...
首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Exercise Science >Relationships Between Anthropometry and Maximal Strength in Male Classic Powerlifters
【24h】

Relationships Between Anthropometry and Maximal Strength in Male Classic Powerlifters

机译:男性经典电力豪华师的人体测量术与最大强度的关系

获取原文

摘要

International Journal of Exercise Science 13(4): 1512-1531, 2020. Several studies have determined the influence of physical characteristics on strength. The present quantified the relationships between anthropometry and maximal strength. Male classic powerlifters (n=59) were measured before a championship. Two-tailed Pearson correlation analysis was used. Powerlifters that presented higher relative maximal strength (RMS) in the squat and bench generally had higher body weight (BW), body mass index (BMI), torso circumference (C), waist C/height, torso C/height (r=0.26 to 0.49, p0.05), and smaller lower leg length (L)/height and forearm L/torso C (r=-0.31 to -0.45, p0.05) ratios. Powerlifters with a higher % of their deadlift on their total generally presented a smaller BW, BMI, body fat percentage (BF%), waist and torso C, trunk L, waist C/height, torso C/height, trunk L/height, waist C/hip C, thigh L/ lower leg L, trunk L/thigh L ratios (r=-0.26 to -0.49, p0.05) and higher lower leg L, lower leg L/height, reach/height, and forearm L/torso C ratios (r=0.32 to 0.51, p0.05). Stepwise regressions revealed that a bigger torso positively predicted absolute maximal strength (AMS) in the squat (β=0.41, p=0.04), the bench (β=0.77, p0.01), the deadlift (β=0.88, p0.01) and the total (β=0.89, p0.01), that a higher torso C/height ratio positively predicted RMS in the squat(β=0.48, p0.01), the bench (β=-0.87, p0.01) and the total (β=0.66, p0.01), and that reach/height positively predicted RMS in the deadlift (β=0.37, p0.01) and it’s % on the total (β=0.31, p0.01), but negatively predicted RMS in the bench (β=-0.25, p=0.02) and its % on the total (β=-0.24, p=0.04) As all of the stronger correlations came from AMS, powerlifters should focus on increasing AMS (weight lifted) instead of RMS (Wilks pts).
机译:国际运动科学杂志13(4):1512-1531,2020。一些研究确定了物理特征对实力的影响。目前量化了人体测量术和最大强度之间的关系。在冠军之前测量了男性经典的Powerlifters(n = 59)。使用了双尾Pearson相关性分析。在蹲下和工作台中呈现更高的相对最大强度(RMS)的Powerlife,通常具有更高的体重(BW),体重指数(BMI),躯干圆周(C),腰部C /高度,躯干C /高度(r = 0.26至0.49,P <0.05),较小的小腿长度(L)/高度和前臂L /躯干C(R = -0.31至-0.45,P <0.05)比率。 Powerlife患者占止血的百分比普遍呈现出较小的BW,BMI,体脂百分比(BF%),腰部和躯干C,行李箱L,腰部C /高度,躯干C /高度,躯干L /高度,腰部C / HIP C,大腿L /下腿L,躯干L /大腿L比率(r = -0.26至-0.49,p <0.05)和较高的小腿L,下腿部L /高度,达到/高度和前臂l /躯干c比率(r = 0.32至0.51,p <0.05)。逐步回归显示,较大的躯干阳性预测绝对预测的蹲下(β= 0.41,P = 0.04),长达(β= 0.77,P <0.01),硬阶(β= 0.88,P <0.01 )和总(β= 0.89,p <0.01),即躯干C /高度比呈较高的躯干预测RMS(β= 0.48,P <0.01),工作台(β= -0.87,P <0.01)并且总共(β= 0.66,P <0.01),并且达到/高度阳性预测的RMS(β= 0.37,P <0.01),总计(β= 0.31,P <0.01),但由于所有更强的相关性来自AMS,所以,基准(β= -0.25,P = 0.02)和其%(β= -0.25,p = 0.02)的均值,其%均来自AMS,应关注增加AMS(重量)提升)而不是RMS(Wilks PTS)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号