超重对Wingate测试性能的影响:3574板#13 6月4日8:00 AM - 9:30 AM

Matthew R Lunde, J. O'kroy
{"title":"超重对Wingate测试性能的影响:3574板#13 6月4日8:00 AM - 9:30 AM","authors":"Matthew R Lunde, J. O'kroy","doi":"10.1249/01.mss.0000487977.60927.ef","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Resistance loading is important to correct power determinations using the Wingate power output test. In football linemen who have very heavy body weights, much of which can be fat mass, the standard loading of 7.5% may result in a resistance too heavy for them to complete the test adequately. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine if excessive body weight will result in peak power output (PPO) and fatigue index (FI) not being accurately assessed at the standard resistance of 7.5% on the Wingate test. METHODS: Eleven division three collegiate football athletes (mean + SD: age, 19.09 ± 0.54 yrs; height, 188.19 ± 3.51 cm; weight, 131.50 ± 14.33 kg; percent fat, 31.58 ± 4.29 %) participated in the current study. All subjects performed three, 30 second Wingate tests at the following resistances, 5.5%, 6.5%, and 7.5% in a randomized order to assess PPO and FI. Each Wingate test was performed on different days with at least four days’ rest between trials. RESULTS: PPO and FI were significantly different between the three resistance groups (p < 0.05). The 5.5% resistance setting produced the lowest PPO (1038.3 ± 82.3 Watts) and fatigue index (15.29 ± 3.66 W/S). The 7.5% resistance setting had the highest PPO (1413.10 ± 125.64 Watts) and fatigue index (25.97 ± 5.27 W/S). At the 6.5% resistance setting, data were between the two other groups and different from the other groups. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, excessive body weight individuals should perform the standard resistance of 7.5% on the Wingate test instead of lower resistances to obtain a true peak power output and fatigue index.","PeriodicalId":18500,"journal":{"name":"Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise","volume":"93 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of Excessive Body Weight on Wingate Test Performance: 3574 Board #13 June 4, 8: 00 AM - 9: 30 AM.\",\"authors\":\"Matthew R Lunde, J. O'kroy\",\"doi\":\"10.1249/01.mss.0000487977.60927.ef\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Resistance loading is important to correct power determinations using the Wingate power output test. In football linemen who have very heavy body weights, much of which can be fat mass, the standard loading of 7.5% may result in a resistance too heavy for them to complete the test adequately. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine if excessive body weight will result in peak power output (PPO) and fatigue index (FI) not being accurately assessed at the standard resistance of 7.5% on the Wingate test. METHODS: Eleven division three collegiate football athletes (mean + SD: age, 19.09 ± 0.54 yrs; height, 188.19 ± 3.51 cm; weight, 131.50 ± 14.33 kg; percent fat, 31.58 ± 4.29 %) participated in the current study. All subjects performed three, 30 second Wingate tests at the following resistances, 5.5%, 6.5%, and 7.5% in a randomized order to assess PPO and FI. Each Wingate test was performed on different days with at least four days’ rest between trials. RESULTS: PPO and FI were significantly different between the three resistance groups (p < 0.05). The 5.5% resistance setting produced the lowest PPO (1038.3 ± 82.3 Watts) and fatigue index (15.29 ± 3.66 W/S). The 7.5% resistance setting had the highest PPO (1413.10 ± 125.64 Watts) and fatigue index (25.97 ± 5.27 W/S). At the 6.5% resistance setting, data were between the two other groups and different from the other groups. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, excessive body weight individuals should perform the standard resistance of 7.5% on the Wingate test instead of lower resistances to obtain a true peak power output and fatigue index.\",\"PeriodicalId\":18500,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise\",\"volume\":\"93 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0000487977.60927.ef\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0000487977.60927.ef","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

电阻负载对于使用温盖特功率输出测试来确定正确的功率非常重要。对于体重非常重的足球边锋来说,其中大部分是脂肪量,7.5%的标准负荷可能会导致阻力过大,使他们无法充分完成测试。目的:本研究的目的是确定体重过重是否会导致峰值功率输出(PPO)和疲劳指数(FI)在温盖特试验中7.5%的标准阻力下无法准确评估。方法:11名大学三级足球运动员(平均+ SD:年龄,19.09±0.54岁;高度:188.19±3.51 cm;重量:131.50±14.33 kg;百分比脂肪(31.58±4.29%)参与了本研究。所有受试者按随机顺序在以下阻力下进行3次30秒Wingate试验,分别为5.5%、6.5%和7.5%,以评估PPO和FI。每个温盖特试验在不同的日子进行,试验之间至少休息四天。结果:PPO、FI在3个耐药组间差异有统计学意义(p < 0.05)。5.5%电阻设置产生最低的PPO(1038.3±82.3 Watts)和疲劳指数(15.29±3.66 W/S)。7.5%电阻设置的PPO(1413.10±125.64 Watts)和疲劳指数(25.97±5.27 W/S)最高。在6.5%阻力设置时,数据介于其他两组之间,与其他组不同。结论:超重个体应在Wingate试验中采用7.5%的标准阻力,而不是更低的阻力,以获得真实的峰值功率输出和疲劳指数。
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
Effects of Excessive Body Weight on Wingate Test Performance: 3574 Board #13 June 4, 8: 00 AM - 9: 30 AM.
Resistance loading is important to correct power determinations using the Wingate power output test. In football linemen who have very heavy body weights, much of which can be fat mass, the standard loading of 7.5% may result in a resistance too heavy for them to complete the test adequately. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine if excessive body weight will result in peak power output (PPO) and fatigue index (FI) not being accurately assessed at the standard resistance of 7.5% on the Wingate test. METHODS: Eleven division three collegiate football athletes (mean + SD: age, 19.09 ± 0.54 yrs; height, 188.19 ± 3.51 cm; weight, 131.50 ± 14.33 kg; percent fat, 31.58 ± 4.29 %) participated in the current study. All subjects performed three, 30 second Wingate tests at the following resistances, 5.5%, 6.5%, and 7.5% in a randomized order to assess PPO and FI. Each Wingate test was performed on different days with at least four days’ rest between trials. RESULTS: PPO and FI were significantly different between the three resistance groups (p < 0.05). The 5.5% resistance setting produced the lowest PPO (1038.3 ± 82.3 Watts) and fatigue index (15.29 ± 3.66 W/S). The 7.5% resistance setting had the highest PPO (1413.10 ± 125.64 Watts) and fatigue index (25.97 ± 5.27 W/S). At the 6.5% resistance setting, data were between the two other groups and different from the other groups. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, excessive body weight individuals should perform the standard resistance of 7.5% on the Wingate test instead of lower resistances to obtain a true peak power output and fatigue index.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effect of Ibuprofen on Markers of Acute Kidney Injury, Intestinal Injury, and Endotoxemia after Running in the Heat. Cognitive Benefits of Open-Skill Sports in Childhood: Evidence from the ABCD Study. Short-Term Warm-Water Immersion for Improving Whole-Body Heat Loss in Older Men. Treadmill Exercise Mitigates Alzheimer's Pathology by Modulating Glial Polarization and Reducing Oligodendrocyte Precursor Cell Perivascular Clustering. The Effects of Gymnastics Programs with Different Cognitive Loads on Working Memory and Prefrontal Cortex Oxygenation: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
×
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