EFFECTS OF A SIX-WEEK STRENGTH TRAINING AND UPPER BODY PLYOMETRICS IN MALE COLLEGE BASKETBALL PHYSICAL EDUCATION STUDENTS

Abstract

This study investigated the effects of a six-week resistance training with upper body plyometrics in the performance of male college
students in a basketball physical education (PE) class. Sixteen males in a novice class in a college basketball PE were randomly assigned
into two groups. The experimental group (EXP; age: 17.4 ± 0.74 years; height: 1.66 ± .04 m; weight: 61.3 ± 7.6 kg) performed a
combined strength and plyometric training twice a week for six weeks. Also, EXP underwent a once a week basketball training (2 hours)
separated from strength with plyometric sessions. The control group (CON; age: 17.8 ± 1.28 years; height: 1.65 ± .03 m; weight: 60.6 ±
8.2 kg) only participated in two hours a week of basketball skills training. Pre-test and post-test upper body strength, grip strength,
vertical jump, and American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance (AAHPERD) battery of tests for basketball were
gathered. Results showed a significant main interaction of intervention and test time on passing skill at F(1, 7) = 0.50, p < 0.05, partial
η2 = 0.07. In conclusion, a six-week strength and upper body plyometrics posted a significantly lower passing score than the control.

Full text

EFFECTS OF A SIX-WEEK STRENGTH TRAINING AND UPPER BODY PLYOMETRICS
IN MALE COLLEGE BASKETBALL PHYSICAL EDUCATION STUDENTS
Jennifer G. Inovero1 & Jeffrey C. Pagaduan2
1University of the Philippines - Baguio, Human Kinetics Department, Philippines
2University of the Philippines - Diliman, College of Human Kinetics, Philippines
Abstract
Original scientific paper
This study investigated the effects of a six-week resistance training with upper body plyometrics in the performance of male college
students in a basketball physical education (PE) class. Sixteen males in a novice class in a college basketball PE were randomly assigned
into two groups. The experimental group (EXP; age: 17.4 ± 0.74 years; height: 1.66 ± .04 m; weight: 61.3 ± 7.6 kg) performed a
combined strength and plyometric training twice a week for six weeks. Also, EXP underwent a once a week basketball training (2 hours)
separated from strength with plyometric sessions. The control group (CON; age: 17.8 ± 1.28 years; height: 1.65 ± .03 m; weight: 60.6 ±
8.2 kg) only participated in two hours a week of basketball skills training. Pre-test and post-test upper body strength, grip strength,
vertical jump, and American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance (AAHPERD) battery of tests for basketball were
gathered. Results showed a significant main interaction of intervention and test time on passing skill at F(1, 7) = 0.50, p < 0.05, partial
η
2 = 0.07. In conclusion, a six-week strength and upper body plyometrics posted a significantly lower passing score than the control.
Key words: resistance training, plyometric training, sport-specific training, basketball, physical education
INTRODUCTION
Basketball is a popular physical activity
intervention in college physical education. Such
activity has been found by researchers to improve
physical fitness parameters as well as
psychological health (Sözen, Saç & Kalkan, 2013;
Vamvakoudis et al., 2007). A traditional basketball
class involves technical and tactical instructions
directed towards intraclass or interclass
competition.
In the recent decade, the utilization of strength
training interventions integrated with basketball
training has been receiving notable attention
among coaches. One of these interventions is the
combination of strength and plyometric exercises
in a single session. Andrejić (2012) found out that
such strategy demonstrated enhancement in
motor performance among youth basketball
players. Similarly, Santos and Janeiro (2008)
showed significant gains in the squat jump,
countermovement jump, Abalakov Test, and
medicine ball throw using a similar program.
Faigenbaum et al. (2007) discovered significant
improvements in strength training with
plyometrics in long jump, medicine ball toss, and
pro-agility shuttle than strength training alone.
Lastly, Fatouros et al. (2000) determined that
combination of strength training with plyometrics
participants produced greater vertical jump and
leg strength when compared with strength and
plyometric training groups.
Most of the studies in strength training with
plyometrics were conducted in athletes. There
seems to be a paucity in literature when using the
previous intervention in basketball PE.
Incorporating strength training activities may
improve more variables than basketball training
alone. Thus, the purpose of this study was to
examine the effects of strength training with
plyometrics together with basketball training in
the physical and basketball specific parameter of
male college PE students.
METHODS
Participants
Sixteen (n
= 16) male physical education students
from the University of the Philippines Baguio
volunteered to participate in this study. The
subjects completed the Physical Activity Readiness
Questionnaire (PAR-Q) and were cleared for
physical activity participation. They were randomly
assigned to a basketball training only group (CON;
n = 8; age: 17.4 ± 0.74 years; height: 166 ± 4.0
cm) or experimental group consisting of resistance
training with plyometrics and basketball training
(EXP; n = 8; age: 17.8 ± 1.28 years; height: 165 ±
3.0 cm). Basketball training was administered
once a week for 2 hours (Wednesday). All the
participants signed a written informed consent
with testing procedures in agreement with the
Declaration of Helsinki for Human Testing.
Inovero & Pagaduan: STRENGTH AND PLYOMETRIC TRAINING
Sport SPA Vol. 12, Issue 1: 11-16
www.sportspa.com.ba
11

Procedures
In this study, EXP underwent a twice a week
(Monday and Friday) strength training with
plyometrics and basketball training (Wednesday)
for 6 weeks. On the other hand, CON only
received basketball training. Both groups received
a standardized basketball training program. In
EXP, the strength training program is conducted
in a circuit manner which consisted of exercises
completed for 2-3 sets of 6-15 repetitions. In
circuit training, exercises are executed one after
the other with minimum rest interval. Rest in
between circuits/sets is 1-3 minutes. A weekly
progression of increasing intensity with decreasing
volume was facilitated. Table 1 presents the six-
week strength training program.
Table 1. Six-Week Strength Training Program
Period Exercise Sets/Reps
Week 1 &Week 2 Lunge, Shoulder Shrug, Peck Deck Flye,
Military Press, Biceps Curl, Triceps Extension,
Wrist Curl, Wrist Extension, Internal Rotation,
External Rotation
Crunches
2x 15
3x 12-15
3 x 25–30 crunches
Week 3 &Week 4 Leg Extension/
Leg Curl, Lat Pulldown, Bench
Flye, Back Press, Hammer Curl, Bench Dip, Wrist
Curl, Wrist Extension, Internal Rotation, External
Rotation, Lying Leg Raise
3 x 8-10
3 x 30–50 crunches
Week 5 &Week6
Squat, Bent Over Row, Bench Press, Upright
Row, Reverse Curl, Triceps Pushdown, Wrist Curl,
Wrist Extension, Internal Rotation, External
Rotation, Lying Knee Raise
3 x 6-8
3 x 40–60 crunches
After strength training, performance of upper body plyometrics followed. Upper body circuit-type plyometrics
were performed using a medicine ball (1-2 kg). Rest interval was 1-3 minutes in between circuits/sets. Table 2
displays the medicine ball exercises in EXP.
Table 2. Medicine Ball Exercises
Period Type of Pass Sets/Reps
Weight of
Medicine Ball
Distance of
Subjects
Week 1 & 2
Overhead Throw
Side Throw
Forward Chest Pass
3x15 1kg. 3 meters
Week 3 & 4
Overhead Throw
Side Throw
Forward Chest Pass
3x15 2kg. 3 meters
Week 5 & 6
Overhead Throw
Side Throw
Forward Chest Pass
3x15 2kg. 4 meters
Inovero & Pagaduan: STRENGTH AND PLYOMETRIC TRAINING
Sport SPA Vol. 12, Issue 1: 11-16
www.sportspa.com.ba
12

