Limits...
Transference of traditional versus complex strength and power training to sprint performance.

Loturco I, Tricoli V, Roschel H, Nakamura FY, Cal Abad CC, Kobal R, Gil S, González-Badillo JJ - J Hum Kinet (2014)

Bottom Line: The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of two different strength-power training models on sprint performance.However, the transfer effect coefficients (TEC) of strength and power performances to 20-m sprint performance following the TT were greater than the CT throughout the 9-week training period.Our data suggest that TT is more effective than CT to improve sprint performance in moderately trained subjects.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: NAR - Nucleus of High Performance in Sport, São Paulo, SP, Brazil. ; Pablo de Olavide University, Faculty of Sport, Seville, Spain. ; School of Physical Education and Sport, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.

ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of two different strength-power training models on sprint performance. Forty-eight soldiers of the Brazilian brigade of special operations with at least one year of army training experience were divided into a control group (CG: n = 15, age: 20.2 ± 0.7 years, body height: 1.74 ± 0.06 m, and body mass: 66.7 ± 9.8 kg), a traditional training group (TT: n = 18, age: 20.1 ± 0.7 years, body height: 1.71 ± 0.05 m, and body mass: 64.2 ± 4.7 kg), and a complex training group (CT: n = 15, age: 20.3 ± 0.8 years, body height: 1.71 ± 0.07 m; and body mass: 64.0 ± 8.8 kg). Maximum strength (25% and 26%), CMJ height (36% and 39%), mean power (30% and 35%) and mean propulsive power (22% and 28%) in the loaded jump squat exercise, and 20-m sprint speed (16% and 14%) increased significantly (p≤0.05) following the TT and CT, respectively. However, the transfer effect coefficients (TEC) of strength and power performances to 20-m sprint performance following the TT were greater than the CT throughout the 9-week training period. Our data suggest that TT is more effective than CT to improve sprint performance in moderately trained subjects.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Mean power (MP-W, panel A) and mean propulsive power (MPP-W, panel B) in jump squat using a load of 45% 1RM, pre- and post-training for the control (CG), traditional training (TT), and complex training (CG) groups, at the instants 0-week (pre-test) and 9-week (post-test) (Mean ± SD).† - p≤0.05 compared to the control group at the same time point
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4120461&req=5

f2-jhk-41-265: Mean power (MP-W, panel A) and mean propulsive power (MPP-W, panel B) in jump squat using a load of 45% 1RM, pre- and post-training for the control (CG), traditional training (TT), and complex training (CG) groups, at the instants 0-week (pre-test) and 9-week (post-test) (Mean ± SD).† - p≤0.05 compared to the control group at the same time point

Mentions: The TT and CT significantly (p≤0.05) increased smith-machine squat 1RM (25% and 26%), CMJ height (36% and 39%) and 20-m sprint speed (16% and 14%), respectively. There were no significant differences (p>0.05) between training groups (Figure 1A, 1B and 1C). In addition, TT and CT groups produced significantly higher (p≤0.05) MP and MPP in the loaded JS in comparison to the CG following the training period (Figure 2A, 2B, and 2C).


Transference of traditional versus complex strength and power training to sprint performance.

Loturco I, Tricoli V, Roschel H, Nakamura FY, Cal Abad CC, Kobal R, Gil S, González-Badillo JJ - J Hum Kinet (2014)

Mean power (MP-W, panel A) and mean propulsive power (MPP-W, panel B) in jump squat using a load of 45% 1RM, pre- and post-training for the control (CG), traditional training (TT), and complex training (CG) groups, at the instants 0-week (pre-test) and 9-week (post-test) (Mean ± SD).† - p≤0.05 compared to the control group at the same time point
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4120461&req=5

f2-jhk-41-265: Mean power (MP-W, panel A) and mean propulsive power (MPP-W, panel B) in jump squat using a load of 45% 1RM, pre- and post-training for the control (CG), traditional training (TT), and complex training (CG) groups, at the instants 0-week (pre-test) and 9-week (post-test) (Mean ± SD).† - p≤0.05 compared to the control group at the same time point
Mentions: The TT and CT significantly (p≤0.05) increased smith-machine squat 1RM (25% and 26%), CMJ height (36% and 39%) and 20-m sprint speed (16% and 14%), respectively. There were no significant differences (p>0.05) between training groups (Figure 1A, 1B and 1C). In addition, TT and CT groups produced significantly higher (p≤0.05) MP and MPP in the loaded JS in comparison to the CG following the training period (Figure 2A, 2B, and 2C).

Bottom Line: The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of two different strength-power training models on sprint performance.However, the transfer effect coefficients (TEC) of strength and power performances to 20-m sprint performance following the TT were greater than the CT throughout the 9-week training period.Our data suggest that TT is more effective than CT to improve sprint performance in moderately trained subjects.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: NAR - Nucleus of High Performance in Sport, São Paulo, SP, Brazil. ; Pablo de Olavide University, Faculty of Sport, Seville, Spain. ; School of Physical Education and Sport, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.

ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of two different strength-power training models on sprint performance. Forty-eight soldiers of the Brazilian brigade of special operations with at least one year of army training experience were divided into a control group (CG: n = 15, age: 20.2 ± 0.7 years, body height: 1.74 ± 0.06 m, and body mass: 66.7 ± 9.8 kg), a traditional training group (TT: n = 18, age: 20.1 ± 0.7 years, body height: 1.71 ± 0.05 m, and body mass: 64.2 ± 4.7 kg), and a complex training group (CT: n = 15, age: 20.3 ± 0.8 years, body height: 1.71 ± 0.07 m; and body mass: 64.0 ± 8.8 kg). Maximum strength (25% and 26%), CMJ height (36% and 39%), mean power (30% and 35%) and mean propulsive power (22% and 28%) in the loaded jump squat exercise, and 20-m sprint speed (16% and 14%) increased significantly (p≤0.05) following the TT and CT, respectively. However, the transfer effect coefficients (TEC) of strength and power performances to 20-m sprint performance following the TT were greater than the CT throughout the 9-week training period. Our data suggest that TT is more effective than CT to improve sprint performance in moderately trained subjects.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus