Sawyer Jason, Higgins Paul, Cacolice Paul A, Doming Troy
Health and Physical Education Department, Rhode Island College, Providence, RI, United States of America.
Department of Movement Science, Sport and Leisure Studies, Westfield State College, Westfield, MA, United States of America.
PeerJ. 2021 Sep 24;9:e12189. doi: 10.7717/peerj.12189. eCollection 2021.
Optimizing training adaptations is of the utmost importance for the strength and conditioning professional. The pre-season of any sport is particularly important to ensure preparedness of the athletes. In DIII Collegiate Football pre-season consists of approximately 3 weeks. The abbreviated time of the pre-season increases the importance of optimizing training using safe methods, including alternative loading strategies. The purpose of the current study was to determine if a 3-week variable resistance training VRT during an undulating (UL) resistance training program elicited a greater increase in back squat strength compared to traditional loading methods.
Forty DIII Football players (age range: 18-25 years) participated in a 3-week UL bilateral back squat (BBS) program. Both groups performed the BBS 3 times per week with a minimum of 24 hours between exercise sessions. The control group (C) ( = 20) (height = 182.3 + 5.1 cm, body mass: pre = 102.8 ± 17.7 kg, post = 104.1 ± 17.8 kg) used traditional loading methods (, Olympic weights only) and the experimental group (E) ( = 20) (height = 180.7 ± 8.0 cm, body mass: pre = 100.3 ± 27.1 kg, post = 101.0 ± 27.7 kg) used traditional loading methods and variable resistance (, resistance bands). The variable resistance accounted for approximately 20% of the total resistance while 80% of the resistance was supplied by traditional loading methods.
When all data was pooled, subjects had a significant increase ( < 0.05) in 1-RM BBS from pre (154.2 + 26.1 kg) to post (166.8 + 26.2 kg), with a percent increase of 8.13% at the completion of the 3-week training program. There was no significant difference ( > 0.05) between the C and E groups for muscular strength, muscular power, or vertical jump. Volume-loads were not significantly ( > 0.05) different between groups for any of the weeks (C: Week 1 = 858.1 + 101.3, Week 2 = 588.6 + 69.2, Week 3 = 332.5 + 38.9, Total = 1179.2 + 209.4 . E: Week 1 = 835.2 + 179.7, Week 2 = 572.2 + 123.4, Week 3 = 323.5 + 68.8, Total = 1730.9 + 371.8) or for the pre-season as a whole.
A traditional UL resistance training program and training program with variable resistance are both effective methods at increasing back squat strength during 3 weeks of training. Resistance band variable resistance (VR) does not enhance training effects within a 3-week mesocycle greater than traditional resistance.
对于体能训练专业人员而言,优化训练适应性至关重要。任何运动项目的季前赛对于确保运动员做好准备尤为重要。在三级学院橄榄球运动中,季前赛约为3周。季前赛时间的缩短增加了使用安全方法优化训练的重要性,包括采用替代负荷策略。本研究的目的是确定在波动阻力训练计划中进行为期3周的可变阻力训练(VRT)与传统负荷方法相比,是否能使后蹲力量有更大幅度的增加。
40名三级学院橄榄球运动员(年龄范围:18 - 25岁)参与了为期3周的波动双侧后蹲(BBS)计划。两组均每周进行3次BBS训练,每次训练之间至少间隔24小时。对照组(C组)(n = 20)(身高 = 182.3 ± 5.1厘米,体重:训练前 = 102.8 ± 17.7千克,训练后 = 104.1 ± 17.8千克)采用传统负荷方法(仅使用奥林匹克杠铃片),实验组(E组)(n = 20)(身高 = 180.7 ± 8.0厘米,体重:训练前 = 100.3 ± 27.1千克,训练后 = 101.0 ± 27.7千克)采用传统负荷方法和可变阻力(弹力带)。可变阻力约占总阻力的20%,而80%的阻力由传统负荷方法提供。
当汇总所有数据时,受试者的1次重复最大后蹲重量(1-RM BBS)从训练前(154.2 ± 26.1千克)到训练后(166.8 ± 26.2千克)有显著增加(P < 0.05),在为期3周的训练计划结束时增加了8.13%。C组和E组在肌肉力量、肌肉功率或垂直跳方面无显著差异(P > 0.05)。在任何一周内,两组之间的容量负荷均无显著差异(P > 0.05)(C组:第1周 = 858.1 ± 101.3,第2周 = 588.6 ± 69.2,第3周 = 332.5 ± 38.9,总计 = 1179.2 ± 209.4。E组:第1周 = 835.2 ± 179.7,第2周 = 572.2 ± 123.4,第3周 = 323.5 ± 68.8,总计 = 1730.9 ± 371.8),整个季前赛期间也是如此。
传统的波动阻力训练计划和可变阻力训练计划都是在3周训练期间增加后蹲力量的有效方法。弹力带可变阻力(VR)在3周的中周期内不会比传统阻力更能增强训练效果。