4.4 Article

Acute Potentiating Effect of Depth Jumps on Sprint Performance

期刊

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182a0d8c1

关键词

potentiation; acceleration; maximum jump height; bounce depth jump

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Byrne, PJ, Kenny, J, and O' Rourke, B. Acute potentiating effect of depth jumps on sprint performance. J Strength Cond Res 28(3): 610-615, 2014-The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether the addition of 3 depth jumps to a dynamic warm-up (DYNDJ) protocol would significantly improve 20-m sprint performance when compared with a cardiovascular (C) warm-up protocol or a dynamic (DYN) stretching protocol alone. The first part of the study identified optimal drop height for all subjects using the maximum jump height method. The identified optimal drop heights were later used during the DYNDJ protocol. The second part compared the 3 warm-up protocols above to determine their effect on 20-m sprint performance. Twenty-nine subjects (age, 20.8 +/- 4.4 years; weight, 82.6 +/- 9.9 kg; height, 180.3 +/- 6.2 cm) performed 3 protocols of a C protocol, a DYN protocol, and a DYNDJ protocol in a randomized order. A 20-m sprint was performed 1 minute after the completion of each of the 3 protocols. Results displayed significant differences between each of the 3 protocols. A significant improvement (p = 0.001) of 2.2% was obtained in sprint time between the C protocol (3.300 +/- 0.105 seconds) and the DYN protocol (3.227 +/- 0.116 seconds), a further significant improvement of 5.01% was attained between the C and the DYNDJ protocols (3.300 +/- 0.10 vs. 3.132 +/- 0.120 seconds; p = 0.001). In addition, a significant improvement (p = 0.001) of 2.93% was observed between the DYN protocol (3.227 +/- 0.116 seconds) and the DYNDJ protocol (3.132 +/- 0.116 seconds). The data from this study advocate the use of DYNDJ protocol as a means of significantly improving 20-m sprint performance 1 minute after the DYNDJ protocol.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据