Resistance Trainings for Enhancement in Jumping Performance: A Comparative Analysis

Sana Ullah Khan, Muhammad Farhan Tabassum, R. Karim
{"title":"Resistance Trainings for Enhancement in Jumping Performance: A Comparative Analysis","authors":"Sana Ullah Khan, Muhammad Farhan Tabassum, R. Karim","doi":"10.51846/the-sky.v7i0.2687","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The primary purpose of programming is to organize training factor modifications that will provide the greatest possible improvement in performance. However, the best programming approach that results in enhanced neuromuscular adaptations is still unclear. This research set out to determine how three varying degrees of unpredictability within resistance training programs affected performance gains. Thirty-six people were split into three groups of twelve each: those who would receive training based on a weekly model (WM), those who would receive instruction based on a daily model (DM), and those who would receive training based on a session model (SM); Six weeks of back squat sessions comprised the training intervention. All participants received the same total training load during the course of six-week intervention. We tested the individual's maximum dynamic strength (1RM) in the back-squat, countermovement jump (CMJ), and squat jump (SJ) both before and after the training intervention. Significant gains were observed across the board (p<0.05). The effect size (ES) of the session model in 1RM is just 0.29.  Effect sizes for the daily model and session model in SJ are both moderate, at 0.61 and 0.41 respectively. The impact size in the CMJ daily model is quite moderate (0.51), while it is very large (0.99) in the session model.  The results of this study show that changing the type of stimulus used in resistance training more often is a significant way to improve both strength and jumping ability at the same time.","PeriodicalId":22954,"journal":{"name":"THE SKY-International Journal of Physical Education and Sports Sciences (IJPESS)","volume":" 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"THE SKY-International Journal of Physical Education and Sports Sciences (IJPESS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51846/the-sky.v7i0.2687","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The primary purpose of programming is to organize training factor modifications that will provide the greatest possible improvement in performance. However, the best programming approach that results in enhanced neuromuscular adaptations is still unclear. This research set out to determine how three varying degrees of unpredictability within resistance training programs affected performance gains. Thirty-six people were split into three groups of twelve each: those who would receive training based on a weekly model (WM), those who would receive instruction based on a daily model (DM), and those who would receive training based on a session model (SM); Six weeks of back squat sessions comprised the training intervention. All participants received the same total training load during the course of six-week intervention. We tested the individual's maximum dynamic strength (1RM) in the back-squat, countermovement jump (CMJ), and squat jump (SJ) both before and after the training intervention. Significant gains were observed across the board (p<0.05). The effect size (ES) of the session model in 1RM is just 0.29.  Effect sizes for the daily model and session model in SJ are both moderate, at 0.61 and 0.41 respectively. The impact size in the CMJ daily model is quite moderate (0.51), while it is very large (0.99) in the session model.  The results of this study show that changing the type of stimulus used in resistance training more often is a significant way to improve both strength and jumping ability at the same time.
提高跳跃成绩的阻力训练:比较分析
编制训练计划的主要目的是对训练因素进行调整,从而最大限度地提高训练成绩。然而,能够增强神经肌肉适应性的最佳计划编制方法仍不明确。本研究旨在确定阻力训练计划中三种不同程度的不可预测性对成绩提高的影响。研究人员将 36 人分成三组,每组 12 人:根据每周模式(WM)接受训练的组员、根据每日模式(DM)接受指导的组员和根据每节课模式(SM)接受训练的组员。在为期六周的干预过程中,所有参与者都接受了相同的总训练负荷。在训练干预前后,我们测试了每个人在深蹲、反身跳(CMJ)和蹲跳(SJ)方面的最大动态力量(1RM)。在所有项目中都观察到了显著的提高(P<0.05)。在 1RM 方面,会话模式的效应大小(ES)仅为 0.29。 在 SJ 方面,日常模式和疗程模式的效应大小均为中等,分别为 0.61 和 0.41。CMJ 日常模型的影响大小相当适中(0.51),而在会话模型中则非常大(0.99)。 本研究结果表明,在阻力训练中更频繁地改变刺激类型是同时提高力量和跳跃能力的重要方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信