Wetmore Alexander B, Moquin Paul A, Carroll Kevin M, Fry Andrew C, Hornsby W Guy, Stone Michael H
Center of Excellence for Sport Science and Coach Education, Department of Sport, Exercise, Recreation and Kinesiology, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN 37614, USA.
Osness Human Performance Laboratories, Department of Health, Sport, and Exercise Sciences, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA.
Sports (Basel). 2020 Oct 31;8(11):145. doi: 10.3390/sports8110145.
Some controversy exists as to the most efficacious method of training to achieve enhanced levels of sport performance. Controversy concerning the efficacy of periodization and especially block periodization (BP) likely stems from the use of poorly or untrained subjects versus trained who may differ in their responses to a stimulus. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of training status on performance outcomes resulting from 11 weeks of BP training. Fifteen males were recruited for this study and placed into strong (age = 24.3 ± 1.9 years., body mass (BM) = 87.7 ± 8.7 kg, squat: body mass = 1.96 ± 0.16), moderate (age = 25.3 ± 2.7 years., body mass = 100.2 ± 15.5 kg, squat: body mass = 1.46 ± 0.14), or weak (age = 23.2 ± 3.9 yrs., body mass = 83.5 ± 17.1 kg, squat: body mass = 1.17 ± 0.07) groups based on relative strength. Testing was completed at baseline, and after each block which consisted of 1 repetition maximum (1RM) squat, 0 kg static jump (SJ), 0 kg countermovement jump (CMJ), 20 kg SJ, and 20 kg CMJ. Absolute and relative strength were strongly correlated with rates of improvement for absolute strength, relative strength, 0 kg, and 20 kg vertical jumps. All subjects substantially improved back squat ( < 0.001), relative back squat ( < 0.001) with large-very large effect sizes between groups for percent change favoring the weak group over the moderate and strong group for all performance variables. All subjects showed statistically significant improvements in 0 kg SJ ( < 0.001), 0 kg CMJ ( < 0.001), 20 kg SJ ( = 0.002), and 20 kg CMJ ( < 0.001). Statistically significant between group differences were noted for both 20 kg SJ ( = 0.01) and 20 kg CMJ ( = 0.043) with the strong group statistically greater jump heights than the weak group. The results of this study indicate BP training is effective in improving strength and explosive ability. Additionally, training status may substantially alter the response to a resistance training program.
关于实现运动成绩提升的最有效训练方法存在一些争议。关于周期化训练,尤其是阶段周期化训练(BP)的有效性的争议,可能源于使用未经良好训练或未训练的受试者与训练有素的受试者,他们对刺激的反应可能不同。本研究的目的是调查训练状态对11周BP训练所产生的成绩结果的影响。本研究招募了15名男性,并根据相对力量将他们分为强壮组(年龄 = 24.3 ± 1.9岁,体重(BM) = 87.7 ± 8.7千克,深蹲:体重 = 1.96 ± 0.16)、中等组(年龄 = 25.3 ± 2.7岁,体重 = 100.2 ± 15.5千克,深蹲:体重 = 1.46 ± 0.14)或虚弱组(年龄 = 23.2 ± 3.9岁,体重 = 83.5 ± 17.1千克,深蹲:体重 = 1.17 ± 0.07)。在基线时以及每个阶段结束后进行测试,每个阶段包括1次最大重复量(1RM)深蹲、0千克原地纵跳(SJ)、0千克反向纵跳(CMJ)、20千克SJ和20千克CMJ。绝对力量和相对力量与绝对力量、相对力量、0千克和20千克垂直跳跃的提升速率密切相关。所有受试者的后深蹲(<0.001)、相对后深蹲(<0.001)均有显著改善,所有表现变量的组间百分比变化的效应大小为大到非常大,有利于虚弱组超过中等组和强壮组。所有受试者在0千克SJ(<0.001)、0千克CMJ(<0.001)以及20千克SJ(=0.002)和20千克CMJ(<0.001)方面均显示出统计学上的显著改善。在20千克SJ(=0.01)和20千克CMJ(=0.043)方面观察到组间存在统计学上的显著差异,强壮组的跳跃高度在统计学上高于虚弱组。本研究结果表明,BP训练在提高力量和爆发力方面是有效的。此外,训练状态可能会显著改变对阻力训练计划的反应。
Sports (Basel). 2020-10-31
J Strength Cond Res. 2012-12
J Strength Cond Res. 2020-8
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2019-7-1
J Sports Sci Med. 2016-2-23
Front Sports Act Living. 2024-6-3
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023-5-19
J Funct Morphol Kinesiol. 2022-11-16
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022-5-11
Sports Health. 2022
J Funct Morphol Kinesiol. 2021-3-9
Sports (Basel). 2021-1-20
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2019-1-1
Sports Med. 2018-4
Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2018-3-1
Sports Med. 2018-4
Eur J Appl Physiol. 2017-9-30
Sports Med. 2017-12