Comparative Effects of Complex Contrast Training and Traditional Training Methods on Physical Performance Within Female, Semiprofessional Australian Rules Football Players.

Abstract

Abstract: Luders, J, Garrett, J, Gleadhill, S, Mathews, L, and Bennett, H. Comparative effects of complex contrast training and traditional training methods on physical performance within female, semiprofessional Australian Rules Football players. J Strength Cond Res 38(11): 1917-1923, 2024-This study aimed to explore whether complex contrast training (CCT) would elicit greater strength and power adaptations than traditional (TRAD) training methods using a volume- and intensity-matched design. Fourteen semiprofessional female Australian Football players completed the study. Both CCT and TRAD saw improvements in all performance outcomes: 1 repetition maximum (1RM) back squat (21.3 ± 8.2 and 16.7 ± 6.8 kg), 1RM bench press (5.3 ± 3.6 and 2.1 ± 4.0 kg), 1RM trap bar deadlift (5.0 ± 6.6 and 11.3 ± 2.5 kg), 5 m sprint (0.002 ± 0.09 and 0.02 ± 0.2 s), 10 m sprint (0.04 ± 0.17 and 0.02 ± 0.1 s), 15 m sprint (0.009 ± 0.15 and 0.08 ± 0.2 s), countermovement jump (CMJ) height (230 ± 150 and 340 ± 390 cm), CMJ absolute peak power (158.5 ± 69.6 and 235.6 ± 229.6 N), CMJ relative peak power (3.46 ± 4.1 and 2.68 ± 1.4 N·kg -1 )), and plyometric push-up peak relative power (20.5 ± 13.4 and 15.2 ± 13.5 N). There were no between-group differences except for TRAD recording slightly greater improvements in 1RM Trap bar deadlift (Bayes factor [BF 10 ] = 1.210). Complex contrast training completed sessions on average ∼7 minutes quicker than TRAD (BF 10 = 5.722), while both groups reporting similar ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) with CCT (± SD ) 58.4 ± 6.7 minutes and TRAD 65.5 ± 4.8. Based on the results, CCT training provides the same performance outcomes as traditional training methods across a period of 8 weeks, while taking less time to achieve these outcomes and with similar RPE.