复杂对比训练和传统训练方法对半职业澳大利亚规则足球女运动员身体表现的比较效果。

IF 2.5 2区 医学 Q2 SPORT SCIENCES Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research Pub Date : 2024-08-14 DOI:10.1519/JSC.0000000000004888
Jack G Luders, Joel M Garrett, Sam Gleadhill, Liam O Mathews, Hunter J Bennett
{"title":"复杂对比训练和传统训练方法对半职业澳大利亚规则足球女运动员身体表现的比较效果。","authors":"Jack G Luders, Joel M Garrett, Sam Gleadhill, Liam O Mathews, Hunter J Bennett","doi":"10.1519/JSC.0000000000004888","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Luders, J, Garrett, J, Gleadhill, S, Mathews, L, and Bennett, H. Comparative effects of complex contrast training and traditional training methods on physical performance within female, semiprofessional Australian Rules Football players. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2024-This study aimed to explore whether complex contrast training (CCT) would elicit greater strength and power adaptations than traditional (TRAD) training methods using a volume- and intensity-matched design. Fourteen semiprofessional female Australian Football players completed the study. Both CCT and TRAD saw improvements in all performance outcomes: 1 repetition maximum (1RM) back squat (21.3 ± 8.2 and 16.7 ± 6.8 kg), 1RM bench press (5.3 ± 3.6 and 2.1 ± 4.0 kg), 1RM trap bar deadlift (5.0 ± 6.6 and 11.3 ± 2.5 kg), 5 m sprint (0.002 ± 0.09 and 0.02 ± 0.2 s), 10 m sprint (0.04 ± 0.17 and 0.02 ± 0.1 s), 15 m sprint (0.009 ± 0.15 and 0.08 ± 0.2 s), countermovement jump (CMJ) height (230 ± 150 and 340 ± 390 cm), CMJ absolute peak power (158.5 ± 69.6 and 235.6 ± 229.6 N), CMJ relative peak power (3.46 ± 4.1 and 2.68 ± 1.4 N·kg-1)), and plyometric push-up peak relative power (20.5 ± 13.4 and 15.2 ± 13.5 N). There were no between-group differences except for TRAD recording slightly greater improvements in 1RM Trap bar deadlift (Bayes factor [BF10] = 1.210). Complex contrast training completed sessions on average ∼7 minutes quicker than TRAD (BF10 = 5.722), while both groups reporting similar ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) with CCT (±SD) 58.4 ± 6.7 minutes and TRAD 65.5 ± 4.8. Based on the results, CCT training provides the same performance outcomes as traditional training methods across a period of 8 weeks, while taking less time to achieve these outcomes and with similar RPE.</p>","PeriodicalId":17129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Effects of Complex Contrast Training and Traditional Training Methods on Physical Performance Within Female, Semiprofessional Australian Rules Football Players.\",\"authors\":\"Jack G Luders, Joel M Garrett, Sam Gleadhill, Liam O Mathews, Hunter J Bennett\",\"doi\":\"10.1519/JSC.0000000000004888\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Luders, J, Garrett, J, Gleadhill, S, Mathews, L, and Bennett, H. Comparative effects of complex contrast training and traditional training methods on physical performance within female, semiprofessional Australian Rules Football players. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2024-This study aimed to explore whether complex contrast training (CCT) would elicit greater strength and power adaptations than traditional (TRAD) training methods using a volume- and intensity-matched design. Fourteen semiprofessional female Australian Football players completed the study. Both CCT and TRAD saw improvements in all performance outcomes: 1 repetition maximum (1RM) back squat (21.3 ± 8.2 and 16.7 ± 6.8 kg), 1RM bench press (5.3 ± 3.6 and 2.1 ± 4.0 kg), 1RM trap bar deadlift (5.0 ± 6.6 and 11.3 ± 2.5 kg), 5 m sprint (0.002 ± 0.09 and 0.02 ± 0.2 s), 10 m sprint (0.04 ± 0.17 and 0.02 ± 0.1 s), 15 m sprint (0.009 ± 0.15 and 0.08 ± 0.2 s), countermovement jump (CMJ) height (230 ± 150 and 340 ± 390 cm), CMJ absolute peak power (158.5 ± 69.6 and 235.6 ± 229.6 N), CMJ relative peak power (3.46 ± 4.1 and 2.68 ± 1.4 N·kg-1)), and plyometric push-up peak relative power (20.5 ± 13.4 and 15.2 ± 13.5 N). There were no between-group differences except for TRAD recording slightly greater improvements in 1RM Trap bar deadlift (Bayes factor [BF10] = 1.210). Complex contrast training completed sessions on average ∼7 minutes quicker than TRAD (BF10 = 5.722), while both groups reporting similar ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) with CCT (±SD) 58.4 ± 6.7 minutes and TRAD 65.5 ± 4.8. Based on the results, CCT training provides the same performance outcomes as traditional training methods across a period of 8 weeks, while taking less time to achieve these outcomes and with similar RPE.