Measures
Pre and post measures were gathered 3 days prior
and after the interventions in EXP and CON. These
include upper body strength, right and left hand
grip strength, and vertical jump measured inside
the strength training facility of the university. On
the other hand, fundamental skill tests in
basketball were administered at the open
basketball grounds of the university.
1 Repetition Maximum (1RM) Bench Press Test.
Prior to determining the 1 RM bench press of each
subject, a 5-minute warm-up and static stretching
were administered In this test, the participants lay
on a bench, with back flat on the surface and the
feet flat on the floor. Grip distance is shoulder
width apart with arms fully extended. From this
starting position, the participants attempt to lower
the bar to the chest. After, the bar is pushed back
until arms return to the starting position. Subjects
lifted a 5 kg bar for 10 repetitions as
familiarization. Beginning load is 40-60 percent of
perceived maximum. Load progression is between
1-3 kg. A 3-5 minute rest period was allowed
between attempts. This procedure is repeated
until the heaviest load in a single repetition was
attained. 1 RM load was recorded for analysis.
Hand Grip Strength. A handheld dynamometer
(Jamar Brand Model
5030J1 Lafayette, IN, USA)
was used to measure grip strength. With the
participants standing upright and dynamometer
held on the extended right hand in line with the
forearm, the handle of the dynamometer is then
pressed as hard as possible without swinging the
arms. Two more trials were performed using the
right hand. Right hand grip strength measurement
was succeeded with left hand grip strength
measurement. Intra and inter trial rest interval was
1 minute. The best trial for each limb was kept for
analysis.
Vertical Jump. The Sargent Jump Test was used to
determine leg power (Sargent, 1921). With both
feet flat on the ground, a participant extends his
dominant arm closest to the wall without lifting
his feet. The highest fingertip serves as his
reference point. The participant then performs a
vertical jump with one hand on the hip and the
other hand raised above the head. The participant
marks his jump with a chalk after reaching the
peak of the jump trial. The difference between the
reach height and the jump height represents the
vertical jump value of the participant. The best of
three trials was recorded as the score of the
subjects.
In the fundamental skills in Basketball, AAHPERD
Test Battery was conducted (AAHPERD, 1984). It
involved speed shooting, control dribble,
defensive movement and passing.
Speed Spot Shooting. This test aims to determine
the rapid shooting skill from different positions
and to some extent, agility and ball handling.
Upon the tester's signal, a participant starts to
shoot, retrieves the ball, and dribbles it to another
spot behind any of the five spots set at 457.2 cm.
A participant should make at least one shot from
each of the five markers. Two consecutive shots in
the same spot is not allowed. Only a maximum of
four lay-ups can be attempted. 2 points was
scored for a successful shot. An unsuccessful shot
hitting the rim or bouncing at the backboard is
scored 1 point. No point was awarded for ball
handling infractions (e.g. double dribble), 2
consecutive lay-ups and more than 4 lay-ups. 3
trials were administered to a participant with the
first trial as practice trial. Each trial lasts for 60
seconds. A trial is repeated when a participant
fails to take a shot in all 5 spots. The sum of the
scores for the 2nd and 3rd trial were kept for
analysis.
Control Dribble. The Control Dribble test is a test
for dribbling efficiency. In this test, a participant
was asked to complete a single hand dribble from
a specified course as fast as possible right after
the given signal. Three (3) trials per limb were
administered in this test with the first trial used as
practice trial. If a participant commits a dribbling
infraction (e.g. travelling), the test is stopped and
the participant performs another trial. The fastest
trial was recorded for analysis.
Defensive Movement. This test measures basic
defensive movement skill in a restricted area. The
test starts with the participant facing away from
the basket. Then a defensive slide is performed to
a specified course upon hearing the whistle. A
defensive slide should be executed without
crossing the feet. Also, a participant should touch
the floor using the hand to which the direction of
the slide is made. A drop step is required for
diagonal defensive movement. Three (3) trials
were facilitated in this test with the first trial as a
familiarization trial. The best time for defensive
movement was used for further analysis.
Passing. This test is a combination of speed and
accuracy in chest passing. Upon the signal “ready,
go”, the participant passes the ball to specified
Inovero & Pagaduan: STRENGTH AND PLYOMETRIC TRAINING
Sport SPA Vol. 12, Issue 1: 11-16
www.sportspa.com.ba
13

