Refine
Year of publication
- 2018 (4) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (4) (remove)
Keywords
- balance (2)
- change-of-direction speed (2)
- jumping (2)
- specificity (2)
- sprinting (2)
- Judo-specific pulling movement (1)
- Kampfsport (1)
- Oberflächenelektromyografie (1)
- athletic performance (1)
- combat sport (1)
- force (1)
- muscle activity (1)
- reliability (1)
- specific strength training (1)
- spezifisches Krafttraining (1)
- sportliche Leistung (1)
- surface electromyography (1)
- work (1)
Power training programs have proved to be effective in improving components of physical fitness such as speed. According to the concept of training specificity, it was postulated that exercises must attempt to closely mimic the demands of the respective activity. When transferring this idea to speed development, the purpose of the present study was to examine the effects of resisted sprint (RST) vs. traditional power training (TPT) on physical fitness in healthy young adults. Thirty-five healthy, physically active adults were randomly assigned to a RST (n = 10, 23 ± 3 years), a TPT (n = 9, 23 ± 3 years), or a passive control group (n = 16, 23 ± 2 years). RST and TPT exercised for 6 weeks with three training sessions/week each lasting 45–60 min. RST comprised frontal and lateral sprint exercises using an expander system with increasing levels of resistance that was attached to a treadmill (h/p/cosmos). TPT included ballistic strength training at 40% of the one-repetition-maximum for the lower limbs (e.g., leg press, knee extensions). Before and after training, sprint (20-m sprint), change-of-direction speed (T-agility test), jump (drop, countermovement jump), and balance performances (Y balance test) were assessed. ANCOVA statistics revealed large main effects of group for 20-m sprint velocity and ground contact time (0.81 ≤ d ≤ 1.00). Post-hoc tests showed higher sprint velocity following RST and TPT (0.69 ≤ d ≤ 0.82) when compared to the control group, but no difference between RST and TPT. Pre-to-post changes amounted to 4.5% for RST [90%CI: (−1.1%;10.1%), d = 1.23] and 2.6% for TPT [90%CI: (0.4%;4.8%), d = 1.59]. Additionally, ground contact times during sprinting were shorter following RST and TPT (0.68 ≤ d ≤ 1.09) compared to the control group, but no difference between RST and TPT. Pre-to-post changes amounted to −6.3% for RST [90%CI: (−11.4%;−1.1%), d = 1.45) and −2.7% for TPT [90%CI: (−4.2%;−1.2%), d = 2.36]. Finally, effects for change-of-direction speed, jump, and balance performance varied from small-to-large. The present findings indicate that 6 weeks of RST and TPT produced similar effects on 20-m sprint performance compared with a passive control in healthy and physically active, young adults. However, no training-related effects were found for change-of-direction speed, jump and balance performance. We conclude that both training regimes can be applied for speed development.
Power training programs have proved to be effective in improving components of physical fitness such as speed. According to the concept of training specificity, it was postulated that exercises must attempt to closely mimic the demands of the respective activity. When transferring this idea to speed development, the purpose of the present study was to examine the effects of resisted sprint (RST) vs. traditional power training (TPT) on physical fitness in healthy young adults. Thirty-five healthy, physically active adults were randomly assigned to a RST (n = 10, 23 ± 3 years), a TPT (n = 9, 23 ± 3 years), or a passive control group (n = 16, 23 ± 2 years). RST and TPT exercised for 6 weeks with three training sessions/week each lasting 45–60 min. RST comprised frontal and lateral sprint exercises using an expander system with increasing levels of resistance that was attached to a treadmill (h/p/cosmos). TPT included ballistic strength training at 40% of the one-repetition-maximum for the lower limbs (e.g., leg press, knee extensions). Before and after training, sprint (20-m sprint), change-of-direction speed (T-agility test), jump (drop, countermovement jump), and balance performances (Y balance test) were assessed. ANCOVA statistics revealed large main effects of group for 20-m sprint velocity and ground contact time (0.81 ≤ d ≤ 1.00). Post-hoc tests showed higher sprint velocity following RST and TPT (0.69 ≤ d ≤ 0.82) when compared to the control group, but no difference between RST and TPT. Pre-to-post changes amounted to 4.5% for RST [90%CI: (−1.1%;10.1%), d = 1.23] and 2.6% for TPT [90%CI: (0.4%;4.8%), d = 1.59]. Additionally, ground contact times during sprinting were shorter following RST and TPT (0.68 ≤ d ≤ 1.09) compared to the control group, but no difference between RST and TPT. Pre-to-post changes amounted to −6.3% for RST [90%CI: (−11.4%;−1.1%), d = 1.45) and −2.7% for TPT [90%CI: (−4.2%;−1.2%), d = 2.36]. Finally, effects for change-of-direction speed, jump, and balance performance varied from small-to-large. The present findings indicate that 6 weeks of RST and TPT produced similar effects on 20-m sprint performance compared with a passive control in healthy and physically active, young adults. However, no training-related effects were found for change-of-direction speed, jump and balance performance. We conclude that both training regimes can be applied for speed development.
