Effects of Overspeed or Overload Plyometric Training on Jump Height and Lifting Velocity.
muscle thickness
testing
training
velocity
Journal
Sports medicine international open
ISSN: 2367-1890
Titre abrégé: Sports Med Int Open
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101721695
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2020
Aug 2020
Historique:
received:
03
10
2019
revised:
07
01
2020
accepted:
09
02
2020
entrez:
8
4
2020
pubmed:
8
4
2020
medline:
8
4
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The aim of this study was to examine the effects of overspeed or overload plyometric training on jump height and lifting velocity in resistance trained females without plyometric training experience. Fifty-six participants (age: 21.2±1.7 years; body mass: 65.1±8.2 kg; height: 168.0±5.9 cm) were randomly allocated to either an overspeed (n=18), overload (n=18), or passive control (n=16) group. The two training groups completed 18.7±1.7 sessions consisting of three different plyometric exercises with overspeed or overload over eight weeks. Apart from the external loading, the two training modalities were identical. Following the training period, the changes in the recorded variables were not significantly different from those in the control group, nor did the training groups differ from each other. The training groups improved peak and average lifting velocity in the 40 and 60% of body mass loading conditions (9.50-33.37%, p=<0.001-0.038), whereas only the average lifting velocity improved in the 80% of body mass loading condition (OS: 14.47%, p<0.001 and OL: 23.13%, p<0.001). No significant changes occurred in the control group (9.18-13.55%, P=0.062-0.980). Overspeed and overload plyometric training may be viable methods for improving lifting velocity, but not squat jump height, in a population without plyometric training experience.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32258385
doi: 10.1055/a-1116-0749
pii: smio10-2019-0136
pmc: PMC7113009
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
E32-E38Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of Interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Références
Eur J Appl Physiol. 2013 Oct;113(10):2511-21
pubmed: 23821239
Sports Med. 2010 Oct 1;40(10):859-95
pubmed: 20836583
Eur J Appl Physiol. 2013 Aug;113(8):2133-42
pubmed: 23604798
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2019 Oct 15;:1-7
pubmed: 31094246
Clin Anat. 2007 Mar;20(2):144-9
pubmed: 16795030
Front Physiol. 2017 Sep 26;8:742
pubmed: 29018362
Front Physiol. 2017 Jan 09;7:677
pubmed: 28119624
Br J Sports Med. 2007 Jun;41(6):349-55; discussion 355
pubmed: 17347316
Int J Sports Med. 2016 Dec;37(13):1060-1065
pubmed: 27557406
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007 Oct;39(10):1757-64
pubmed: 17909403
Int J Sports Med. 2011 May;32(5):365-72
pubmed: 21380966
J Strength Cond Res. 2005 Feb;19(1):169-76
pubmed: 15705030
Int J Sports Med. 2019 Dec;40(13):813-817
pubmed: 31614381
J Sci Med Sport. 2011 Jan;14(1):85-9
pubmed: 20829109
Physiol Rep. 2015 Aug;3(8):
pubmed: 26272733
Can J Appl Sport Sci. 1981 Jun;6(2):87-92
pubmed: 7016357
J Appl Physiol (1985). 1993 Jan;74(1):359-68
pubmed: 8444715
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2018 Apr;50(4):729-738
pubmed: 29206782
J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Aug;25(8):2219-27
pubmed: 21654341