Ingebrigtsen Jørgen, Holtermann Andreas, Roeleveld Karin
Human Movement Sciences Programme, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
J Strength Cond Res. 2009 Sep;23(6):1670-6. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181b3f37b.
The velocity-specificity principle in training is well established by studies applying isokinetic training devices. However, the contraction velocity during customary resistance training using barbells is rarely stable and can be manipulated in several ways. By manipulating load and intention of movement, the significance of contraction velocity during barbell training on gains in strength-related parameters was investigated. Twenty-seven subjects (divided into 3 experimental groups) performed standardized biceps curls 3 times a week for 3 weeks under the following conditions: high load and slow contraction velocity (HS), high load and fast contraction velocity (HF), and low load with fast contraction velocity (LF). Twelve subjects received no intervention, serving as controls (C). Elbow flexion strength was tested before and after the training period at both isometric and 4 isokinetic contraction velocities (30, 90, 240 and 300 degrees/sec) using a dynamometer. Rate of force development (RFD) was calculated in 100 millisecond epochs from isometric torque curves. Increased maximal isometric strength was seen in HF (9.7%), whereas HS improved slow isokinetic strength (8.5%). There were no improvements in force performance for LF and C. In none of the groups were changes in RFD observed. These findings support the principle of training specificity, highlighting the importance of details concerning contraction velocity on the outcome of resistance training using free weights.
应用等速训练设备的研究充分证实了训练中的速度特异性原则。然而,在使用杠铃进行常规阻力训练时,收缩速度很少稳定,并且可以通过多种方式进行操控。通过操控负荷和运动意图,研究了杠铃训练期间收缩速度对力量相关参数增加的意义。27名受试者(分为3个实验组)在以下条件下每周进行3次标准二头肌弯举,共进行3周:高负荷和慢收缩速度(HS)、高负荷和快收缩速度(HF)以及低负荷和快收缩速度(LF)。12名受试者不接受干预,作为对照组(C)。在训练期前后,使用测力计在等长收缩和4种等速收缩速度(30、90、240和300度/秒)下测试肘屈肌力量。从等长扭矩曲线计算100毫秒时段内的力量发展速率(RFD)。HF组的最大等长力量增加(9.7%),而HS组改善了慢等速力量(8.5%)。LF组和C组的力量表现没有改善。所有组均未观察到RFD的变化。这些发现支持训练特异性原则,突出了收缩速度细节对使用自由重量器械进行阻力训练结果的重要性。