spots using chest pass only from a 243.8 cm
distance. A participant is allowed to move while
passing the ball. Passing sequence is from A to F
and vice versa. Each pass hitting the target
corresponds to 2 points. A pass that hit the
intervening spaces is equivalent to 1 point. A pass
is not scored when executed over the restraining
line (243.8 cm). No point is awarded for 2
consecutive passes made on the same spot. Three
30-second trials were administered with the sum
of the scores for the last two trials utilized for
analysis.
Statistical Analyses
Data is expressed as mean and standard deviation.
A two-way repeated measures ANOVA was
utilized to establish significant main effects of
time (pre- vs. post) and intervention (control vs.
experimental) on performance variables. It was
also used to determine significant interaction
effects of time and intervention on performance
variables. Data was analyzed using a commercial
statistical package (SPSS version 19, Chicago,
USA). Effect size was established using eta
squared (η2). Kolmogorov-Smirnov was used to
test the normality of data. The level of
significance was set at 0.05 for all analyses.
RESULTS
Kolmogorov-Smirnov confirmed normal
distribution of data. Pretest and post test scores
of performance parameters of the control group
and experimental group are presented in the
following table:
Table 3. Pre and Post Variables of Control and Experimental Groups (mean, standard deviation)
Parameter Control Experimental
Pre Post Pre Post
1 RM Bench Press (kg) 30.3, 6.5 34.3, 8.2 29.2, 6.1 33.5, 5.0
Handgrip Strength - Right (kg) 41.4, 6.0 42.0, 6.6 38.8, 6.6 41.2, 5.0
Handgrip Strength - Left (kg) 37.5, 9.3 39.1, 8.0 39.4, 5.7 41.4, 3.3
Vertical Jump (cm) 55.8, 5.1 61.1, 6.3 50.5, 6.7 55.7, 3.8
Speed Spot Shooting (pts) 31.4, 10.3 36.0, 8.0 32.5, 6.3 36.4, 4.9
Control Dribble – Right (sec) 20.3, 3.2 18.2, 1.9 20.1, 1.4 18.7, 1.1
Control Dribble – Left (sec) 19.4, 2.2 18.7, 2.3 20.5, 2.0 19.4, 1.8
Defensive Movement (sec) 24.4, 4.4 21.8, 1.5 24.5, 2.1 22.4, 1.7
Passing (pts) 46.4, 2.3 89.1, 14.9 46.6, 2.2 85.0, 14.0
1 RM Bench Press. In terms of upper body
strength, there was a significant main effect of
test time on the 1 RM bench press, F (1, 7) = 19.4,
partial η2 = 0.74. There was no significant main
effect of intervention in 1 RM Bench Press. No
significant interaction between intervention and
test time was observed.
Grip Strength. There were no significant main
effect and interaction seen from the left hand and
right hand grip strength of the subjects.
Vertical Jump. As a measure of lower body power,
results showed that there was a significant main
effect of test time on the vertical jump height, F
(1, 7) = 17.4, p < 0.01, partial η2 = 0.71. On the
other hand, no significant main effect of
intervention was identified. There was no
significant interaction between intervention and
test time.
Speed Spot Shooting. In speed spot shooting, a
significant main effect of test time F (1, 7) = 11.7
p < 0.05, partial η2 = 0.63 was identified. There
was no significant main effect of intervention as
well as interaction between intervention and test
time.
Control Dribble. There was a main effect of test
time on the right-hand control dribble F (1, 7) =
13.9, p < 0.01, partial η2 = 0.67. No significant
main effect of intervention and interaction
between intervention and test time on right-hand
control dribble were posted. For the left-hand
dribble, no significant main effect and interaction
were noted.
Inovero & Pagaduan: STRENGTH AND PLYOMETRIC TRAINING
Sport SPA Vol. 12, Issue 1: 11-16
www.sportspa.com.ba
14

Defensive Movement. The main effect of test
time on defensive movement F (1, 7) = 10.3, p <
0.05, partial η2 = 0.60 was found to be
significant. On the other hand, no significant main
effect of intervention was demonstrated. No
significant interaction between intervention and
time was distinguished.
Passing. A significant effect of test time on the
passing scores was discovered, F (1, 7) = 98.7, p <
0.01, partial η2 = 0.93. No significant main effect
of intervention was noticed. However, there was
a small but significant main interaction of
intervention and test time on the passing skill of
the subjects F(1, 7) = 0.50, p < 0.05, partial η2 =
0.07.
DISCUSSION
The purpose of the study was to determine the
effects of a six-week strength training and upper
body plyometrics in male college basketball
physical education students. Findings showed
significant higher passing scores in CON than EXP.
This may be explained by the fatigue experienced
by the EXP group from frequency of training. In
this study, EXP participated in 3 times a week
physical activity sessions while CON only attended
once a week training session. With this, it may be
possible that the EXP group exhibited a negative
net potentiation effect in post activation
potentiation (PAP) (Robbins, 2005). PAP
acknowledges the co-existence of fitness and
fatigue with mechanical stimulus. When fitness is
greater than fatigue, PAP is achieved and vice
versa. Although EXP may have experienced fitness
gains, the recovery time allowed to exhibit
transference in passing accuracy may not be
enough. This result is partially supported by
Ahmed (2013) which posted that fatigue led to
negative effects in strength and passing accuracy.
Also, Lyons, Al-Nakeeb and Nevill (2006)
suggested that novice basketball players tend to
experience more detrimental effects in passing
after undergoing a fatiguing condition. Another
possible mechanism which resulted to CON
delivering better scores is its specificity training.
CON focused motor-unit activation patterns
specific to basketball, thus creating a faster neural
adaptation that requires accuracy (Bompa &
Carrera, 2005).
The results of the study contradicted the findings
by previous researchers which demonstrated
improvements in performance from strength
training with plyometrics while undergoing
basketball training (Andrejić, 2012; Santos &
Janeira, 2008; Faigenbaum et al., 2007; Fatouros
et al., 2000). These discrepancies may be
attributed mainly to the nature of participants
involved in the study. Previous studies included
athletes while this study were participated by
novice participants. Although there was a
similarity in the training program of this study
with previous studies, the mechanical stimuli may
be highly-fatiguing for the population in the
study. This is supported by Wilson et al. (2013)
which presented the role of training experience in
augmenting the benefits of a conditioning activity
via PAP.
One interesting finding in this study showed that
sport specific training alone improved
performance parameters and basketball
fundamental skills of the subjects in CON. This
implies that practicing specific skills in basketball
does not only produce skill efficiency but also
increase fitness scores as well (Bompa & Carrera,
2005). Such intervention may be advantageous to
novice basketball players to achieve faster skill
learning and retention.
Although the study identified valuable information
in incorporating strength inducing stimuli in
basketball PE, certain limitations should be noted.
First, the study is a short-term study which may
mask the gains of the intervention in EXP. Also,
generalization should be avoided as the findings
of the study are applicable only to the
participants. Inclusion of other performance
variables that may be helpful in interpreting other
aspects of fitness and performance should also be
noted. Lastly, additional session in EXP reduced its
applicability in college PE. Future studies
considering the limitations of the current study
should be warranted.
In conclusion, a six-week strength training and
upper body plyometrics produced no significant
difference in upper body strength, grip strength,
vertical jump, speed shooting and control dribble
when compared to a control group. However, the
passing score in the experimental group was
significantly lower than the control group.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank the physical
education students who volunteered in the study.
The study was funded by the University of the
Philippines - Baguio through the faculty research
grant.
Inovero & Pagaduan: STRENGTH AND PLYOMETRIC TRAINING
Sport SPA Vol. 12, Issue 1: 11-16
www.sportspa.com.ba
15

