Purpose: An a posteriori multicenter reliability study was conducted to compare the reliability of the outcomes derived from the linear force-velocity (F-V) relationship (F-intercept [F0], V-intercept [V0], F-V slope, and maximum power [Pmax]) using a 2-point method based on 2 distant loads with respect to a multiple-point method based on 4 proximal loads and a multiple-point method that considered all 6 tested loads. Method: Data from 63 healthy men derived from 3 studies were analyzed. The F-V relationship obtained from the bench-press-throw exercise was determined in 2 separate sessions using 3 different combinations of loads: 2-point method (20-70% of 1-repetition maximum [1RM]), 4-load multiple-point method (30-40-50-60% of 1RM), and 6-load multiple-point method (20-30-40-50-60-70% of 1RM). Reliability was assessed through the coefficient of variation (CV), whereas a CVratio of 1.15 was deemed as the smallest important ratio. Results: The 2-point method provided the outcomes of the F-V relationship with greater reliability than the 4-load multiple-point method (F0, 3.58% vs 4.53%, CVratio = 1.27; V0, 5.58% vs 7.85%, CVratio = 1.41; F-V slope, 8.57% vs 11.99%, CVratio = 1.40; Pmax, 4.33% vs 4.81%, CVratio = 1.11). The reliability of the 6-load multiple-point method was comparable to the 2-point method (F0, 3.53%, CVratio = 1.01; V0, 5.32%, CVratio = 1.05; F-V slope, 8.38%, CVratio = 1.02; P0, 3.74%, CVratio = 1.16). Conclusion: The distance between experimental points is more important for obtaining a reproducible F-V relationship than the number of experimental points; therefore, the 2-point method could be recommended for a quicker assessment of the F-V relationship.