ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT07802028VBTvsPBTUpdated Sep 9, 2026

Velocity-Based vs Percentage-Based Strength Training in Young Football Players

An interventional study of Velocity Based Squat and Bench Press Training and Velocity Based Squat Training in Exercise (EX), Strength Training Effects and Soccer Performance, sponsored by Uludag University. Completed at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Open to male participants aged 16 Years to 18 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-09-09.

Sponsored by Uludag University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 4 years after the study started (first participant enrolled Aug 2022, registered Aug 2026).
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
58
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
16 Years to 18 Years
Sex
Male
01

Where this study stands

Counted across the records on this site · 2026-11-12

Among 995 studies in Motor Activity with a site in Turkey — 196 open to participants now, 225 under way, none of them phase 3. Motor Activity · Turkey.

Enrollment
237th of 768
58 · median 42
Started
2022
with 126 others
No phase
768 of 995
160 open now
Registered
963rd of 995
by date

Among the 995 studies in Motor Activity with a site in Turkey, this one is the 237th largest by enrollment of the 768 interventional ones that give a count, is one of 127 that started in 2022, is one of 768 with no phase, and was the 963rd registered.

Motor Activity

9,798 studies on the registry are indexed under Motor Activity; 1,910 are open to participants now.

Browse Motor Activity studies →

Open to participants now

196 of the 995 studies in Motor Activity with a site in Turkey are open now. Recruiting first, the newest first:

191 more — sign in →

All 196 open studies →

A study can be open while its sites in Turkey have not opened yet or have stopped. Only those recruiting at a site in Turkey →

Who these studies take

Of the 1,201 Motor Activity studies recruiting now, 517 (43%) set no upper age limit and 535 (45%) stop at 75 or younger; 180 take children under 18; 420 take healthy volunteers.

This study: 16 Years to 18 Years · male · healthy volunteers too.

The full table on the hub →

This tab as a report to print or save as PDF → With an account.

Was this useful?
Watch this landscapeDownload CSVNarrow it in search →With an account: a weekly mail of what changed among 995 studies in Motor Activity with a site in Turkey, or all of them as a file.
02

Study summary

The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of six weeks of velocity-based training (VBT) and traditional percentage-based strength training (TRD) on 20 m sprint performance, vertical jump, and aerobic capacity in elite young football players.

The main research question was: Does VBT produce greater improvements than TRD in these performance markers? Researchers compared VBT with TRD to determine whether VBT leads to superior enhancements in sprint speed, jump performance, and aerobic capacity among elite young football players.

Participants:

Performed either VBT squat training, VBT squat plus bench press training, or TRD squat training. Completed VBT or TRD sessions three times per week for six weeks. Attended the laboratory for measurements and tests before and after the six-week training program.

Read the detailed description

All participants had been following the same training program for the previous two months: five weekly training sessions (each lasting 60-90 minutes) and one match, with intensity ranging from 50-90% of maximum heart rate calculated using the Karvonen method, monitored with Polar V800 devices. Participants were randomly assigned to three groups, with equal distribution across age categories: 1) Traditional Strength Training (TRD), 2) Velocity Based Squat Training (Sq_V), and 3) Velocity Based Squat + Bench Press Training (SqBp_V). Study protocols were performed on three consecutive days per week, immediately after regular soccer practice. In the TRD group, only the 1-RM was calculated in the first week, while in the SqBp_V and Sq_V groups, 1-RM values were calculated weekly, and the 6-week training program was updated weekly based on these 1-RM values. The last weight lifted was recorded as the 1-RM in kilograms. The number of sets and repetitions was matched between the TRD and Sq_V groups. However, the SqBp_V group performed the same program as Sq_V plus bench press, using the same procedure. Therefore, total weekly volume (sets × repetitions × exercises) was matched between the VBT and TRD groups. Pre tests were conducted one week prior to the intervention, and post tests one week after completion (Figures 1 and 2). The 20 m Sprint, CMJ, and Yo-Yo IR2 were performed as both pre tests and post tests. All workouts and tests were familiarized two days before the pre test. The study was conducted on natural grass and in a fitness facility between 16:00-18:00 at 20-24°C and 60-70% humidity.