REFERENCES
1. Ahmed, T. (2013). The effect of upper extremity fatigue on grip strength and passing accuracy in junior
basketball players.
Journal of Human Kinetics, 37
, 71-79.
2. American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance (AAPHERD). (1984).
AAHPERD
skills test manual. Basketball for girls and boys.
Reston, VA: AAHPERD.
3. Andrejić, O. (2012). The effects of a plyometric and strength training program on the fitness
performance in young basketball players.
Facta Universitatis Series: Physical Education and Sport, 10
(3),
221 – 229.
4. Bompa, T., & Carrera, M. (2005).
Periodization for strength training and sports
(2nd edition). Champaign,
IL: Human Kinetics.
5. Faigenbaum, A.D., McFarland, J.E., Keiper, F.B., Tevlin, W., Ratamess, N.A., Kang, J. et al. (2007). Effects
of a short-term plyometric and resistance training program on fitness performance in boys age 12 to 15
years.
Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, 6
, 519-525.
6. Fatouros, I.G., Jamurtas, A.Z., Leontsini, D., Taxildaris, K., Aggelousis, N., Kostopoulos, N., et al.
(2000). Evaluation of plyometric exercise training, weight training, and their combination on vertical jump
performance and leg strength.
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 14
, 470-476.
7. Lyons, M., Al-Nakeeb, Y., Nevill, A. (2006). The impact of moderate and high intensity total body fatigue
on passing accuracy in expert and novice basketball players
. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine
, 5,
215-227.
8. Robbins, D.W. (2005). Postactivation potentiation and its practical applicability: a brief review.
Journal of
Strength and Conditioning Research, 19
(2), 453-458.
9. Santos, E.J., & Janeira, M.A. (2008). Effects of complex training on explosive strength in male basketball
players. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 22(3), 903-909.
10. Sargent, D.A. (1921). The physical test of a man.
American Physical Education Review, 26
, 188-194.
11. Sözen., H., Saç, A., & Kalkan, M. (2013).The effects of basketball training on children's self esteem.
International Journal of Research in Social Sciences, 1
(3), 35-37.
12. Wilson, J.M., Duncan, N.M., Marin, P.J., Brown, L.E., Loenneke, J.P., Wilson, S.M. et al. (2013). Meta-
analysis of postactivation potentiation and power: effects of conditioning activity, volume, gender, rest
periods, and training status.
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 27
(3), 854-859.
13. Vamvakoudis, E, Vrabas, I.S., Galazoulas, C., Stefanidis, P., Metaxas, T.I., & Mandroukas, K. (2007).
Effects of basketball training on maximal oxygen uptake, muscle strength, and joint mobility in young
basketball players
. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 21
, 930–936.
Jennifer G. Inovero
Corresponding author:
Human Kinetics Department,
University of the Philippines – Baguio
E-mail: jginovero@gmail.com
Received: 05. November 2014
Accepted: 10. March 2015
Inovero & Pagaduan: STRENGTH AND PLYOMETRIC TRAINING
Sport SPA Vol. 12, Issue 1: 11-16
www.sportspa.com.ba
16