4.4 Review

The Physiology of Judo-Specific Training Modalities

期刊

JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH
卷 28, 期 5, 页码 1474-1481

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000281

关键词

heart rate; athletic performance; immunosuppression; muscle strength; lactate; martial arts

资金

  1. CNPq [236768/2012-3]
  2. FAPESP [2011/17059-2]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Franchini, E, Brito, CJ, Fukuda, DH, and Artioli, GG. The physiology of judo-specific training modalities. J Strength Cond Res 28(5): 1474-1481, 2014-Understanding the physiological response to the most common judo training modalities may help to improve the prescription and monitoring of training programs. This review is based on search results using the following terms: judo, judo and training, judo and physiology, judo and specific exercises, and judo and combat practice. Uchi-komi (repetitive technical training) is a specific judo exercise that can be used to improve aerobic and anaerobic fitness. Effort to pause ratio, total session duration, number and duration of individual sets, and the type of technique can be manipulated to emphasize specific components of metabolism. Nage-komi (repetitive throwing training) can also be used to improve aerobic and anaerobic fitness, depending on the format of the training session. Randori (combat or fight practice; sparring) is the training modality most closely related to actual judo matches. Despite the similarities, the physiological demands of randori practice are not as high as observed during real competitive matches. Heart rate has not shown to be an accurate measure of training intensity during any of the previously mentioned judo training modalities. High-volume, high-intensity training programs often lead judo athletes to experience overtraining-related symptoms, with immunosuppression being one of the most common. In conclusion, judo training and judo-specific exercise should be manipulated to maximize training response and competitive performance.

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