...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of strength and conditioning research >EVALUATION OF THE MOST RELIABLE PROCEDURE OF DETERMINING JUMP HEIGHT DURING THE LOADED COUNTERMOVEMENT JUMP EXERCISE: TAKE-OFF VELOCITY VS. FLIGHT TIME
【24h】

EVALUATION OF THE MOST RELIABLE PROCEDURE OF DETERMINING JUMP HEIGHT DURING THE LOADED COUNTERMOVEMENT JUMP EXERCISE: TAKE-OFF VELOCITY VS. FLIGHT TIME

机译:评估加载对策跳转运动期间确定跳跃高度的最可靠程序:起飞速度与 飞行时间

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Perez-Castilla, A and Garcia-Ramos, A. Evaluation of the most reliable procedure of determining jump height during the loaded countermovement jump exercise: Take-off velocity vs. flight time. J Strength Cond Res 32(7): 2025-2030, 2018-This study aimed to compare the reliability of jump height between the 2 standard procedures of analyzing force-time data (take-off velocity [TOV] and flight time [FT]) during the loaded countermovement (CMJ) exercise performed with a free-weight barbell and in a Smith machine. The jump height of 17 men (age: 22.2 +/- 2.2 years, body mass: 75.2 +/- 7.1 kg, and height: 177.0 +/- 6.0 cm) was tested in 4 sessions (twice for each CMJ type) against external loads of 17, 30, 45, 60, and 75 kg. Jump height reliability was comparable between the TOV (coefficient of variation [CV]: 6.42 +/- 2.41%) and FT (CV: 6.53 +/- 2.1 7%) during the free-weight CMJ, but it was higher for the FT when the CMJ was performed in a Smith machine (CV: 11.34 +/- 3.73% for TOV and 5.95 +/- 1.12% for FT). Bland-Altman plots revealed trivial differences (= 0.27 cm) and no heteroscedasticity of the errors (R-2 = 0.09) for the jump height obtained by the TOV and FT procedures, whereas the random error between both procedures was higher for the CMJ performed in the Smith machine (2.02 cm) compared with the free-weight barbell (1.26 cm). Based on these results, we recommend the FT procedure to determine jump height during the loaded CMJ performed in a Smith machine, whereas the TOV and FT procedures provide similar reliability during the free-weight CMJ.
机译:Perez-Castilla,A和Garcia-Ramos,A。评估加载的对策期间确定跳跃高度的最可靠程序:起飞速度与飞行时间。 J Fircience Cond Res 32(7):2018-1025-2030,2018-本研究旨在比较2标准程序之间分析力 - 时间数据的标准程序之间的可靠性(起飞速度[TOV]和飞行时间[FT] )在装载的对策(CMJ)锻炼期间,使用自由重量杠铃和史密斯机器进行。 17名男子的跳跃高度(年龄:22.2 +/- 2.2岁,体重:75.2 +/- 7.1千克和高度:177.0 +/- 6.0 cm)在4个课程中进行测试(每次CMJ类型的两次)对外载荷为17,30,45,60和75千克。跳跃高度可靠性在自由重量CMJ期间,TOV(变异系数[CV]:6.42 +/- 2.41%)和FT(CV:6.53 +/- 2.1 7%),但FT更高当CMJ在史密斯机器中进行时(CV:11.34 +/- 3.73%,对于FT的5.95 +/- 1.12%)。 Bland-Altman图揭示了通过TOV和FT程序获得的跳跃高度的差异差异(& = 0.27cm),并且没有误差的异源性(R-2 <= 0.09),而这两个程序之间的随机误差较高对于与自由重量杠铃(1.26cm)相比,在史密斯机器(2.02cm)中进行的CMJ。基于这些结果,我们建议FT程序在史密斯机器中执行的加载CMJ期间确定跳跃高度,而TOV和FT程序在自由重量CMJ期间提供类似的可靠性。

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