Stuart N. Guppy, Tsuyoshi Nagatani, Wayne C. K. Poon, K. Kendall, Jason P. Lake, G. Gregory Haff
{"title":"硬举六次最大重复次数的变化,反向跳跃表现,杠铃速度,以及在一个微循环持续时间内感知到的用力","authors":"Stuart N. Guppy, Tsuyoshi Nagatani, Wayne C. K. Poon, K. Kendall, Jason P. Lake, G. Gregory Haff","doi":"10.1177/17479541231172569","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The primary aim of this study was to investigate the stability of the six-repetition maximum (6RM) deadlift over the length of a five-day microcycle and whether the fatigue induced by maximal effort testing detrimentally impacted preparedness. Twelve participants performed four testing sessions, comprising a one-repetition maximum test and three 6RM tests separated by 48 hours. Countermovement jumps were performed before each testing session, and barbell velocity was measured during each warm-up set to assess changes in preparedness. The 6RM deadlift was not statistically different between any of the testing sessions ( p = .056; ηp2 = 0.251). Similarly, there were no significant differences in jump height or other CMJ variables between sessions ( p > .05). There were small to moderate differences in mean barbell velocity between the first and second 6RM test ( g = 0.24–0.88), while there were only small differences in mean velocity (MV) between the second and third 6RM test at some of the warm-up loads (40% 6RM: g = 0.20; 80% 6RM: g = −0.47). Taken collectively, these data indicate that 6RM deadlift strength is stable over five days and does not appear to induce sufficient fatigue to impact vertical jump performance or rating of perceived exertion despite some changes in barbell velocity.","PeriodicalId":182483,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Changes in deadlift six repetition maximum, countermovement jump performance, barbell velocity, and perceived exertion over the duration of a microcycle\",\"authors\":\"Stuart N. Guppy, Tsuyoshi Nagatani, Wayne C. K. Poon, K. Kendall, Jason P. Lake, G. Gregory Haff\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17479541231172569\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The primary aim of this study was to investigate the stability of the six-repetition maximum (6RM) deadlift over the length of a five-day microcycle and whether the fatigue induced by maximal effort testing detrimentally impacted preparedness. Twelve participants performed four testing sessions, comprising a one-repetition maximum test and three 6RM tests separated by 48 hours. Countermovement jumps were performed before each testing session, and barbell velocity was measured during each warm-up set to assess changes in preparedness. The 6RM deadlift was not statistically different between any of the testing sessions ( p = .056; ηp2 = 0.251). Similarly, there were no significant differences in jump height or other CMJ variables between sessions ( p > .05). There were small to moderate differences in mean barbell velocity between the first and second 6RM test ( g = 0.24–0.88), while there were only small differences in mean velocity (MV) between the second and third 6RM test at some of the warm-up loads (40% 6RM: g = 0.20; 80% 6RM: g = −0.47). Taken collectively, these data indicate that 6RM deadlift strength is stable over five days and does not appear to induce sufficient fatigue to impact vertical jump performance or rating of perceived exertion despite some changes in barbell velocity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":182483,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17479541231172569\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17479541231172569","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本研究的主要目的是调查6次最大硬举(6RM)在5天微周期内的稳定性,以及最大努力测试引起的疲劳是否会对准备产生不利影响。12名参与者进行了四次测试,包括一次重复最大测试和三次间隔48小时的6RM测试。在每次测试前进行反向跳跃,并在每次热身期间测量杠铃速度,以评估准备的变化。6RM硬举在任何测试阶段之间没有统计学差异(p = 0.056;ηp2 = 0.251)。同样,两组之间的跳跃高度或其他CMJ变量也没有显著差异(p < 0.05)。在一些热身负荷下,第一次和第二次6RM测试的平均杠铃速度有小到中等的差异(g = 0.24-0.88),而第二次和第三次6RM测试的平均速度(MV)只有很小的差异(40% 6RM: g = 0.20;80% 6RM: g =−0.47)。总的来说,这些数据表明,6RM硬举强度在5天内是稳定的,尽管杠铃速度发生了一些变化,但似乎不会引起足够的疲劳来影响垂直跳跃性能或感知运动的评级。
Changes in deadlift six repetition maximum, countermovement jump performance, barbell velocity, and perceived exertion over the duration of a microcycle
The primary aim of this study was to investigate the stability of the six-repetition maximum (6RM) deadlift over the length of a five-day microcycle and whether the fatigue induced by maximal effort testing detrimentally impacted preparedness. Twelve participants performed four testing sessions, comprising a one-repetition maximum test and three 6RM tests separated by 48 hours. Countermovement jumps were performed before each testing session, and barbell velocity was measured during each warm-up set to assess changes in preparedness. The 6RM deadlift was not statistically different between any of the testing sessions ( p = .056; ηp2 = 0.251). Similarly, there were no significant differences in jump height or other CMJ variables between sessions ( p > .05). There were small to moderate differences in mean barbell velocity between the first and second 6RM test ( g = 0.24–0.88), while there were only small differences in mean velocity (MV) between the second and third 6RM test at some of the warm-up loads (40% 6RM: g = 0.20; 80% 6RM: g = −0.47). Taken collectively, these data indicate that 6RM deadlift strength is stable over five days and does not appear to induce sufficient fatigue to impact vertical jump performance or rating of perceived exertion despite some changes in barbell velocity.