, 2016 · One repetition maximum (RM) is defined as the maximum weight a person can lift only once in a complete range of motion. It is a gold ...
  10. [10]
    A Primer on Weightlifting: From Sport to Sports Training
    Aug 6, 2025 · ... Olympic Games in Antwerp in 1920 (Stone et al., 2006). ... one-repetition maximum. The position of the barbell was digitised ...
  11. [11]
    [PDF] Science from Strength - Stark Center
    In it, DeLorme describes how to determine a patient's one repetition max (IRM) and 10 repetition max. (10RM), and he also discusses the effect of his heavy.
  12. [12]
  13. [13]
    Muscle Fiber Recruitment Characteristics in Trained Older Adults - NIH
    Sep 17, 2025 · ... maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) and squatting movements using ... one-repetition maximum (1RM), with 8–12 repetitions per set ...
  14. [14]
    Rate Coding and the Control of Muscle Force - PMC - NIH
    The force exerted by a muscle during a voluntary contraction depends on the number of motor units ... maximal voluntary contraction (MVC). Traces ...
  15. [15]
    Effects of Testosterone and Resistance Training in Men with Chronic ...
    May 7, 2003 · Percentage changes in one-repetition maximum (1RM) of the leg ... Testosterone supplementation produced increased leg extensor strength ...
  16. [16]
    Creatine electrolyte supplement improves anaerobic power and ...
    May 24, 2019 · Measurements of maximal strength (1RM) as well as other ... 1RM is heavily dependent on the phosphagen system [13]. The phosphagen ...Data Collection · Table 1 · Fig. 2
  17. [17]
    Profiling the absolute and relative strength of a special operations ...
    Jun 20, 2022 · The 1RM test is a gold standard for assessing strength in non-laboratory situations the power rack. Officers were then instructed to place their ...
  18. [18]
    Loading Recommendations for Muscle Strength, Hypertrophy ... - NIH
    A low repetition scheme with heavy loads (from 1 to 5 repetitions per set with 80% to 100% of 1-repetition maximum (1RM)) optimizes strength increases. A ...
  19. [19]
    Resistance Training Load Effects on Muscle Hypertrophy and ... - NIH
    Second, the present investigation excluded nonspecific muscle strength/performance measures such as maximal voluntary contraction and muscle endurance due to ...
  20. [20]
    None
    ### Summary of Normative 1RM Data
  21. [21]
    Comparison between linear and daily undulating periodized ...
    In conclusion, undulating periodized strength training induced higher increases in maximal strength than the linear model in strength-trained men. For ...Missing: NSCA | Show results with:NSCA
  22. [22]
    Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Linear and Undulating ...
    Aug 9, 2025 · This systematic review and meta-analysis examined all studies directly comparing linear and undulating periodized resistance training programs.
  23. [23]
    Integrating Deloading into Strength and Physique Sports Training ...
    Sep 21, 2023 · During a deloading phase, strength and physique coaches will normally decrease training volume by reducing the number of repetitions completed ...
  24. [24]
    Resistance Training with Single vs. Multi-joint Exercises at Equal ...
    Dec 22, 2017 · The present study aimed to compare the effects of equal-volume resistance training performed with single-joint (SJ) or multi-joint exercises ...
  25. [25]
    What is a One Rep Max? The Pros and Cons of 1RM Testing
    Jul 29, 2024 · Doing a 1RM test will likely require setting aside an entire training session from your schedule every 6-12 weeks just to test 1-2 exercises, ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  26. [26]
    Lighter and heavier initial loads yield similar gains in strength when ...
    Finally, we also predicted that the session of 95% of 1RM would be the last complete session in the first cycle (assuming a strength gain of 2.5% of 1RM in the ...
  27. [27]
    [PDF] Technical Rules Book 2024 - International Powerlifting Federation
    Jan 23, 2024 · The official text of the Technical Rules shall be maintained by the IPF and shall be published in English. In the event of any conflict between ...Missing: 1RM | Show results with:1RM
  28. [28]
    Normative data for the squat, bench press and deadlift exercises in ...
    1RM assessments are safe and demonstrate good to excellent test–retest reliability regardless of exercise selection, the body part assessed (upper or lower), ...
  29. [29]
    Are You Strong Enough to go to the Crossfit Games? - Misfit Athletics
    Unlike sports like powerlifting or weightlifting, CrossFit rewards athletes much more if they have the capacity to move anywhere from light (20-40% of their 1RM) ...
  30. [30]
    NFL-225 Test to Predict 1RM Bench Press in NCAA ... - PubMed
    The new NFL-225 test seems to be a reasonable predictor of 1RM bench press in Division I players but should be further assessed on players from other high-level ...
  31. [31]
    Effects of creatine supplementation and resistance training on ...
    The increase in bench press 1RM ranged from 3 to 45%, and the improvement in weightlifting performance in the bench press ranged from 16 to 43%. Thus there is ...
  32. [32]
    Changes in Body Composition and Strength after 12 Weeks of High ...
