Loturco Irineu, Pereira Lucas A, Reis Valter P, Zanetti Vinicius, Bishop Chris, McGuigan Michael R
NAR-Nucleus of High Performance in Sport, São Paulo, Brazil.
Department of Human Movement Science, Federal University of São Paulo, Santos, São Paulo, Brazil.
J Strength Cond Res. 2022 Dec 1;36(12):3432-3439. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003899. Epub 2020 Dec 4.
Loturco, I, Pereira, LA, Reis, VP, Zanetti, V, Bishop, C, and Mcguigan, MR. Traditional free-weight vs. variable resistance training applied to elite young soccer players during a short preseason: Effects on strength, speed, and power performance. J Strength Cond Res 36(12): 3432-3439, 2022-Maximizing the neuromuscular capacities of players is a critical challenge during short soccer preseasons. This study compared the effects of 2 strength-power training regimes, on the strength, speed, and power performance of elite young soccer players during a 4-week preseason. Twenty-five under-20 players from the same club were pair matched in 2 training groups as follows: traditional training group (TTG) ( n = 13), athletes performed half-squat (HS) and jump-squat (JS) exercises as traditionally prescribed, and elastic band (EB) group (EBG) ( n = 12), athletes performed HS and JS with EB attached to the barbell. Vertical jump height, 20-m sprint velocity, change of direction (COD) speed, HS and JS power, and 1 repetition maximum (1RM) in the HS were assessed before, after 2-week, and after 4-week of training. A two-way analysis of variance with repeated measures was used to assess the effects of both training protocols over the experimental period. Both strategies were effective for significantly improving HS and JS power (effect sizes [ESs] = 1.00-1.77), HS 1RM (ES = 1.68 and 1.51 for TTG and EBG, respectively), vertical jumping ability (ES = 0.37-0.65), and COD speed (ES = 0.81 and 0.39 for TTG and EBG, respectively), when comparing premeasures and postmeasures. By contrast, both TTG and EBG failed to increase 20-m sprint velocity (ES ranging between -0.54 and 0.23). In conclusion, both training schemes were able to improve the strength and power performance but not the sprint capacity of young soccer players. To accelerate strength gains over very-short time periods (i.e., 2 weeks), variable resistance training may be advantageous. Conversely, to optimize power adaptations in ballistic exercises across a similar time period, traditional free-weight training may be preferred.
洛图尔科,I,佩雷拉,LA,雷斯,VP,扎内蒂,V,毕晓普,C,以及麦奎根,MR。在短时间季前赛期间应用于精英年轻足球运动员的传统自由重量训练与可变阻力训练:对力量、速度和功率表现的影响。《力量与体能研究杂志》36(12): 3432 - 3439,2022年——在短时间的足球季前赛期间,最大限度地提高运动员的神经肌肉能力是一项关键挑战。本研究比较了两种力量 - 功率训练方案对精英年轻足球运动员在为期4周的季前赛期间的力量、速度和功率表现的影响。来自同一俱乐部的25名20岁以下球员被配对分为两个训练组,如下:传统训练组(TTG)(n = 13),运动员按照传统规定进行半蹲(HS)和跳蹲(JS)练习;弹性带组(EBG)(n = 12),运动员在杠铃上附着弹性带进行HS和JS练习。在训练前、训练2周后和训练4周后评估垂直跳高度、20米冲刺速度、变向(COD)速度以及HS和JS功率,以及HS的1次重复最大重量(1RM)。采用重复测量的双向方差分析来评估两种训练方案在实验期间的效果。与训练前和训练后的测量结果相比,两种训练策略均能显著提高HS和JS功率(效应量[ESs]=1.00 - 1.77)、HS的1RM(TTG和EBG的ES分别为1.68和1.51)、垂直跳跃能力(ES = 0.37 - 0.65)以及COD速度(TTG和EBG的ES分别为0.81和0.39)。相比之下,TTG和EBG均未能提高20米冲刺速度(ES在 - 0.54至0.23之间)。总之,两种训练方案都能够提高年轻足球运动员的力量和功率表现,但不能提高其冲刺能力。为了在非常短的时间段(即2周)内加速力量增长,可变阻力训练可能更具优势。相反,为了在相似时间段内优化弹道练习中的功率适应,传统自由重量训练可能更受青睐。