4.6 Article

Velocity specificity, combination training and sport specific tasks

Journal

JOURNAL OF SCIENCE AND MEDICINE IN SPORT
Volume 4, Issue 2, Pages 168-178

Publisher

SPORTS MEDICINE AUSTRALIA
DOI: 10.1016/S1440-2440(01)80027-X

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Whether velocity-specific resistance training is important for improving functional sporting performance was investigated by studying the effect of isoinertial training velocity on netball chest pass throwing velocity. Twenty-one female netball players were randomly assigned to a strength-trained group (80% 1RM - average training velocity = .308 m/s), power-trained group (60% 1RM - average training velocity = .398 m/s) and a control group. Resistance training was combined with sport specific motion training for both groups over a ten-week training duration. Pre- and post-training testing revealed that the training velocity associated with the strength-trained group produced significantly greater improvement in mean volume of weight lifted (85kg) and mean power output (13.25 W) as compared to the power and control groups (P < 0.05). The strength-trained and power-trained groups significantly improved netball throw velocity by 12.4% and 8.8% respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups. The validity of velocity-specific training and subsequent adaptations to improve functional sporting performance appears highly questionable, due to the disparity between training velocity and actual movement velocity (11.38 m.s(-1)) for a given sport specific task such as the netball throw it was proposed that the repeated intent to move an isoinertial load as rapidly as possible coupled with performance of the sport-specific movement promote efficient coordination and activation patterns. Such mechanisms might be more important determinants of sport-specific high velocity adaptation.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available