4.1 Article

Relationship between pre-season strength and power measures and performance in elite Australian football

出版社

UNIV WALES INST, CARDIFF
DOI: 10.1080/24748668.2015.11868830

关键词

bench press; clean pull; countermovement jump; match statistics; GPS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the relationship between various measures of muscular strength and power and individual player performance in elite Australian football (AF). Strength and power data was collected from 30 players from one Australian Football League club at various time points over the 2014 pre-season period. Upper and lower body strength and power were assessed using a one repetition maximum bench press, isometric mid-thigh pull and loaded countermovement jumps respectively. These variables were related to individual performance indicators (Champion Data ranking and descriptive match statistics) averaged over 22 games of the 2014 regular season. A secondary analysis also correlated strength and power measures with high speed running data derived from GPS units worn during games. For all players combined, no significant relationships for strength measures were found with Champion data ranking, but some power measures recorded moderate-large inverse relationships (r = -0.38 to -0.61) with certain match statistics. When separated by position, strong positive associations (r = 0.51 to 0.73) between upper body strength and performance (Champion Data(C) ranking and match statistics) were recorded for nomadic (midfield) players, but not for non-nomadic (taller, set position) players. Lower body power was also moderately-strongly associated (r = 0.42-0.69) with (GPS) maximum game acceleration and speed for the nomadic and combined player groups. These findings suggest that strength and power are significantly related to some common AF performance indicators and that particular consideration should be given to the positional requirements of players in planning strength and power programmes.

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

4.1
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