Hintergrund Schnellkräftige Wurfeingangsbewegungen stellen im Judo entscheidende Voraussetzungen für den Wettkampferfolg dar, weshalb das Training der Anrissbewegung ein zentrales Element des judospezifischen Trainings darstellt. Das Ziel der Studie bestand darin, die Effekte eines Anrisstrainings mit einem Judoergometer-System (ATJ) gegenüber einem tradierten Anrisstraining mit Partner (ATP) auf kinetische und elektromyografische Parameter des Anreißens bei Wurfeingangsbewegungen von Judoka zu untersuchen. Methode Männliche leistungsorientierte Judoka (N = 24, Alter: 22 ± 4 Jahre; Trainingserfahrung: 15 ± 3 Jahre) wurden randomisiert in zwei Gruppen aufgeteilt. Im Crossover-Design absolvierte die erste Gruppe über vier Wochen ein ATJ gefolgt von vier Wochen ATP (je 3x/ Woche). Die zweite Gruppe führte beide Trainingsvarianten in umgekehrter Reihenfolge durch. ATJ und ATP wurden zusätzlich zum bestehenden Training absolviert. Vor dem Training sowie nach vier und nach acht Wochen Training wurden Tests zur Erfassung kinetischer Parameter (dynamisch-realisierte Maximalkraft, Explosivkraft, mechanische Arbeit) und elektromyografischer (EMG) Schulter-/ Rumpfmuskelaktivitäten (M. biceps brachii, M. deltoideus, M. trapezius, M. erector spinae) für die Hub- und Zugarmseite bei Wurfeingangsbewegungen am Judoergometer sowie sportartunspezifische Krafttests (d. h. Liegend-Anreißen, Klimmziehen) durchgeführt.
Ergebnisse Die Ergebnisse der statistischen Analyse ergaben über den gesamten Interventionszeitraum (8 Wochen) für beide Trainingsgruppen signifikante Verbesserungen der kinetischen Parameter (p <,05; 0,83 ≤d≤ 1,77) und EMG-Aktivitäten (p <,05; 1,07 ≤d≤ 2,25). Darüber hinaus zeigten sich größere Zuwachsraten in der Explosivkraft, der mechanischen Arbeit und den Schulter-/Rumpfmuskelaktivitäten (M. deltoideus, M. erector spinae, M. trapezius) zugunsten von ATJ im Vergleich zu ATP (p <,05; 1,25 ≤d≤ 2,79). Für die sportartunspezifischen Kraftwerte wurden keine signifikanten Veränderungen festgestellt.
Schlussfolgerung Die vorliegenden Ergebnisse zeigen, dass ATJ gegenüber ATP größere Steigerungsraten von kinetischen und elektromyografischen Parametern des Anreißens bei Wurfeingangsbewegungen von Judoka bewirkt. Die trainingsbedingten Leistungssteigerungen scheinen zumindest teilweise auf neuronalen Anpassungen zu beruhen.
Our experimental approach included two studies to determine discriminative validity and test-retest reliability (study 1) as well as ecological validity (study 2) of a judo ergometer system while performing judo-specific movements. Sixteen elite (age: 23 +/- 3 years) and 11 sub-elite (age: 16 +/- 1 years) athletes participated in study 1 and 14 male sub-elite judo athletes participated in study 2. Discriminative validity and test-retest reliability of sport-specific parameters (mechanical work, maximal force) were assessed during pulling movements with and without tsukuri (kuzushi). Ecological validity of muscle activity was determined by performing pulling movements using the ergometer without tsukuri and during the same movements against an opponent. In both conditions, electromyographic activity of trunk (e.g., m. erector spinae) and upper limb muscles (e.g., m. biceps brachii) were assessed separately for the lifting and pulling arm. Elite athletes showed mostly better mechanical work, maximal force, and power (0.12 <= d <= 1.80) compared with sub-elite athletes. The receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed acceptable validity of the JERGo(C) system to discriminate athletes of different performance levels predominantly during kuzushi without tsukuri (area under the curve = 0.27-0.90). Moreover, small-to-medium discriminative validity was found to detect meaningful performance changes for mechanical work and maximal force. The JERGo(C) system showed small-to-high relative (ICC = 0.37-0.92) and absolute reliability (SEM = 10.8-18.8%). Finally, our analyses revealed acceptable correlations (r = 0.41-0.88) between muscle activity during kuzushi performed with the JERGo(C) system compared with a judo opponent. Our findings indicate that the JERGo(C) system is a valid and reliable test instrument for the assessment and training of judo-specific pulling kinetics particularly during kuzushi movement without tsukuri.