4.4 Article

Caffeine improves muscular performance in elite Brazilian Jiu-jitsu athletes

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SPORT SCIENCE
Volume 16, Issue 8, Pages 1079-1086

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/17461391.2016.1143036

Keywords

Testing; strength; fatigue

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Scientific information about the effects of caffeine intake on combat sport performance is scarce and controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of caffeine to improve Brazilian Jiu-jitsu (BJJ)-specific muscular performance. Fourteen male and elite BJJ athletes (29.2 +/- 3.3years; 71.3 +/- 9.1kg) participated in a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled and crossover experiment. In two different sessions, BJJ athletes ingested 3mgkg(-1) of caffeine or a placebo. After 60min, they performed a handgrip maximal force test, a countermovement jump, a maximal static lift test and bench-press tests consisting of one-repetition maximum, power-load, and repetitions to failure. In comparison to the placebo, the ingestion of the caffeine increased: hand grip force in both hands (50.9 +/- 2.9 vs. 53.3 +/- 3.1kg; respectively p<.05), countermovement jump height (40.6 +/- 2.6 vs. 41.7 +/- 3.1cm; p=.02), and time recorded in the maximal static lift test (54.4 +/- 13.4 vs. 59.2 +/- 11.9s; p<.01).The caffeine also increased the one-repetition maximum (90.5 +/- 7.7 vs. 93.3 +/- 7.5kg; p=.02), maximal power obtained during the power-load test (750.5 +/- 154.7 vs. 826.9 +/- 163.7W; p<.01) and mean power during the bench-press exercise test to failure (280.2 +/- 52.5 vs. 312.2 +/- 78.3W; p=.04). In conclusion, the pre-exercise ingestion of 3mgkg(-1) of caffeine increased dynamic and isometric muscular force, power, and endurance strength in elite BJJ athletes. Thus, caffeine might be an effective ergogenic aid to improve physical performance in BJJ.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available