This study aimed to compare the maximal mechanical variables derived from the load-velocity (L-V) relationship and 2000-meter rowing ergometer performance between rowers of different age categories, and to identify the L-V relationship variables more closely related to 2000-meter rowing ergometer performance. Nineteen competitive rowers (15 males and four females) aged between 15 and 25 years were evaluated during the national 2000-meter rowing ergometer competition organised by the Chilean Rowing Federation. Thereafter, the L-V relationship variables (load-axis intercept [L0], velocity-axis intercept [v0], and area under the L-V relationship line [Aline]) were determined on separate occasions during the squat jump and prone bench pull exercises. Rowers were classified according to their chronological age for comparative purposes (under 16 years [U16] vs. over 16 years [O16]). L0 and Aline were always higher for O16 than for U16 (p ≤ 0.046; ES range = 0.99-1.79), while v0 was generally comparable for both age categories (p ≥ 0.038; ES range = 0.07-1.03). Furthermore, the O16 revealed a greater performance (i.e. shorter total time) during the 2000-meter rowing ergometer competition (p = 0.011; ES = -1.31). In general, significant correlations were obtained between rowing performance and the L-V relationship variables obtained during the squat jump (r or ρ range = -0.294 to -0.922) and prone bench pull (r or ρ range = -0.322 to -0.928). These results support the L-V relationship as a sensitive procedure to evaluate the maximal mechanical capacities of lower- and upper-body muscles in competitive rowers.HighlightsThe load-velocity relationship variables are sensitive enough to differentiate between rowers of different age categories (U16 vs. O16).The load-velocity variables are significantly associated with 2000-meter rowing ergometer performance (total time).This novel testing methodology can provide practitioners and coaches with a simpler and more precise alternative to comprehensively assess a rower's maximal neuromuscular profiles.
Keywords: Testing; methodology; performance; strength.