Person:
Hernández Belmonte, Alejandro

Profile Picture
Email Address
Birth Date
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Job Title
Last Name
Hernández Belmonte
First Name
Alejandro
Name
Hernández Belmonte, Alejandro

Filters

20231
2
2
Reset filters

Settings

Subject: Intensity ×

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Embargo
    Free-weight and machine-based training are equally effective on strength and hypertrophy: Challenging a traditional myth
    (Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM), ) Hernández Belmonte, Alejandro; Martínez-Cava, Alejandro; Buendia Romero, Ángel; Franco López, Francisco; García Pallarés, Jesús; Actividad Física y Deporte
    Purpose: This study aimed to compare the effects of free-weight and machine-based resistance training on strength, hypertrophy, and joint discomfort. Methods: Thirty-eight resistance-trained men participated in an 8-wk resistance program allocated into free-weight (n = 19) or machine-based (n = 19) groups. Training variables were identical for both modalities, so they only differed in the use of barbells or machines to execute the full squat, bench press, prone bench pull, and shoulder press exercises. The velocity-based method was implemented to accurately adjust the intensity throughout the program. Strength changes were evaluated using eight velocity-monitored loading tests (four exercises × two modalities) and included the relative one-repetition maximum (1RMRel), as well as the mean propulsive velocity against low (MPVLow) and high (MPVHigh) loads. Ultrasound-derived cross-sectional area of quadriceps (proximal and distal regions), pectoralis major, and rectus abdominis was measured to examine hypertrophy. Complementarily, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaires were administrated to assess changes in lower- and upper-limb joint discomfort. Outcomes were compared using ANCOVA and percentage of change (∆) statistics. Results: Each group significantly (P < 0.001) increased 1RMRel, MPVLow, and MPVHigh for both modalities tested, but especially in the one they trained. When considering together the eight exercises tested, strength changes for both modalities were similar (∆ differences ≤1.8%, P ≥ 0.216). Likewise, the cross-sectional area of all the muscles evaluated was significantly increased by both modalities, with no significant differences between them (∆ difference ≤2.0%, P ≥ 0.208). No between-group differences (P ≥ 0.144) were found for changes in stiffness, pain, and functional disability levels, which were reduced by both modalities. Conclusions: Free-weight and machine-based modalities are similarly effective to promote strength and hypertrophy without increasing joint discomfort.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Embargo
    Velocity-based method in free-weight and machine-based training modalities: the degree of freedom matters
    (Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, 2023-09) Hernández Belmonte, Alejandro; Buendía Romero, Ángel; García Pallarés, Jesús; Martínez Cava, Alejandro; Actividad Física y Deporte
    This study aimed to analyze and compare the load-velocity relationships of free-weight and machine-based modalities of 4 resistance exercises. Moreover, we examined the influence of the subject's strength level on these load-velocity relationships. Fifty men completed a loading test in the free-weight and machine-based modalities of the bench press, full squat, shoulder press, and prone bench pull exercises. General and individual relationships between relative intensity (%1RM) and velocity variables were studied through the coefficient of determination (R2) and standard error of the estimate (SEE). Moreover, the velocity attained to each %1RM was compared between both modalities. Subjects were divided into stronger and weaker to study whether the subject's strength level influences the mean test (mean propulsive velocity [MPVTest]) and 1RM (MPV1RM) velocities. For both modalities, very close relationships (R2 ≥ 0.95) and reduced estimation errors were found when velocity was analyzed as a dependent (SEE ≤ 0.086 m·s−1) and independent (SEE ≤ 5.7% 1RM) variable concerning the %1RM. Fits were found to be higher (R2 ≥ 0.995) for individual load-velocity relationships. Concerning the between-modality comparison, the velocity attained at each intensity (from 30 to 100% 1RM) was significantly faster for the free-weight variant. Finally, nonsignificant differences were found when comparing MPVTest (differences ≤ 0.02 m·s−1) and MPV1RM (differences ≤ 0.01 m·s−1) between stronger and weaker subjects. These findings prove the accuracy and stability of the velocity-based method in the free-weight and machine-based variants but highlight the need to use the load-velocity relationship (preferably the individual one) specific to each training modality.
Ir a Estadísticas