03

Conditions studied

  • Exercise (EX)
  • Strength Training Effects
  • Soccer Performance

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • strength training
  • soccer
  • performance enhancement
  • velocity
04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
16 Years to 18 Years
Sexes eligible
Male
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Male football players aged 16-18 years
  • Minimum of five years of licensed competitive football experience
  • At least three years of structured strength-training experience
  • No prior experience with velocity-based training (VBT)
  • Free from musculoskeletal injury within the previous six months
  • Willingness to comply with all study procedures and provide written

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria

  • Previous participation in a VBT program
  • Any musculoskeletal injury within the previous six months
  • Use of medications or stimulants that may affect physical performance
  • Failure to complete baseline testing or intervention procedures
  • Presence of cardiovascular, neurological, or metabolic disorders that could interfere with study participation
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(1)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Other
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
58 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Velocity-Based Squat + Bench Press Training (SqBp_V)

    Velocity-based strength training (VBT) consisted of squat and bench press exercises.

    Other: Velocity Based Squat and Bench Press Training

  • Experimental
    Velocity-Based Squat Training (Sq_V)

    Velocity-based strength training (VBT) consisted of squat exercises.

    Other: Velocity Based Squat Training

  • Active comparator
    Traditional Strength Training (TRD)

    Traditional strength training (TRD) consisted of squat exercises.

    Other: Traditional Strength Training

Interventions

  • OtherVelocity Based Squat and Bench Press Training

    The squat and bench press strength program was implemented for six weeks, with three sessions per week, immediately after regular soccer practice. The one-repetition maximum (1-RM) for both squat and bench press was assessed weekly, and the training program was updated accordingly throughout the six-week intervention.

  • OtherVelocity Based Squat Training

    The squat strength program was implemented for six weeks, with three sessions per week, immediately after regular soccer practice. The one-repetition maximum (1-RM) for the squat was assessed weekly, and the training program was updated accordingly throughout the six-week intervention.

  • OtherTraditional Strength Training

    The squat strength program was implemented for six weeks, with three sessions per week, immediately after regular soccer practice. The one-repetition maximum (1-RM) for the squat was assessed only in the first week, and this value was used to prescribe training loads throughout the intervention.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Countermovement jump (CMJ)

    In the countermovement jump (CMJ) test, vertical jump height was measured using an Infinitek electronic vertical jump device (Infinitek Company, Istanbul, Turkey). Each participant performed two trials, separated by a 60-second passive rest interval. The better performance was recorded for analysis.

    Time frame: From enrollment to the completion of the six-week exercise program, participants followed the prescribed training protocol.

  2. 20m Sprint

    A wireless two-door Sinar photocell device (Sinar, Turkey) was used to measure 20-meter sprint performance. Each participant performed two 20-meter sprints, separated by a three-minute rest interval, and the better time was recorded. Participants were instructed to walk forward naturally with relaxed arms and an upright posture beginning three meters before the timing line. After the final step before the line, they accelerated maximally through the 20-meter distance.

    Time frame: From enrollment to the completion of the six-week exercise program, participants followed the prescribed training protocol.

  3. Aerobic capacity

    Aerobic capacity was assessed using the Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level 2 (Yo-Yo IR2). In this test, participants performed repeated 2 × 20-meter shuttle runs at progressively increasing speeds, moving back and forth between the starting, turning, and finishing lines. Between each shuttle run, a 10-second active recovery period was allowed, during which participants walked or jogged within a 5-meter recovery zone. Running speed was dictated by audio signals automatically controlled by a CD player. Cones were used to mark 2-meter-wide, 20-meter-long running lanes, with an additional cone placed 5 meters behind the starting line to indicate the recovery area.The test was terminated when the participant was unable to continue or failed to reach the finish line on two consecutive occasions. The total distance covered was recorded as the test result. Maximal oxygen uptake was estimated using the following equation: VO2max = distance (m) × 0.0136 + 45.3

    Time frame: From enrollment to the completion of the six-week exercise program, participants followed the prescribed training protocol.

Secondary outcomes

  1. TRD One maximum repetition - Squat (TRD 1-RM Squat):

    In the TRD group, the one-repetition maximum (1-RM) squat was determined using the traditional percentage-based method. Before the athletes began the test, the coach selected an appropriate starting weight for each participant. Athletes were advised to begin with lower loads to ensure proper anatomical positioning and technique before progressing to heavier weights.

    Time frame: Before enrollment to exercise programme.

  2. One maximum repetition - Squat VBT (1-RM Squat VBT)

    In the VBT group, the one-repetition maximum (1-RM) squat was measured weekly using an Apple iPhone 7 Plus (iOS 12.4.1; Apple Inc., USA) with the My Lift application (My Jump Lab, Spain). Before beginning the exercise, participants received a verbal command to initiate the movement. The squat exercise was uploaded to the device and recorded. The range of motion during the squat was measured in meters. For standardization, participants were instructed to squat until reaching 90° of knee flexion and then immediately return to the starting position with full extension of the knee and hip joints.

    Time frame: Before enrollment to exercise programme.

  3. One maximum repetition - Bench Press VBT (1-RM Bench press VBT)

    In the VBT group, the one-repetition maximum (1-RM) bench press was measured weekly using an Apple iPhone 7 Plus (iOS 12.4.1; Apple Inc., USA) with the My Lift application (My Jump Lab, Spain). Before beginning the exercise, participants received a verbal command to initiate the movement. The bench press exercise was uploaded to the device and recorded. The range of motion during the bench press was measured in meters. For standardization, participants were instructed to lower the bar to the chest and then immediately return to the starting position with full elbow extension. Prior to initiating the speed-based strength training measurement, the distance from the center of the bar to the participant's chest was measured and entered into the My Lift application as required.

    Time frame: Before enrollment to exercise programme.

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Bursa Uludağ University, Faculty of Spor Sciences
    Bursa, NİLÜFER 16120, Turkey (Türkiye)
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Wang Y, Qiu J, Dai D, Li Q, Wang X, Luo Q. The effects of velocity-based vs. percentage-based resistance training on sports performance in trainedindividuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2026 Jan 5;18(1):57. doi: 10.1186/s13102-025-01504-9. PubMed 41491263 ↗
  • Loturco I, Pereira LA, Boullosa D. Reassessing the Role of 1-Repetition Maximum Testing for Resistance-Training Prescription and Monitoring. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2026 Mar 3;21(8):968-972. doi: 10.1123/ijspp.2025-0700. Print 2026 Aug 1. PubMed 41780507 ↗
  • Jimenez-Reyes P, Castano-Zambudio A, Cuadrado-Penafiel V, Gonzalez-Hernandez JM, Capelo-Ramirez F, Martinez-Aranda LM, Gonzalez-Badillo JJ. Differences between adjusted vs. non-adjusted loads in velocity-based training: consequences for strength training control and programming. PeerJ. 2021 Mar 23;9:e10942. doi: 10.7717/peerj.10942. eCollection 2021. PubMed 33828909 ↗
  • Flanagan, E., & Jovanovic M. (2014). Researched applications of velocity-based training. Journal of Australian Strength and Conditioning, 22(2), 58-69.
  • Chung, B., Bing, W., & Kim, D. (2025). Velocity-based vs. percentage-based training: Superior effects on acceleration and explosive power in high school triple jump athletes. Applied Sciences, 15(22), 12010. https://doi.org/10.3390/app152212010
  • Balsalobre-Fernandez C, Torres-Ronda L. The Implementation of Velocity-Based Training Paradigm for Team Sports: Framework, Technologies, Practical Recommendations and Challenges. Sports (Basel). 2021 Mar 30;9(4):47. doi: 10.3390/sports9040047. PubMed 33808302 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Undecided

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Ran from Aug 2022 to primary completion in Oct 2022, 1 month.

Of 5,147 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Motor Activity, half reached primary completion within 17 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 7 and three quarters within 36. This study's 1 month is below that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 5,207 studies reached it within 17 months; a quarter within 7 and three quarters within 36.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Aug 30, 2026
First posted
Sep 3, 2026
StartActual
Aug 15, 2022
Primary completionActual
Oct 1, 2022
CompletionActual
Oct 30, 2022
Last update
Sep 9, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 9, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07802028
Lead sponsor
Uludag University
Responsible party
Ramiz ARABACI (Prof. Dr., Uludag University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Sep 3, 2026
Start date
Aug 15, 2022
Primary completion
Oct 1, 2022
Completion
Oct 30, 2022
Last update
Sep 9, 2026

Oversight

FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Sep 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion