Human Performance Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, University of Rhode Island, South Kingston, Rhode Island.
Department of Plant Sciences, University of Rhode Island, South Kingston, Rhode Island.
J Strength Cond Res. 2019 Apr;33(4):965-973. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002961.
Hatfield, DL, Murphy, KM, Nicoll, JX, Sullivan, WM, and Henderson, J. Effects of different athletic playing surfaces on jump height, force, and power. J Strength Cond Res 33(4): 965-973, 2019-Artificial turfs (ATs) have become more commonplace. Some aspects of performance such as speed seem to be better on ATs, but there are few published studies on the effects of playing surfaces on performance. Furthermore, there is no research that compares performance on ATs, hard surfaces (HSs), and different composite natural surfaces. Forty-three subjects, 21 men (age: 20 ± 1.82 years; height: 177.53 ± 5.87 cm; body mass: 78.44 ± 11.59 kg; and body fat: 11.17 ± 4.45%) and 22 women (age: 25 ± 1.32 years; height: 161.37 ± 6.47 cm; body mass: 60.94 ± 10.24 kg; and body fat: 27.16 ± 7.08%) performed a single countermovement jump (SCMJ), repeated CMJs (RCMJs), and single depth jump (SDJ) on 4 different playing surfaces (peat soil composition turf [NT1], sandy loam composition turf [NT2], 1 AT, and 1 HS. Repeated-measures analysis of variance with Bonferroni post hoc was used to calculate differences in performance across playing surfaces. Statistical significance was set at p ≤ 0.05. Force and jump height were not different across different surfaces. Men had significantly higher force, power, and jump height on all surfaces. Only SCMJ power was lower on NT1 compared with all other surfaces. The difference in power between surfaces was not reproduced when RCMJ and SDJ were performed, and may be due to the increased reactiveness of the stretch-shortening cycle during those jumps. Because of marginal differences between athletic performance and playing surface type, future research comparing playing surface type and other aspects of athletic success such as rate of injury should be considered.
哈特菲尔德、DL、墨菲、KM、尼科尔斯、JX、沙利文、WM 和亨德森,J. 不同运动场地对跳跃高度、力量和功率的影响。J 力量与条件研究 33(4):965-973,2019-人工草皮 (ATs) 已变得更为常见。有些性能方面,如速度,似乎在 ATs 上表现得更好,但关于运动场地对性能的影响的研究很少。此外,没有研究比较 ATs、硬表面 (HSs) 和不同复合天然表面的性能。43 名受试者,21 名男性(年龄:20 ± 1.82 岁;身高:177.53 ± 5.87cm;体重:78.44 ± 11.59kg;体脂:11.17 ± 4.45%)和 22 名女性(年龄:25 ± 1.32 岁;身高:161.37 ± 6.47cm;体重:60.94 ± 10.24kg;体脂:27.16 ± 7.08%)分别在 4 种不同的运动场地(泥炭土组成草皮 [NT1]、沙壤土组成草皮 [NT2]、1 种 AT 和 1 种 HS)上进行了单次反跳(SCMJ)、重复反跳(RCMJ)和单次深跳(SDJ)。使用 Bonferroni 事后检验的重复测量方差分析来计算不同运动场地的性能差异。统计学显著性设置为 p ≤ 0.05。不同表面的力和跳跃高度没有差异。男性在所有表面上的力、功率和跳跃高度都显著更高。与所有其他表面相比,NT1 上的 SCMJ 功率明显较低。当进行 RCMJ 和 SDJ 时,表面之间的功率差异没有再现,这可能是由于在这些跳跃中伸展-缩短周期的反应性增加所致。由于运动表现和运动场地类型之间的差异较小,未来应考虑比较运动场地类型和运动成功的其他方面,如受伤率。