You are not logged in.

A rationale for assessing the lower-body power profile in team sport athletes

Nibali, Maria L., Chapman, Dale W., Robergs, Robert A. and Drinkwater, Eric J. 2013, A rationale for assessing the lower-body power profile in team sport athletes, Journal of strength and conditioning research, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 388-397, doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182576feb.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title A rationale for assessing the lower-body power profile in team sport athletes
Author(s) Nibali, Maria L.
Chapman, Dale W.
Robergs, Robert A.
Drinkwater, Eric J.ORCID iD for Drinkwater, Eric J. orcid.org/0000-0002-9594-9360
Journal name Journal of strength and conditioning research
Volume number 27
Issue number 2
Start page 388
End page 397
Total pages 10
Publisher Lippincot Williams & Wilkins
Place of publication Philadelphia, Pa.
Publication date 2013-02
ISSN 1533-4287
Keyword(s) jump squats
load-power profile
maximal power production
optimal load
substantial differences
Summary Training at the load that maximizes peak mechanical power (Pmax) is considered superior for the development of power. We aimed to identify the Pmax load ('optimal load') in the jump squat and to quantify small, moderate, large, and very large substantial differences in power output across a spectrum of loads to identify loads that are substantially different to the optimal, and lastly, to investigate the nature of power production (load-force-velocity profiles). Professional Australian Rules Football (ARF; n = 16) and highly trained Rugby Union (RU; n = 20) players (subdivided into stronger [SP] vs. weaker [WP] players) performed jump squats across incremental loads (0-60 kg). Substantial differences in peak power (W·kg(-1)) were quantified as 0.2-2.0 of the log transformed between-athlete SD at each load, backtransformed and expressed as a percent with 90% confidence limits (CL). A 0-kg jump squat maximized peak power (ARF: 57.7 ± 10.8 W·kg(-1); RU: 61.4 ± 8.5 W·kg(-1); SP: 64.4 ± 7.5 W·kg(-1); WP: 54.8 ± 9.5 W·kg(-1)). The range for small to very large substantial differences in power output was 4.5-55.9% (CL: ×/÷1.36) and 2.8-32.4% (CL: ×/÷1.31) in ARF and RU players, whereas in SP and WP, it was 3.7-43.1% (CL: ×/÷1.32) and 4.3-51.7% (CL: ×/÷1.36). Power declined per 10-kg increment in load, 14.1% (CL: ±1.6) and 10.5% (CL: ±1.5) in ARF and RU players and 12.8% (CL: ±1.9) and 11.3% (CL: ±1.7) in SP and WP. The use of a 0-kg load is superior for the development of jump squat maximal power, with moderate to very large declines in power output observed at 10- to 60-kg loads. Yet, performance of heavier load jump squats that are substantially different to the optimal load are important in the development of sport-specific force-velocity qualities and should not be excluded.
Language eng
DOI 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182576feb
Field of Research 110699 Human Movement and Sports Science not elsewhere classified
1106 Human Movement And Sports Science
Socio Economic Objective 929999 Health not elsewhere classified
HERDC Research category C1.1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
ERA Research output type C Journal article
Copyright notice ©2013, National Strenght & Conditioning Association
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30083028

Document type: Journal Article
Collection: School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences
Connect to link resolver
 
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 8 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 8 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 82 Abstract Views, 1 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Fri, 22 Apr 2016, 15:45:49 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.