Search

Purpose: The aim of the present study was to analyze the effect of different eccentric tempos on eccentric kinetics and kinematics and the subsequent concentric performance when performing countermovement jumps against different loads. Methods: After 1-repetition-maximum assessment and 2 familiarization sessions, 13 well-trained participants performed, in randomized order, 12 sets (4 tempos × 3 loads) of 4 repetitions of the loaded countermovement-jump exercise. The eccentric tempos analyzed were 5 and 2 seconds, as fast as possible, and accelerated (ie, without pause between repetitions), while the loads used were 30%, 50%, and 70% of 1-repetition maximum. Several kinetic and kinematic variables during both phases were recorded by linking a linear position transducer to the barbell. Results: The eccentric work was greater in the accelerated condition despite no changes in the eccentric depth. The peak and mean propulsive velocities were greater in the as-fast-as-possible and accelerated conditions. Correlation analysis showed that, compared with the 5-second condition, the increased concentric performance in the accelerated condition was related to the difference in eccentric work performed in the last 100 milliseconds of the eccentric phase (r >.770). Conclusions: Contrary to current practices, the current study highlights the need for performing the eccentric phase of loaded countermovement jumps, a common exercise performed by athletes for both training and evaluation purposes, as fast as possible. This allows not only a greater eccentric work but also improved concentric performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

CrossFit is characterized by being a standardized training program that improves physical performance through the provision of several stimuli regardless of the participant's strength level. This study aimed to compare the acute response in total repetitions as a measurement of performance, jump ability, physiological demand (heart rate and blood lactate), and perceived effort considering the participants' strength level with individualized intensity in CrossFit. Thirty-five participants were assessed and asked to participate on two separate days in a standardized and relative 'As Many Repetitions As Possible' (AMRAP) CrossFit circuit. Both AMRAPs comprised strength, gymnastic and aerobic exercises, although only strength was individualized according to the participant's level. Before the statistical analysis, participants were allocated to higher- or lower-strength groups following the one-repetition maximum-bodyweight ratio in the push press exercise. Results support the existence of a strong relationship between strength level and total repetitions in both AMRAPs. In addition, differences in total repetitions and rate of perceived exertion between strength groups are discarded when AMRAP intensity is individualized while physiological demand and jump ability are maintained. Thus, the higher-strength participants may benefit from similar responses with a lower number of repetitions. Therefore, CrossFit trainers should be encouraged to prescribe strength tasks based on the percentage of 1RM for every training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Flywheel resistance training has become more integrated within resistance training programs in a variety of sports due to the neuromuscular, strength, and task-specific enhancements reported with this training. Objective: This paper aimed to present the consensus reached by internationally recognized experts during a meeting on current definitions and guidelines for the implementation of flywheel resistance training technology in sports. Methods: Nineteen experts from different countries took part in the consensus process; 16 of them were present at the consensus meeting (18 May 2023) while three submitted their recommendations by e-mail. Prior to the meeting, evidence summaries were developed relating to areas of priority. This paper discusses the available evidence and consensus process from which recommendations were made regarding the appropriate use of flywheel resistance training technology in sports. The process to gain consensus had five steps: (1) performing a systematic review of systematic reviews, (2) updating the most recent umbrella review published on this topic, (3) first round discussion among a sample of the research group included in this consensus statement, (4) selection of research group members—process of the consensus meeting and formulation of the recommendations, and (5) the consensus process. The systematic analysis of the literature was performed to select the most up-to-date review papers available on the topic, which resulted in nine articles; their methodological quality was assessed according to AMSTAR 2 (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Review 2) and GRADE (Grading Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation). Statements and recommendations scoring 7–9 were considered appropriate. Results: The recommendations were based on the evidence summary and researchers' expertise; the consensus statement included three statements and seven recommendations for the use of flywheel resistance training technology. These statements and recommendations were anonymously voted on and qualitatively analyzed. The three statements reported a score ranging from 8.1 to 8.8, and therefore, all statements included in this consensus were considered appropriate. The recommendations (1–7) had a score ranging from 7.7 to 8.6, and therefore, all recommendations were considered appropriate. Conclusions: Because of the consensus achieved among the experts in this project, it is suggested that practitioners and researchers should adopt the guidelines reported in this consensus statement regarding the use of flywheel resistance technology in sports. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To assess the influence of age and skill level on handball throwing kinematics and performance, 126 participants were distributed into groups according to their skill level (elite or recreational) and age group (U12, U16 or +18). Each participant performed three sets of 10 throws, aiming to hit a target (40 × 40 cm) located in the right corner of the goal. During testing, kinematic data were recorded and throwing performance (accuracy and velocity) was measured. Results showed greater throwing velocity in the elite compared to recreational groups, whereas no differences were found for throwing accuracy. The elite U16 and +18 groups displayed higher segment velocities (hand, arm and pelvis) than the recreational groups. The participation of proximal segments was higher in older groups, showing the more skilled players (U16 and +18) greater pelvis velocities (1.62–1.75 vs 1.02–1.22 m/s). The increased velocity of the distal joints (hand peak velocity: 13.56 ± 1.65 vs 10.67 ± 1.98 m/s) are responsible for the difference in throwing velocity between the elite and recreational U12 groups. Several correlations were found between joint kinematics and throwing velocity. Coaches could use these results during training, to optimise specific throwing training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to assess the influence of the load order used (i. e. incremental, decremental or random loads order) during the bench press throw load-velocity profile on peak velocity achieved against four different loads (20–40–60–80% of one repetition maximum [1RM]). Both intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of variation (CV) were calculated to assess the reliability of the measures. A repeated measures ANOVA was used to assess differences between protocols. A linear regression analysis was performed to assess the load-velocity relationships among the different protocols. Peak velocity showed good to high ICC values independently of the load used (ICC=0.83–0.92). CV scores showed good reliability (ranging between 2.2 and 6.2%). No significant differences in peak velocity attained at each load were found between the three testing protocols (p> 0.05). In addition, peak velocity at each load was very large to almost perfect, correlated between protocols (r= 0.790–0.920). The linear regression model showed a significant relationship between testing protocols (p< 0.001; R2 =0.94). In conclusion, due to some ICC scores below 0.9 and R2 below 0.95, the indistinct use of different load-order protocols to assess load-velocity relationships in the bench press throw exercise is not recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To analyze the effects of different inertial loads on power production and power maintenance, as well as the number of sessions required for proper familiarization during the flywheel quarter-squat. Methods: Twenty-four high-level handball players attended 4 testing sessions consisting of 4 sets of 10 repetitions using 4 different inertial loads (0.025, 0.050, 0.075, and 0.100 kg⋅m²). In addition, a 5th set of 15 repetitions was performed. Both concentric and eccentric peak power and the eccentric: concentric ratio were recorded. Results: The results showed the need to perform 3 sessions for a proper familiarization (ie, outcomes stabilization). The inertial load of 0.025 kg⋅m² led to greater concentric peak power compared with the other inertial loads (from likely to most likely greater values). Both 0.025 and 0.050 kg⋅m² inertial loads entailed greater eccentric peak power compared with 0.075 and 0.100 kg⋅m² (most likely greater). Conversely, the 0.025-kg⋅m² inertial load showed a lower eccentric: concentric ratio, presenting negative effects (most likely lower values) compared with the inertial loads of 0.050, 0.075, and 0.100 kg⋅m². Participants were able to perform 5-12 repetitions per set without significant peak power output decrements. Conclusions: This study highlights the importance of performing at least 3 sessions to obtain a stable measure during flywheel squat exercise. Lower inertial loads (0.025 kg⋅m²) are the better option for eliciting high concentric peak power output values. In contrast, medium to high inertial loads are more appropriate to achieve greater eccentric overload values. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To investigate the influence of adding a weekly eccentric-overload training (EOT) session in several athletic performance’s tests, 18 team-handball players were assigned either to an EOT (n = 11) or a Control (n = 7) group. Both groups continued to perform the same habitual strength training, but the EOT group added one session/week during a 7-week training programme consisting of four sets of eight repetitions for the bilateral half-squat and unilateral lunge exercises. The test battery included handball throwing velocity, maximum dynamic strength (1RM), countermovement jump (CMJ), 20 m sprint, triple hop for distance, and eccentric/concentric power in both the half-squat and lunge exercises. Data were analysed using magnitude-based inferences. Both groups improved their 1RM in the half squat, 20 m sprint time, and CMJ performance to a similar extent, but the EOT group showed a beneficial effect for both right [(42/58/0), possibly positive] and left [(99/1/0), very likely positive] triple hop for distance performance. In addition, the EOT group showed greater power output improvements in both eccentric and concentric phases of the half-squat (difference in percent of change ranging from 6.5% to 22.0%) and lunge exercises (difference in per cent of change ranging from 13.1% to 24.9%). Nevertheless, no group showed changes in handball throwing velocity. Selected variables related to team-handball performance (i.e. functional jumping performance, power output) can be improved by adding a single EOT session per week, highlighting the usefulness of this low-volume/high-intensity training when aiming at optimizing dynamic athletic performance. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]