Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the reliability and magnitude of the force–velocity (F–V) relationship parameters [maximum force (F0), maximum velocity (V0), F–V slope, and maximum power (P0)] obtained through the application of only two loads (i.e., two-point method) vs. six loads (i.e., multiple-point method).
Methods: Ten physically active men (age 19.5 ± 0.9 years, body mass 79.0 ± 9.0 kg, height 183.9 ± 8.4 cm) conducted four testing sessions after a preliminary familiarization session with the leg cycle ergometer exercise. In a counterbalanced order, subjects performed two sessions of the multiple-point method (six loads applied for the F–V modeling) over 1 week and two sessions of the two-point method (only the lightest and heaviest loads were applied) over another week.
Results: The main findings revealed that (I) the reliability of the F–V relationship parameters was very high and generally of comparable magnitude for both the multiple- [coefficient of variation (CV) range 1.91–3.94%; intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) range 0.72–0.99] and two-point methods [CV range 1.41–4.62%; ICC range 0.76–0.95], (II) the magnitude of the same parameters obtained from both methods was highly correlated (r > 0.80), and (III) the P0 assessed from the multiplepoint method was significantly lower than the obtained from the two-point method [P = 0.041; effect size (ES) 0.36] due to a significant decrease in F0 (P = 0.039; ES 0.41) with no significant differences observed for V0 (P = 0.570; ES − 0.15).
Conclusions: These results support the two-point method as a reliable, valid, and fatigue-free procedure of assessing the muscle mechanical capacities through the F–V relationship.