4.2 Article

Asymmetries during repeated treadmill sprints in elite female Rugby Sevens players

期刊

SPORTS BIOMECHANICS
卷 22, 期 7, 页码 863-873

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/14763141.2020.1767188

关键词

Symmetry angle scores; repeated-sprint ability; female athletes; rugby sevens; running mechanics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study describes the asymmetry in main running mechanical variables during repeated treadmill sprints in elite female athletes and examines the influence of fatigue on inter-limb differences in sprinting mechanics. The results showed that there was no noticeable difference in asymmetries for the majority of stride mechanical variables during repeated treadmill sprints in elite female Rugby Sevens players.
This study describes asymmetry in the main running mechanical variables during repeated treadmill sprints in elite female athletes and examines whether inter-limb differences in sprinting mechanics increase with fatigue. Eighteen elite female players (French national Rugby Sevens team) performed 8 x 5-s sprints (25-s rest) on an instrumented motorised sprint treadmill. The group mean 'symmetry angle' (SA) scores were similar to 1-2% for contact time (1.6 +/- 0.6%), aerial time (2.1 +/- 0.8%), step frequency (1.3 +/- 0.5%) and step length (1.6 +/- 0.6%). Mean vertical and horizontal forces, vertical and leg stiffness presented SA values of 1.7 +/- 1.5%, 2.4 +/- 1.2%, 2.6 +/- 0.2% and 2.5 +/- 0.2%, respectively. The SA scores were similar to 2-8% for duration of braking (6.9 +/- 5.0%) and propulsive (6.5 +/- 4.4%) phases, peak braking (6.5 +/- 2.5%) and propulsive (1.6 +/- 0.9%) forces as well as net (5.8 +/- 5.6%), braking (7.7 +/- 5.3%) and propulsive (2.7 +/- 1.6%) impulses. However, there was no influence of sprint repetition number on SA scores for tested variables (P > 0.05). In elite female Rugby Sevens players, there was no noticeable difference in asymmetries for the great majority of stride mechanical variables during repeated treadmill sprints.

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

4.2
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