Wilson G, Murphy A
Southern Cross University, Lismore, Australia.
Aust J Sci Med Sport. 1995 Mar;27(1):20-4.
This research examined the efficacy of several tests of muscular strength and power in their capacity to be related to performance, their ability to effectively discriminate between individuals of different performance levels and their sensitivity in detecting training induced changes to performance. Thirty healthy active subjects performed the following maximal tests of muscular function: (1) Vertical jump; (2) Isokinetic knee extension at 1.05, 3.14 and 5.24 rads s-1; and (3) Isometric rate of force development. Performance was assessed by the peak power output achieved on a cycle test. In addition, subjects participated in a 10 week resistance training program. The isokinetic and vertical jump tests were significantly related to performance (r = 0.5-0.73) and could be used to discriminate between subjects of differing performance levels. However, the isometric rate of force development test was an ineffective assessment modality. None of the tests were able to effectively monitor training induced changes in performance, as evidenced by non-significant correlations between the pre- to post-percentage changes in cycling performance and the test variables. Consequently, alterations to training programs for athletes should be based on changes in actual performance, as opposed to muscular function tests.
本研究考察了几种肌肉力量和功率测试在与运动表现相关的能力、有效区分不同运动表现水平个体的能力以及检测训练引起的运动表现变化的敏感性方面的功效。30名健康的活跃受试者进行了以下肌肉功能的最大测试：（1）垂直纵跳；（2）在1.05、3.14和5.24弧度/秒下的等速膝关节伸展；以及（3）等长力发展速率。通过在自行车测试中达到的峰值功率输出评估运动表现。此外，受试者参加了为期10周的阻力训练计划。等速测试和垂直纵跳测试与运动表现显著相关（r = 0.5 - 0.73），可用于区分不同运动表现水平的受试者。然而，等长力发展速率测试是一种无效的评估方式。没有一项测试能够有效监测训练引起的运动表现变化，这一点从自行车运动表现的前后百分比变化与测试变量之间的非显著相关性得到证明。因此，运动员训练计划的调整应基于实际运动表现的变化，而不是肌肉功能测试。
