Hertogh C, Hue O
Laboratoire ACTE, UFR-STAPS, Université des Antilles et de la Guyane, Campus de Fouillole, Pointe à Pitre, France, Guadeloupe.
J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2002 Sep;42(3):300-3.
The aim of the present study was to determine the best jump power equation in the evaluation of elite volleyball players using both the force platform and peak power equations.
Nine elite volleyball players and nine sedentary subjects performed counter-movement jump tests on a force platform.
Peak power and height were greater in the volleyball players than in the sedentary subjects, whatever the method used. The results demonstrated that the peak power values obtained on the force platform and those scored from the equations of Lewis, Harman and Sayers et al. were correlated when the whole sample was taken into account. However, a significant equation x level interaction (p<10(-4)) indicated different behaviour as a function of performance level. In sedentary subjects, peak power was significantly underestimated using the Lewis equation (943+/-162 W; p<10(-4)) and did not differ using both the Harman (3004+/-563 W) and Sayers (3400+/-604 W) equations when compared to the peak power noted with the force platform (3372+/-532 W). In contrast, in volleyball players, peak power was underestimated using the three equations (1246+/-78 W, p<10(-4); 4314+/-216 W, p<0.001; 4607+/-251, p<0.005; for the Lewis, Harman and Sayers equations, respectively, versus 5355+/-522 W for the force platform).
The results of the present study demonstrate the difficulty in choosing the most relevant equation in the jump power calculation.
本研究的目的是通过使用测力平台和峰值功率方程来确定评估精英排球运动员时最佳的跳跃功率方程。
九名精英排球运动员和九名久坐不动的受试者在测力平台上进行了反向移动跳跃测试。
无论采用何种方法，排球运动员的峰值功率和跳跃高度均高于久坐不动的受试者。结果表明，当考虑整个样本时，测力平台上获得的峰值功率值与Lewis、Harman和Sayers等人方程得出的值具有相关性。然而，显著的方程x水平交互作用（p<10(-4)）表明，其行为随表现水平而有所不同。在久坐不动的受试者中，使用Lewis方程时峰值功率被显著低估（943±162瓦；p<10(-4)），与测力平台记录的峰值功率（3372±532瓦）相比，使用Harman方程（3004±563瓦）和Sayers方程（3400±604瓦）时峰值功率无差异。相比之下，在排球运动员中，使用这三个方程时峰值功率均被低估（Lewis方程为1246±78瓦，p<10(-4)；Harman方程为4314±216瓦，p<0.001；Sayers方程为4607±251瓦，p<0.005；分别与测力平台的5355±522瓦相比）。
本研究结果表明在跳跃功率计算中选择最相关方程存在困难。
