The study aim was to compare different predictive models in one repetition maximum (1RM) estimation from load-velocity profile (LVP) data. Fourteen strength-trained men underwent initial 1RMs in the free-weight back squat, followed by two LVPs, over three sessions. Profiles were constructed via a combined method (jump squat (0 load, 30–60% 1RM) + back squat (70–100% 1RM)) or back squat only (0 load, 30–100% 1RM) in 10% increments. Quadratic and linear regression modeling was applied to the data to estimate 80% 1RM (kg) using 80% 1RM mean velocity identified in LVP one as the reference point, with load (kg), then extrapolated to predict 1RM. The 1RM prediction was based on LVP two data and analyzed via analysis of variance, effect size (g
), Pearson correlation coefficients (r
), paired t
-tests, standard error of the estimate (SEE), and limits of agreement (LOA). p
< 0.05. All models reported systematic bias < 10 kg, r
> 0.97, and SEE < 5 kg, however, all linear models were significantly different from measured 1RM (p
= 0.015 <0.001). Significant differences were observed between quadratic and linear models for combined (p
= 0.90) and back squat (p
= 0.35) methods. Significant differences were observed between exercises when applying linear modeling (p
= 0.67–0.80), but not quadratic (p
= 0.001–0.18). Quadratic modeling employing the combined method rendered the greatest predictive validity. Practitioners should therefore utilize this method when looking to predict daily 1RMs as a means of load autoregulation.
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.