<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">
 <record>
  <leader>     caa a22        4500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="001">469054611</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="003">CHVBK</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="005">20180323132840.0</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="007">cr unu---uuuuu</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="008">170328e19921101xx      s     000 0 eng  </controlfield>
  <datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">10.1007/BF00243507</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">doi</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">(NATIONALLICENCE)springer-10.1007/BF00243507</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Mastropaolo</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">J.</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Trisphere Exercise Physiology Laboratory, California State University, 90840, Long Beach, Long Beach, California, USA</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="2">
   <subfield code="a">A test of the maximum-power stimulus theory for strength</subfield>
   <subfield code="h">[Elektronische Daten]</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">[J. Mastropaolo]</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1="3" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Summary: The main purpose was to test the hypothesis that the true force and power in weightlifting were related significantly to the strengthening stimulus. Secondary hypotheses were (a) slower, heavier weight training for strength would increase strength, not maximum power, (b) faster, lighter weight training for maximum power would increase maximum power, not strength and (c) there would be no significant difference between force = mass (F=m) and true force = mass multiplied by acceleration (F=ma) for arm weightlifting. Using an optical encoder, digital recorder and a data-logging computer on an arm weightlifting machine, F=m and F=ma were significantly different between 25% and 94%, contrary to published reports, but not at 100% of strength. A second-order polynomial equation predicted force, F=ma, as a multiple of the weight lifted, from the velocity of the lift with R 2 = 0.997. A group was trained for strength and a matched group was trained for maximum power. The strength group gained significantly in maximum power and the power group gained significantly in strength and maximum power. Both groups gained significantly in velocity, but not force, at maximum power. The correlations between strength and maximum power were high (r=0.95-0.98, P&lt;0.02), consistent (before and after training) and valid (gain in standard error of estimate of 6 N or 2% of strength). The evidence suggested that maximum -power was the strength stimulus. The maximum-power stimulus theory may unify and simplify theories of response and adaptation of structure and function induced by muscle.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="540" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Springer-Verlag, 1992</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Weight lifting</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Strength training</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Force</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Velocity</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="t">European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Springer-Verlag</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">65/5(1992-11-01), 415-420</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">0301-5548</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">65:5&lt;415</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">1992</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">65</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">421</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00243507</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="908" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="D">1</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">research-article</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">jats</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">856</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">40</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00243507</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">100</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">1-</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">Mastropaolo</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">J.</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Trisphere Exercise Physiology Laboratory, California State University, 90840, Long Beach, Long Beach, California, USA</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">773</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">0-</subfield>
   <subfield code="t">European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Springer-Verlag</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">65/5(1992-11-01), 415-420</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">0301-5548</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">65:5&lt;415</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">1992</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">65</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">421</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="900" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Metadata rights reserved</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">Springer special CC-BY-NC licence</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="898" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">BK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">XK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">XK010000</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="949" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="F">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">NL-springer</subfield>
  </datafield>
 </record>
</collection>
