抗阻训练与 plyometric 训练对青春期前足球运动员的效果和时程适应性比较。
Effectiveness and time-course adaptation of resistance training vs. plyometric training in prepubertal soccer players.
机构信息
Research Unit "Sport Performance, Health & Society" Higher Institute of Sport and Physical Education of Ksar Said, Tunis 2009, Tunisia.
Tunisian Research Laboratory "Sports Performance Optimization", National Center of Medicine and Science in Sports (CNMSS), Tunis 1003, Tunisia.
出版信息
J Sport Health Sci. 2020 Dec;9(6):620-627. doi: 10.1016/j.jshs.2016.07.008. Epub 2016 Jul 16.
PURPOSE
This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and time course for improvements in explosive actions through resistance training (RT) vs. plyometric training (PT) in prepubertal soccer players.
METHODS
Thirty-four male subjects were assigned to: a control group (n = 11); an RT group (5 regular soccer training sessions per week, n = 12); a PT group (3 soccer training sessions and 2 RT sessions per week, n = 11). The outcome measures included tests for the assessment of muscle strength (e.g., 1 repetition maximum half-squat test), jump ability (e.g., countermovement jump, squat jump, standing long jump, and multiple 5 bounds test), linear speed (e.g., 20 m sprint test), and change of direction (e.g., Illinois change of direction test).
RESULTS
The RTG showed an improvement in the half-squat (Δ = 13.2%; d = 1.3, p< 0.001) and countermovement jump (Δ = 9.4%; d = 2.4, p< 0.001) at Week 4, whereas improvements in the 20-m sprint (Δ = 4.2%; d = 1.1, p < 0.01); change of direction (CoD) (Δ = 3.8%; d = 2.1, p < 0.01); multiple 5 bounds (Δ = 5.1%; d = 1.5, p < 0.05); standing long jump (Δ = 7.2%; d = 1.2, p < 0.01); squat jump (Δ = 19.6%; d = 1.5, p < 0.01); were evident at Week 8. The PTG showed improvements in CoD (Δ = 2.1%; d = 1.3, p< 0.05); standing long jump (Δ = 9.3%; d = 1.1, p< 0.01); countermovement jump (Δ = 16.1%; d = 1.2, p< 0.01); and squat jump (Δ = 16.7%; d = 1.4, p< 0.01); at Week 8 whereas improvements in the 20-m sprint (Δ = 4.1%; d = 1.3, p < 0.01); and multiple 5 bounds (Δ = 7.4%; d = 2.4, p< 0.001); were evident only after Week. The RT and PT groups showed improvements in all sprint, CoD, and jump tests (p< 0.05) and in half-squat performance, for which improvement was only shown within the RTG (p< 0.001).
CONCLUSION
RT and PT conducted in combination with regular soccer training are safe and feasible interventions for prepubertal soccer players. In addition, these interventions were shown to be effective training tools to improve explosive actions with different time courses of improvements, which manifested earlier in the RTG than in the PTG. These outcomes may help coaches and fitness trainers set out clear and concise goals of training according to the specific time course of improvement difference between RT and PT on proxies of athletic performance of prepubertal soccer players.
目的
本研究旨在评估抗阻训练（RT）与跳躍训练（PT）对青春期前足球运动员爆发力改善的效果和时间进程。
方法
34 名男性受试者被分配到：对照组（n = 11）；RT 组（每周进行 5 次常规足球训练，n = 12）；PT 组（每周进行 3 次足球训练和 2 次 RT 训练，n = 11）。评估的结果包括肌肉力量测试（例如，1 次重复最大半蹲测试）、跳跃能力测试（例如，反動跳躍、深蹲跳躍、站立跳遠和多次 5 次跳躍測試）、线性速度测试（例如，20 米冲刺测试）和变向能力测试（例如，伊利诺伊變向能力測試）。
结果
RTG 在第 4 周时显示半蹲（Δ=13.2%；d=1.3，p<0.001）和反動跳躍（Δ=9.4%；d=2.4，p<0.001）的改善，而 20 米冲刺（Δ=4.2%；d=1.1，p<0.01）；变向能力（CoD）（Δ=3.8%；d=2.1，p<0.01）；多次 5 次跳躍（Δ=5.1%；d=1.5，p<0.05）；站立跳遠（Δ=7.2%；d=1.2，p<0.01）；深蹲跳躍（Δ=19.6%；d=1.5，p<0.01）的改善则在第 8 周时出现。PTG 显示 CoD（Δ=2.1%；d=1.3，p<0.05）；站立跳遠（Δ=9.3%；d=1.1，p<0.01）；反動跳躍（Δ=16.1%；d=1.2，p<0.01）；和深蹲跳躍（Δ=16.7%；d=1.4，p<0.01）的改善在第 8 周时出现，而 20 米冲刺（Δ=4.1%；d=1.3，p<0.01）；和多次 5 次跳躍（Δ=7.4%；d=2.4，p<0.001）的改善则仅在第 8 周时出现。RT 和 PT 组在所有冲刺、CoD 和跳跃测试中都显示出改善（p<0.05），并且在半蹲表现中也显示出改善，而这种改善仅在 RTG 中出现（p<0.001）。
结论
与常规足球训练相结合的 RT 和 PT 是青春期前足球运动员安全且可行的干预措施。此外，这些干预措施被证明是有效的训练工具，可以改善爆发力，且不同的干预措施改善效果的时间进程不同，在 RTG 中比在 PTG 中更早出现。这些结果可能有助于教练和健身教练根据 RT 和 PT 对青春期前足球运动员运动表现的代理指标改善的具体时间进程差异，设定清晰明确的训练目标。
Zotero 插件