4.6 Article

Strength Training Intensity and Volume Affect Performance of Young Kayakers/Canoeists

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PHYSIOLOGY
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2021.686744

关键词

youth sports; water sports; exercise test; athletic performance; anthropometry

资金

  1. German Federal Institute of Sport Science [ZMVI1-081901 14-18, ZMVI4081901/20-23]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that low intensity, high volume training had greater effects on the sport-specific performance and muscular endurance of young kayakers and canoeists compared to moderate intensity, low volume training.
Purpose The aim of this study was to compare the effects of moderate intensity, low volume (MILV) vs. low intensity, high volume (LIHV) strength training on sport-specific performance, measures of muscular fitness, and skeletal muscle mass in young kayakers and canoeists. Methods Semi-elite young kayakers and canoeists (N = 40, 13 +/- 0.8 years, 11 girls) performed either MILV (70-80% 1-RM, 6-12 repetitions per set) or LIHV (30-40% 1-RM, 60-120 repetitions per set) strength training for one season. Linear mixed-effects models were used to compare effects of training condition on changes over time in 250 and 2,000 m time trials, handgrip strength, underhand shot throw, average bench pull power over 2 min, and skeletal muscle mass. Both between- and within-subject designs were used for analysis. An alpha of 0.05 was used to determine statistical significance. Results Between- and within-subject analyses showed that monthly changes were greater in LIHV vs. MILV for the 2,000 m time trial (between: 9.16 s, SE = 2.70, p < 0.01; within: 2,000 m: 13.90 s, SE = 5.02, p = 0.01) and bench pull average power (between: 0.021 W.kg(-1), SE = 0.008, p = 0.02; within: 0.010 W.kg(-1), SE = 0.009, p > 0.05). Training conditions did not affect other outcomes. Conclusion Young sprint kayakers and canoeists benefit from LIHV more than MILV strength training in terms of 2,000 m performance and muscular endurance (i.e., 2 min bench pull power).

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

4.6
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