The effectiveness of resisted movement training on sprinting and jumping performance.
ABSTRACT Resisted movement training is that in which the sports movement is performed with added resistance. To date, the effectiveness on enhancing sprint speed or vertical jump height had not been reviewed. The objectives of this review were to collate information on resisted training studies for sprinting and vertical jumping, ascertain whether resisted movement training was superior to normal unresisted movement training, and identify areas for future research. The review was based on peer-reviewed journal articles identified from electronic literature searches using MEDLINE and SPORTDiscus data bases from 1970 to 2010. Resisted sprint training was found to increase sprint speed but, in most cases, was no more effective than normal sprint training. There was some evidence that resisted sprint training was superior in increasing speed in the initial acceleration phase of sprinting. Resisted jump training in the form of weighted jump squats was shown to increase vertical jump height, but it was no more effective than plyometric depth jump training. Direct comparisons between resisted jump training and unresisted normal jump training were limited, but loaded eccentric countermovement jump squat training with unloaded concentric phase and eccentric landing was shown to generate superior results for elite jumpers. More prospective studies on resisted sprint training are required along with monitoring both kinematic and kinetic adaptations to fully determine any underlying mechanisms for any improvements in sprint speed. Based on the available data, the benefits and superiority of resisted sprint training have not been fully established. As for resisted jump training, although there are some promising findings, these results need to be duplicated by other researchers before resisted jump training can be claimed to be more effective than other forms of jump training.
- SourceAvailable from: Jeremy R Townsend
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "In addition, some treadmills require subjects to overcome a resistance to start the sprint that demands a different running strategy than seen in a trackbased sprint (Ross et al., 2009). Although training on a flat non-motorized treadmill has been shown to enhance power performance and improve sprint time (Ross et al., 2009), these benefits may only be realized during the initial acceleration phase (Hrysomallis et al., 2012). "
ABSTRACT: A curved treadmill offers a practical method of assessing anaerobic power by enabling unrestricted running motion and greater sport specificity. The purpose of this research was to determine reliability of a curved treadmill (cTM) sprint test and to compare performance measures to the traditional Wingate anaerobic power test (WAnT) performed on a cycle ergometer. Thirty-two recreationally active men and women (22.4 ± 2.8 yrs; 1.73 ± 0.08 m; 74. 2 ± 13.2 kg) performed four familiarization trials on cTM, followed by two randomly assigned experimental trials consisting of one 30-second maximum effort on either cTM or WAnT. Each trial was separated by at least 48 hours. Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), interclass correlations (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal differences (MD) were used to determine reliability of familiarization trials on cTM, and Pearson product moment correlations were calculated to compare cTM and WAnT. ANOVA results showed significant differences (p < 0.05) during the four familiarization trials. Post hoc analysis showed significant differences (p < 0. 05) between the first two trials. Familiarization trials 3 and 4 showed a high reliability for each performance variable (distance: ICC2,1 = 0.969, %SEM = 2.645, p = 0.157; mean velocity: ICC2,1 = 0. 969, %SEM = 2.622, p = 0.173; peak velocity: ICC2,1 = 0.966, %SEM = 3.142, p = 0.033; mean power: ICC2,1 = 0.940, %SEM = 4.140, p = 0.093; and peak power: ICC2,1 = 0.887, %SEM = 11.244, p = 0.669). Participants elicited an average peak power of 1050.4 ± 338.5 Watts on cTM and 1031.4 ± 349.8 Watts on WAnT. Pearson product moment coefficients indicated high correlations between peak power, mean power, and peak velocity (r = 0.75, p < 0.001; r = 0.84, p < 0.001; and r = 0.76, p < 0. 001, respectively) derived from cTM and WAnT. In conclusion, results suggest that after two familiarization trials, cTM is a reliable sprint test for recreationally active men and women. In addition, there are strong relationships between cTM and WAnT in assessing anaerobic performance. Key pointsThe Woodway Curve 3.0(TM) is a non-motorized treadmill utilizing a curved platform which allows individuals to simulate an unrestricted sprint test in a laboratory setting, offering a practical and sport specific method of assessing anaerobic power.The curved treadmill provides a reliable sprint test for recreationally active men and women.There are strong relationships between the curved treadmill and cycle ergometer in assessing anaerobic performance.Journal of sports science & medicine 10/2013; 12(1):104-8. · 1.03 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "Resisted sprinting (RS) has been shown to improve sprint performance, particularly acceleration over distances less than 10 m, which would be valuable for many sports (Behrens and Simonson, 2011; Hrysomallis, 2012; Ross et al., 2009). While there are several different modes of RS, one could use a non-motorized treadmill with adjustable levels of resistance. "
ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to determine the load which allows the highest peak power for resisted sprinting on a non-motorized treadmill and to determine if other variables are related to individual differences. Thirty college students were tested for vertical jump, vertical jump peak and mean power, 10 m sprint, 20 m sprint, leg press 1 RM, leg press 1 RM relative to body weight, leg press 1 RM relative to lean body mass, leg press 1 RM power, and leg press power at 80% of 1 RM. Participants performed eight resisted sprints on a non-motorized treadmill, with increasing relative loads expressed as percent of body weight. Sprint peak power was measured for each load. Pearson correlations were used to determine if relationships between the sprint peak power load and the other variables were significant. The sprint peak power load had a mode of 35% with 73% of all participants having a relative sprint peak power load between 25-35%. Significant correlations occurred between sprint peak power load and body weight, lean body mass, vertical jump peak and mean power, leg press 1 RM, leg press 1 RM relative to lean body mass, leg press 1 RM power, and leg press power at 80% of 1 RM (r = 0.44, 0.43, 0.39, 0.37, 0.47, 0.39, 0.46, and 0.47, respectively). Larger, stronger, more powerful athletes produced peak power at a higher relative load during resisted sprinting on a non-motorized treadmill.Journal of Human Kinetics 10/2013; 38:161-167. DOI:10.2478/hukin-2013-0056 · 1.03 Impact Factor
Article: Vertical Jump and Power[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Power and jumping ability correlate with sport performance. Improving maximal force and/or velocity increases power production, and therefore theoretically enhances game play. Coaches and researchers alike acknowledge that both jumping specific (e.g., plyometrics) and nonjumping activities (e.g., resistance training) function as valuable methods of increasing power. However, their efficacy and mechanisms of adaptation are often argued. this article presents a brief overview of vertical jumping, power, training modalities and provides a sample 12-week training cycle.Strength and conditioning journal 12/2012; 34(6):34-43. DOI:10.1519/SSC.0b013e3182752b25 · 0.60 Impact Factor