This study aimed to compare the reliability and agreement of mean velocity (MV) and maximal velocity (V_max) between the two velocity monitoring devices (GymAware vs T-Force) most commonly used in the scientific literature. Twenty resistance-trained males completed two testing sessions. The free-weight barbell back squat one-repetition maximum (1RM) was determined in the first session (125.0 ± 24.2 kg; mean ± standard deviation). The second session consisted of two blocks of 16 repetitions (six repetitions at 45% 1RM and 65% 1RM, and four repetitions at 85% 1RM). Half of the repetitions were performed with the GymAware on the left side of the barbell and the other half of the repetitions were performed on the right side of the barbell (opposite placement for the T-Force). MV and V_max were recorded simultaneously with the GymAware and T-Force. The overall reliability, which was calculated pooling together the data of three loads, did not differ between the T-Force (coefficient of variation (CV) = 5.28 ± 1.79%) and GymAware (CV = 5.79 ± 2.26%) (CV_ratio = 1.10), but the reliability was higher for V_max (CV = 5.08 ± 1.79%) compared to MV (CV = 5.98 ± 2.73%) (CV_ratio = 1.18). MV was significantly higher for the T-Force (p < 0.001, Δ = 4.42%), but no significant differences were detected between the devices for V_max (p = 0.455, Δ = 0.22%). These results support the use of both the GymAware and T-Force as gold-standards in studies designed to validate other velocity monitoring devices. However, systematic bias, albeit rather constant, exists for the magnitude of MV between the two devices.

本研究旨在比较科学文献中最常用的两种速度监测设备（GymAware 与 T-Force）之间的平均速度 (MV) 和最大速度 (V _max )的可靠性和一致性。20 名接受过阻力训练的男性完成了两次测试。自由重量杠铃背蹲单次重复最大值 (1RM) 在第一次训练中确定 (125.0 ± 24.2 kg; 平均值 ± 标准偏差)。第二节包括两个 16 次重复的组（6 次重复 45% 1RM 和 65% 1RM，以及 4 次重复 85% 1RM）。一半的重复是在杠铃左侧使用 GymAware 进行的，另一半重复是在杠铃的右侧（T-Force 的相反位置）进行的。MV 和 V_最大值与 GymAware 和 T-Force 同时记录。T-Force（变异系数 (CV) = 5.28 ± 1.79%）和 GymAware（CV = 5.79 ± 2.26%）（CV_比率 = 1.10)，但与 MV (CV = 5.98 ± 2.73%) 相比，V _max (CV = 5.08 ± 1.79%)的可靠性更高（CV_比率 = 1.18）。T-Force 的 MV 显着更高 ( p  < 0.001, Δ = 4.42%)，但在 V _max ( p = 0.455，Δ = 0.22%）。这些结果支持在旨在验证其他速度监测设备的研究中使用 GymAware 和 T-Force 作为黄金标准。然而，两个设备之间的 MV 大小存在系统偏差，尽管相当恒定。