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17129,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000004888\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000004888","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:Luders,J,Garrett,J,Gleadhill,S,Mathews,L 和 Bennett,H. 复杂对比训练和传统训练方法对半职业澳大利亚规则足球女运动员体能表现的影响比较。J Strength Cond Res XX(X):000-000,2024--本研究旨在探索复杂对比度训练(CCT)与传统(TRAD)训练方法相比,是否能通过量和强度匹配设计激发更大的力量和功率适应性。14 名半职业澳大利亚女足运动员完成了这项研究。CCT 和 TRAD 在所有成绩结果上都有所提高:0 ± 6.6 和 11.3 ± 2.5 千克)、5 米短跑(0.002 ± 0.09 和 0.02 ± 0.2 秒)、10 米短跑(0.04 ± 0.17 和 0.02 ± 0.1 秒)、15 米短跑(0.009 ± 0.15 秒和 0.08 ± 0.2 秒)、反运动跳跃(CMJ)高度(230 ± 150 厘米和 340 ± 390 厘米)、CMJ 绝对峰值功率(158.5 ± 69.6 牛顿和 235.6 ± 229.6 牛顿)、CMJ 相对峰值功率(3.46 ± 4.1 牛顿-千克-1 和 2.68 ± 1.4 牛顿-千克-1)和负重俯卧撑相对峰值功率(20.5 ± 13.4 牛顿和 15.2 ± 13.5 牛顿)。除了 TRAD 在 1RM 抓杠负重举方面的进步略大外(贝叶斯因子 [BF10] = 1.210),其他组间没有差异。复合对比训练的完成时间平均比 TRAD 快 7 分钟(BF10 = 5.722),而两组的体力感觉评分(RPE)相似,CCT(±SD)为 58.4 ± 6.7 分钟,TRAD 为 65.5 ± 4.8 分钟。从结果来看,CCT 训练与传统训练方法在 8 周时间内取得的成绩相同,但达到这些成绩所需的时间更短,RPE 相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparative Effects of Complex Contrast Training and Traditional Training Methods on Physical Performance Within Female, Semiprofessional Australian Rules Football Players.

Abstract: Luders, J, Garrett, J, Gleadhill, S, Mathews, L, and Bennett, H. Comparative effects of complex contrast training and traditional training methods on physical performance within female, semiprofessional Australian Rules Football players. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2024-This study aimed to explore whether complex contrast training (CCT) would elicit greater strength and power adaptations than traditional (TRAD) training methods using a volume- and intensity-matched design. Fourteen semiprofessional female Australian Football players completed the study. Both CCT and TRAD saw improvements in all performance outcomes: 1 repetition maximum (1RM) back squat (21.3 ± 8.2 and 16.7 ± 6.8 kg), 1RM bench press (5.3 ± 3.6 and 2.1 ± 4.0 kg), 1RM trap bar deadlift (5.0 ± 6.6 and 11.3 ± 2.5 kg), 5 m sprint (0.002 ± 0.09 and 0.02 ± 0.2 s), 10 m sprint (0.04 ± 0.17 and 0.02 ± 0.1 s), 15 m sprint (0.009 ± 0.15 and 0.08 ± 0.2 s), countermovement jump (CMJ) height (230 ± 150 and 340 ± 390 cm), CMJ absolute peak power (158.5 ± 69.6 and 235.6 ± 229.6 N), CMJ relative peak power (3.46 ± 4.1 and 2.68 ± 1.4 N·kg-1)), and plyometric push-up peak relative power (20.5 ± 13.4 and 15.2 ± 13.5 N). There were no between-group differences except for TRAD recording slightly greater improvements in 1RM Trap bar deadlift (Bayes factor [BF10] = 1.210). Complex contrast training completed sessions on average ∼7 minutes quicker than TRAD (BF10 = 5.722), while both groups reporting similar ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) with CCT (±SD) 58.4 ± 6.7 minutes and TRAD 65.5 ± 4.8. Based on the results, CCT training provides the same performance outcomes as traditional training methods across a period of 8 weeks, while taking less time to achieve these outcomes and with similar RPE.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
9.40%
发文量
384
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The editorial mission of The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research (JSCR) is to advance the knowledge about strength and conditioning through research. A unique aspect of this journal is that it includes recommendations for the practical use of research findings. While the journal name identifies strength and conditioning as separate entities, strength is considered a part of conditioning. This journal wishes to promote the publication of peer-reviewed manuscripts which add to our understanding of conditioning and sport through applied exercise science.
期刊最新文献
Does Cathodal Preconditioning Enhance the Effects of Subsequent Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Corticospinal Excitability and Grip Strength? Evaluation of Trunk Oblique Muscle Activities in Baseball Batters Using T2-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Frequency of Velocity-Based-Training Frequency Impacts Changes in Muscle Morphology, Neuromuscular Performance, and Functional Capability in Persons With Parkinson's Disease. Position-Specific Differences in Speed Profiles Among National Football League Scouting Combine Participants. Prediction of Snatch and Clean and Jerk Performance From Physical Performance Measures in Elite Male Weightlifters.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1