Suppr超能文献

3 种举重过头推举练习和运动项目 1 次重复最大性能比较。

Comparison of 1-Repetition-Maximum Performance Across 3 Weightlifting Overhead Pressing Exercises and Sport Groups.

出版信息

Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2020 Mar 9;15(6):862-867. doi: 10.1123/ijspp.2019-0582. Print 2020 Jul 1.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To (1) compare the 1-repetition-maximum (1RM) performance between the push press, push jerk, and split jerk and (2) explore these differences between weightlifters, CrossFit athletes, and a mixed group of athletes.

METHODS

Forty-six resistance-trained males (age 28.8 [6.4] y; height 180.0 [6.0] cm; body mass 84.1 [10.2] kg; weightlifting training experience 3.64 [3.14] y) participated in this study. The 1RM performance of the push press, push jerk, and split jerk was assessed during the same session in a sequential order (ie, combined 1RM assessment method). Thirty-six participants were retested to determine between-sessions reliability of the 1RM values.

RESULTS

Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) showed a high between-sessions reliability for the push press (ICC = .98; 95% CI, .95-.99), push jerk (ICC = .99; 95% CI, .98-1.00), and split jerk (ICC = .99; 95% CI, .98-1.00). There was a significant main effect of exercise (η2 = .101) and exercise × group interaction (η2 = .012) on 1RM performance (P < .001), whereas the main effect of group did not reach statistical significance (P = .175).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence that the weightlifting overhead press derivatives affect 1RM performance. In addition, the interaction of exercise and sport group was caused by the higher differences in 1RM performance between exercises for weightlifters compared with CrossFit and a mixed group of athletes. Therefore, strength and conditioning professionals should be aware that the differences in 1RM performance between weightlifting overhead-press derivatives may be affected by sport group.

摘要

目的

(1)比较推举、推举挺举和分裂挺举的 1 次最大重复次数(1RM)表现,(2)探索举重运动员、CrossFit 运动员和混合运动员群体之间的这些差异。

方法

46 名有抗阻训练经验的男性(年龄 28.8 [6.4] 岁;身高 180.0 [6.0] 厘米;体重 84.1 [10.2] 公斤;举重训练经验 3.64 [3.14] 年)参加了这项研究。在一个连续的顺序(即,联合 1RM 评估方法)中,在同一会议上评估了推举、推举挺举和分裂挺举的 1RM 表现。36 名参与者进行了重测,以确定 1RM 值的组间可靠性。

结果

组内相关系数(ICC)和相关 95%置信区间(CI)显示,推举(ICC =.98;95%CI,.95-.99)、推举挺举(ICC =.99;95%CI,.98-1.00)和分裂挺举(ICC =.99;95%CI,.98-1.00)的组间可靠性很高。运动(η2 =.101)和运动×组交互作用(η2 =.012)对 1RM 表现有显著的主要影响(P <.001),而组的主要影响没有达到统计学意义(P =.175)。

结论

本研究提供了证据,表明举重过顶压力的衍生物会影响 1RM 表现。此外,运动和运动群体的相互作用是由于举重运动员与 CrossFit 和混合运动员群体之间的运动表现差异较大造成的。因此,体能训练专业人员应该意识到,举重过顶压力衍生动作之间的 1RM 表现差异可能受到运动群体的影响。

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