Suppr超能文献

不同的赛前力量训练负荷方案可使巴西精英足球运动员的运动表现得到相似的提升。

Different loading schemes in power training during the preseason promote similar performance improvements in Brazilian elite soccer players.

机构信息

School of Physical Education and Sport, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

出版信息

J Strength Cond Res. 2013 Jul;27(7):1791-7. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182772da6.

Abstract

The present study investigated the effects of 2 different power training loading schemes in Brazilian elite soccer players. Thirty-two players participated in the study. Maximum dynamic strength (1RM) was evaluated before (B), at midpoint (i.e., after 3 weeks; T1), and after 6 weeks (T2) of a preseason strength/power training. Muscle power, jumping, and sprinting performance were evaluated at B and T2. Players were randomly allocated to 1 of 2 training groups: velocity-based (VEL: n = 16; age, 19.18 ± 0.72 years; height, 173 ± 6 cm; body mass, 72.7 ± 5.8 kg) or intensity-based (INT: n = 16; age, 19.11 ± 0.7 years; height, 172 ± 4.5 cm; body mass, 71.8 ± 4.6 kg). After the individual determination of the optimal power load, both groups completed a 3-week traditional strength training period. Afterward, the VEL group performed 3 weeks of power-oriented training with increasing velocity and decreasing intensity (from 60 to 30% 1RM) throughout the training period, whereas the INT group increased the training intensity (from 30 to 60% 1RM) and thus decreased movement velocity throughout the power-oriented training period. Both groups used loads within ±15% (ranging from 30 to 60% 1RM) of the measured optimal power load (i.e., 45.2 ± 3.0% 1RM). Similar 1RM gains were observed in both groups at T1 (VEL: 9.2%; INT: 11.0%) and T2 (VEL: 19.8%; INT: 22.1%). The 2 groups also presented significant improvements (within-group comparisons) in all of the variables. However, no between-group differences were detected. Mean power in the back squat (VEL: 18.5%; INT: 20.4%) and mean propulsive power in the jump squat (VEL: 29.1%; INT: 31.0%) were similarly improved at T2. The 10-m sprint (VEL: -4.3%; INT: -1.6%), jump squat (VEL: 7.1%; INT: 4.5%), and countermovement jump (VEL: 6.7%; INT: 6.9%) were also improved in both groups at T2. Curiously, the 30-m sprint time (VEL: -0.8%; INT: -0.1%) did not significantly improve for both groups. In summary, our data suggest that male professional soccer players can achieve improvements in strength- and power-related abilities as a result of 6 weeks of power-oriented training during the preseason. Furthermore, similar performance improvements are observed when training intensity manipulation occurs around only a small range within the optimal power training load.

摘要

本研究调查了 2 种不同的力量训练负荷方案对巴西精英足球运动员的影响。32 名运动员参加了这项研究。在赛季前的力量/力量训练前(B)、中点(即第 3 周后;T1)和第 6 周后(T2)评估最大动态强度(1RM)。肌肉力量、跳跃和冲刺表现分别在 B 和 T2 进行评估。运动员被随机分配到 2 个训练组中的 1 个:速度组(VEL:n=16;年龄,19.18±0.72 岁;身高,173±6cm;体重,72.7±5.8kg)或强度组(INT:n=16;年龄,19.11±0.7 岁;身高,172±4.5cm;体重,71.8±4.6kg)。在确定最佳动力负荷后,两组均完成了 3 周的传统力量训练期。此后,VEL 组在整个训练期间进行了 3 周的以速度为主导的训练,强度逐渐降低(从 60%到 30%1RM),而 INT 组则增加了训练强度(从 30%到 60%1RM),从而降低了整个动力训练期间的运动速度。两组均使用负荷在测量最佳动力负荷的±15%以内(范围为 30%至 60%1RM),即 45.2±3.0%1RM。在 T1(VEL:9.2%;INT:11.0%)和 T2(VEL:19.8%;INT:22.1%),两组均观察到相似的 1RM 增加。两组在所有变量上都有显著的改善(组内比较)。然而,未检测到组间差异。在背蹲(VEL:18.5%;INT:20.4%)和跳蹲(VEL:29.1%;INT:31.0%)中的平均动力以及在 T2 时的 10 米冲刺(VEL:-4.3%;INT:-1.6%)、跳蹲(VEL:7.1%;INT:4.5%)和反向跳跃(VEL:6.7%;INT:6.9%)也都有所提高。有趣的是,两组的 30 米冲刺时间(VEL:-0.8%;INT:-0.1%)都没有显著提高。总的来说,我们的数据表明,男性职业足球运动员可以通过赛季前 6 周的以力量为主导的训练来提高力量和相关能力。此外,当训练强度仅在最佳动力训练负荷范围内的小范围内进行调整时,观察到类似的性能提高。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验