    Jan 4, 2022 · At week 12, both groups demonstrated significant improvements in bench press 1-RM (LL: 11.78 ± 6.88%, p < 0.001; ML:15.99 ± 6.06%, p < 0.001) ...2.4. Muscle Strength... · 3. Results · 4. Discussion
  33. [33]
    Effect of Creatine Supplementation During Cast-Induced...
    These results indicate that short-term creatine supplementation attenuates the loss in muscle mass and strength during upper-arm immobilization in young men.Muscular Strength And... · Results · Muscle Strength And...<|separator|>
  34. [34]
    Bench Press Strength Standards (Ages 18-39, kg) - ExRx.net
    Bench Press Strength Standards (Ages 18-39, kg) ; 145+, 72.5, 92.5, 115.0, 155.0 ...
  35. [35]
    The Minimum Effective Training Dose Required for 1RM Strength in ...
    In competition, a PL athlete is allowed three 1-repetition-maximum (1RM) attempts at each of the powerlifts, with the goal of achieving the highest possible PL ...Missing: standards | Show results with:standards
  36. [36]
    Bench Press Standards for Men and Women (lb) - Strength Level
    The average Bench Press weight for a male lifter is 217 lb (1RM). This makes you Intermediate on Strength Level and is a very impressive lift.Kilograms (kg) · Bench Press How To · Dumbbell Bench Press
  37. [37]
    Isometric Midthigh Pull Reliability and Relationship to Deadlift One ...
    Lack of associations between RFD and deadlift 1RM indicate that the ability to create explosive force may be independent of the ability to create maximal force.Missing: comparison | Show results with:comparison
  38. [38]
    Effects of Concurrent Training on 1RM and VO2 in Adults - PubMed
    The purpose of this systematic review was to analyze the effects of concurrent training on one repetition maximum (1RM), maximum oxygen consumption (VO 2 max) ...
  39. [39]
    Age and sex differentially affect regional changes in one repetition ...
    Younger subjects showed a greater increase in strength than older subjects, and men showed a greater increase in strength compared with women.
  40. [40]
    Effect of age on muscle hypertrophy induced by resistance training
    Conclusions: Aging can attenuate the hypertrophic response of muscle groups to resistance training, when the training load is proportional to baseline strength.
  41. [41]
    Responses to Maximal Strength Training in Different Age ... - PubMed
    Feb 17, 2021 · Results: All age groups increased leg-press 1RM (p < 0.01), with a mean improvement of 24.2 ± 14.0%. There were no differences in improvements ...
  42. [42]
    Sex Differences in Bench Press Strength and Power - PubMed
    Jul 24, 2025 · Results: Men exhibited significantly greater strength and power than women across most loads when adjusted for both body mass and fat-free mass ...
  43. [43]
    Single- and Multi-Joint Maximum Weight Lifting Relationship to Free ...
    Mar 28, 2022 · For 1RM in KE, the correlation with FFM in lower limb increased with thigh area (R2 = 0.56), whereas 1RM in LC and LP45 correlation to whole ...
  44. [44]
    A meta-analysis to determine the dose response for strength ...
    Training with a mean intensity of 60% of one repetition maximum elicits maximal gains in untrained individuals, whereas 80% is most effective in those who are ...Missing: novices advanced 1RM
  45. [45]
    American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Progression ...
    The recommendation for training frequency is 2-3 d x wk(-1) for novice training, 3-4 d x wk(-1) for intermediate training, and 4-5 d x wk(-1) for advanced ...Missing: gains | Show results with:gains
  46. [46]
    Muscle adaptations following 21 consecutive days of strength test ...
    Increases in 1RM strength from resistance training are related to the specificity of exercise and are likely driven by mechanisms other than muscle growth.
  47. [47]
    Time course of recovery is similar for the back squat, bench press ...
    This study examined the time course of recovery following resistance exercise sessions in the back squat, bench press, and deadlift.Missing: post- | Show results with:post-
  48. [48]
    Effects of daily 24-gram doses of rice or whey protein on resistance ...
    Dec 1, 2020 · We evaluated the ability of 24-g doses of rice or whey protein concentrate to augment adaptations following 8 weeks of resistance training.
  49. [49]
    Muscular strength and power and endurance performance at loads ...
    Jul 7, 2025 · Muscular strength and power and endurance performance at loads exceeding 25% of one-repetition maximum are unaffected by time-of-day in ...<|separator|>
  50. [50]
    Creatine supplementation enhances muscle force recovery after ...
    The major finding of this investigation was a significant improvement in the rate of recovery of knee extensor muscle function after Cr supplementation ...
  51. [51]
    Evaluation of the Vmaxpro sensor for assessing movement velocity ...
    Coefficients of variance for intra- and inter-day reliability ranged from 2.4% to 9.7% and from 3.2% to 8.6% for BP and SQ, respectively.Missing: variability | Show results with:variability
  52. [52]
    free weights vs. hammer strength equipment - PubMed
    The purpose of this study was to determine whether a relationship exists between 1-repetition maximum (1RM) performed on hammer strength (HS) machines ...
  53. [53]
    Comparison of muscle force production using the Smith machine ...
    The squat 1RM was greater for the SM than the FWs; conversely, the bench 1RM was greater for FWs than the SM. When sex was considered, bench 1RM for FWs was ...