(71) EVALUATING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FITNESS AND PERFORMANCE METRICS TO HIFT PERFORMANCE IN WELL-TRAINED MALES

Purpose: Several fitness and performance metrics are often assessed as components of a comprehensive evaluation by practitioners. High intensity functional training (HIFT) is a form of training that has significantly increased in popularity over the past 20 years. HIFT typically incorporates multiple exercise modes at high intensities and volumes with little, or no, prescribed rest periods between sets. Large gaps in the research exist due to the relative brief existence of HIFT as a formalized modality of exercise. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship of basic fitness and performance metrics to HIFT performance in well-trained males. Methods: Nine HIFT experienced male participants (age 21 ± 4 y, weight 80.8 ± 5.3 kg, height 175.9 ± 7.5 cm, BF% 10.3 ± 2.1 %, HIFT experience 2.5 ± 1.0 y) had the following fitness and performance assessments completed on them: height, weight, BMI calculation, 3-site skinfold, self-reported months of HIFT experience and weekly minutes of vigorous intensity physical activity, maximal countermovement jump, 1RM bench press, 3-repetition bench press bar velocity at 70% of 1RM, maximum distance 4.5 kg seated medicine ball toss, 1-minute push-up test, and 250 m rowing ergometer test. Following the previous assessments, the participants completed a popular HIFT workout that consisted of as many rounds as possible in 20 minutes of 5 pull-ups, 10 push-ups, and 15 bodyweight squats. Total repetitions performed and continuous heart rate during the HIFT workout were also assessed. Pearson product moment correlations were used to investigate the relationships between variables. Results: The mean total repetitions for the HIFT workout were 631 ± 129. Height had a negative, strong relationship (r = -0.83) with total repetitions during the HIFT workout. HIFT experience (2.5 ± 1.0 y) and mean heart rate (178 ± 5 bpm) during the workout had positive, strong relationships (r = 0.72; r = 0.87) with total repetitions during the HIFT workout. BMI (26.2 ± 2.0 kg/m²), 1RM bench press (103.4 ± 14.1 kg), and maximum push-ups from the 1-minute push-up test (35 ± 6 reps) had positive, moderate relationships (r = 0.68; r = 0.49; r = 0.64) and BF% had a positive, weak relationship (r = 0.27) with total repetitions during the HIFT workout. The 3-repetition bench press bar velocity assessment (0.64 ± 0.06 m/s) produced a negative, moderate relationship (r = -0.44) and the seated medicine ball toss (242.0 ± 31.5 cm) had a negative, weak relationship (r = -0.33) with total repetitions during the HIFT workout. Conclusions: The findings of this study add to the current relatively minimal body of literature focused on HIFT performance. Further research should be conducted evaluating basic fitness and performance metrics for HIFT workouts consisting of other time domains and exercises. Practical Applications: A well-developed fitness and performance testing battery should assess a variety of metrics to aid the fitness professional in exercise program-related decisions. The examination of some of the common fitness and performance metrics in this study provide an understanding of how these variables are related to male HIFT participants for this specific HIFT workout. In this case, strength, endurance, BMI, and BF% were positively associated with HIFT performance there were negative associations with upper-body power and height. The evidence from this study could assist practitioners in the development of future programs. Acknowledgements: None