Hori Naruhiro, Newton Robert U, Andrews Warren A, Kawamori Naoki, McGuigan Michael R, Nosaka Kazunori
School of Exercixe, Biomedical and Health Science, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, Western Australia, Australia.
J Strength Cond Res. 2007 May;21(2):314-20. doi: 10.1519/R-22896.1.
Measurement of power output during resistance training is becoming ubiquitous in strength and conditioning programs, but there is great variation in the methods used. The main purposes of this study were to compare the power output values obtained from 4 different methods and to examine the relationships between these values. Male semiprofessional Australian rules football players (n = 30) performed hang power clean and weighted jump squat while ground reaction force (GRF)-time data and barbell displacement-time data were sampled simultaneously using a force platform and a linear position transducer attached to the barbell. Peak and mean power applied to the barbell was obtained from barbell displacement-time data (method 1). Peak and mean power applied to the system (barbell + lifter) was obtained from 3 other methods: (a) using GRF-time data (method 2), (b) using barbell displacement-time data (method 3), and (c) using both barbell displacement-time data and GRF-time data (method 4). The peak power values (W) obtained from methods 1, 2, 3, and 4 were (mean +/- SD) 1,644 +/- 295, 3,079 +/- 638, 3,821 +/- 917, and 4,017 +/- 833 in hang power clean and 1,184 +/- 115, 3,866 +/- 451, 3,567 +/- 494, and 4,427 +/- 557 in weighted jump squat. There were significant differences between power output values obtained from method 1 vs. methods 2, 3, and 4, as well as method 2 vs. methods 3 and 4. The power output applied to the barbell and that applied to the system was significantly correlated (r = 0.65-0.81). As a practical application, it is important to understand the characteristics of each method and consider how power output should be measured during the hang power clean and the weighted jump squat.
在力量与体能训练计划中，测量抗阻训练期间的功率输出变得越来越普遍，但所使用的方法存在很大差异。本研究的主要目的是比较从4种不同方法获得的功率输出值，并检验这些值之间的关系。30名澳大利亚男子半职业澳式橄榄球运动员进行了悬垂高翻和负重深蹲跳，同时使用力平台和连接在杠铃上的线性位置传感器同步采集地面反作用力（GRF）-时间数据和杠铃位移-时间数据。杠铃的峰值功率和平均功率通过杠铃位移-时间数据获得（方法1）。施加于系统（杠铃+举重者）的峰值功率和平均功率通过其他3种方法获得：（a）使用GRF-时间数据（方法2），（b）使用杠铃位移-时间数据（方法3），以及（c）同时使用杠铃位移-时间数据和GRF-时间数据（方法4）。在悬垂高翻中，从方法1、2、3和4获得的峰值功率值（瓦特）分别为（平均值±标准差）1644±295、3079±638、3821±917和4017±833；在负重深蹲跳中分别为1184±115、3866±451、3567±494和4427±557。从方法1与方法2、3和4获得的功率输出值之间存在显著差异，方法2与方法3和4之间也存在显著差异。施加于杠铃的功率输出与施加于系统的功率输出显著相关（r=0.65-0.81）。作为实际应用，了解每种方法的特点并考虑在悬垂高翻和负重深蹲跳期间应如何测量功率输出非常重要。
