https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/physical-training/repeated-trials-reliability Changes to this claim in Matteo Campagna's evidence registry: its status, its year-by-year history, revisions of the page. en-gb https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/physical-training/repeated-trials-reliabilityIt depends on what is being measured, and the only evidence that decides the status goes against the claim. For draw force, as early as 1967 three repeated trials in the same session on 49 university beginners gave very close values: the best trial and the mean of the other two correlated at 0.91 to 0.98, so a single trial ranked the archers almost as well as three. For the electrical activity of muscles the picture changes: in 2021, in twenty experienced archers, an isometric electromyographic measurement taken once has a reliability of 0.745, while the mean of five trials reaches 0.936; over the five maximal trials, however, the signal falls trial after trial, from 5.87 to 4.64 mV, and the hip angle at which it is measured counts almost four times as much as the differences between people. That study appears in a journal with questionable editorial standards, which by rule does not decide the status, and covers a single muscle, rectus femoris. Repeating helps when the signal is noisy, as long as there is time to recover and the measurement is always taken in the same position; for draw force a single well-run trial already says a great deal.claim:prove-ripetute-affidabilita:revision:2026-05-30:2Sat, 30 May 2026 08:00:00 GMT https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/physical-training/repeated-trials-reliabilityclaim:prove-ripetute-affidabilita:new_claim:2026-05-26:contraddettoTue, 26 May 2026 08:00:00 GMT