Graduate School of Sport Sciences, Waseda University, Saitama, Japan; and.
Faculty of Sport Sciences, Waseda University, Saitama, Japan.
J Strength Cond Res. 2023 Oct 1;37(10):1939-1946. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000004512. Epub 2023 Mar 17.
Nishioka, T and Okada, J. Ballistic exercise versus heavy resistance exercise protocols: which resistance priming is more effective for improving neuromuscular performance on the following day? J Strength Cond Res 37(10): 1939-1946, 2023-This study aimed to determine whether ballistic exercise priming (BEP) or heavy resistance priming (HRP) is more effective for improving ballistic performance after 24 hours. Ten resistance-trained men performed BEP and HRP conditions 72-144 hours apart in a randomized and counterbalanced order. Jumping performance was assessed before and 24 hours after the BEP and HRP sessions using 0 and 40% one-repetition maximum (1RM) squat jump (SJ), 0 and 40% 1RM countermovement jump (CMJ), and drop jump (DJ) reactive strength index (RSI). Statistical significance was accepted at p ≤ 0.05. In the BEP condition, 0% 1RM CMJ height (+3.62%) as well as theoretical maximum velocity (+5.14%) and theoretical maximum power (+2.55%) obtained from CMJ 24 hours after the priming session were significantly greater than those at the baseline ( p ≤ 0.05), but 0% 1RM SJ height and DJ RSI ( p > 0.05) were not greater than those at the baseline. In the HRP condition, the jump performances were not improved ( p > 0.05). The percentage change in 0% 1RM CMJ height in the BEP condition was significantly greater than that seen in the HRP condition ( p = 0.015) but did not differ for 0% 1RM SJ height and DJ RSI ( p > 0.05). These results suggest that the BEP is more effective than HRP in improving CMJ performance after 24 hours. Therefore, practitioners should consider prescribing resistance priming using low-load ballistic exercises rather than high-load traditional exercises when planning to enhance athlete performance on the following day.
西冈和冈田。冲击练习与大阻力练习方案:哪种阻力预热对次日提高神经肌肉表现更有效?J 力量与调节研究 37(10):1939-1946,2023-本研究旨在确定冲击练习预热(BEP)或大阻力预热(HRP)在 24 小时后对提高冲击表现更有效。10 名受过抗阻训练的男性以随机和平衡的顺序相隔 72-144 小时进行 BEP 和 HRP 条件。使用 0%和 40%1RM 深蹲跳(SJ)、0%和 40%1RM 反向跳(CMJ)以及跳深反应力量指数(RSI),在 BEP 和 HRP 课后 24 小时前和 24 小时后评估跳跃表现。统计显著性接受 p≤0.05。在 BEP 条件下,0%1RM CMJ 高度(+3.62%)以及 CMJ 24 小时后获得的理论最大速度(+5.14%)和理论最大功率(+2.55%)均显著高于基线时(p≤0.05),但 0%1RM SJ 高度和 DJ RSI(p>0.05)没有高于基线。在 HRP 条件下,跳跃表现没有提高(p>0.05)。BEP 条件下 0%1RM CMJ 高度的百分比变化明显大于 HRP 条件(p=0.015),但 0%1RM SJ 高度和 DJ RSI 无差异(p>0.05)。这些结果表明,与 HRP 相比,BEP 更有效地提高 24 小时后的 CMJ 表现。因此,从业者在计划次日提高运动员表现时,应考虑使用低负荷冲击练习而不是高负荷传统练习进行抗阻预热。