举重顶压运动的动力学没有差异。

IF 2 3区 医学 Q3 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL
Sports Biomechanics Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2021-10-27 DOI:10.1080/14763141.2021.1993983
Marcos A Soriano, Jason Lake, Paul Comfort, Timothy J Suchomel, John J McMahon, Ester Jiménez-Ormeño, Pilar Sainz de Baranda
{"title":"举重顶压运动的动力学没有差异。","authors":"Marcos A Soriano, Jason Lake, Paul Comfort, Timothy J Suchomel, John J McMahon, Ester Jiménez-Ormeño, Pilar Sainz de Baranda","doi":"10.1080/14763141.2021.1993983","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to compare the kinetics between the push press (PP), push jerk (PJ), and split jerk (SJ). Sixteen resistance-trained participants (12 men and 4 women; age: 23.8 ± 4.4 years; height: 1.7 ± 0.1 m; body mass: 75.7 ± 13.0 kg; weightlifting experience: 2.2 ± 1.3 years; one repetition maximum [1RM] PP: 76.5 ± 19.5 kg) performed 3 repetitions each of the PP, PJ, and SJ at a relative load of 80% 1RM PP on a force platform. The kinetics (peak and mean force, peak and mean power, and impulse) of the PP, PJ, and SJ were determined during the dip and thrust phases. Dip and thrust displacement and duration were also calculated for the three lifts. In addition, the inter-repetition reliability of each variable across the three exercises was analysed. Moderate to excellent reliability was evident for the PP (Intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.91-1.00), PJ (ICC = 0.86-1.00), and SJ (ICC = 0.55-0.99) kinetics. A one-way analysis of variance revealed no significant or meaningful differences (<i>p</i> > 0.05, η<sup>2</sup><b> </b>≤ 0.010) for any kinetic measure between the PP, PJ, and SJ. In conclusion, there were no differences in kinetics between the PP, PJ, and SJ when performed at the same standardised load of 80% 1RM PP.</p>","PeriodicalId":49482,"journal":{"name":"Sports Biomechanics","volume":" ","pages":"2080-2092"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"No differences in weightlifting overhead pressing exercises kinetics.\",\"authors\":\"Marcos A Soriano, Jason Lake, Paul Comfort, Timothy J Suchomel, John J McMahon, Ester Jiménez-Ormeño, Pilar Sainz de Baranda\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14763141.2021.1993983\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study aimed to compare the kinetics between the push press (PP), push jerk (PJ), and split jerk (SJ). Sixteen resistance-trained participants (12 men and 4 women; age: 23.8 ± 4.4 years; height: 1.7 ± 0.1 m; body mass: 75.7 ± 13.0 kg; weightlifting experience: 2.2 ± 1.3 years; one repetition maximum [1RM] PP: 76.5 ± 19.5 kg) performed 3 repetitions each of the PP, PJ, and SJ at a relative load of 80% 1RM PP on a force platform. The kinetics (peak and mean force, peak and mean power, and impulse) of the PP, PJ, and SJ were determined during the dip and thrust phases. Dip and thrust displacement and duration were also calculated for the three lifts. In addition, the inter-repetition reliability of each variable across the three exercises was analysed. Moderate to excellent reliability was evident for the PP (Intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.91-1.00), PJ (ICC = 0.86-1.00), and SJ (ICC = 0.55-0.99) kinetics. A one-way analysis of variance revealed no significant or meaningful differences (<i>p</i> > 0.05, η<sup>2</sup><b> </b>≤ 0.010) for any kinetic measure between the PP, PJ, and SJ. In conclusion, there were no differences in kinetics between the PP, PJ, and SJ when performed at the same standardised load of 80% 1RM PP.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49482,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sports Biomechanics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"2080-2092\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sports Biomechanics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14763141.2021.1993983\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/10/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports Biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14763141.2021.1993983","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/10/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在比较推举(PP)、推挺举(PJ)和劈叉挺举(SJ)的动力学。16 名接受过阻力训练的参与者(12 名男性和 4 名女性;年龄:23.8 ± 4.4 岁;身高:1.7 ± 0.1 米;体重:75.7 ± 13.0 千克;举重经验:2.2 ± 1.3 年;单次最大负重[1RM] PP:76.5 ± 19.5 千克)在力台上以 80% 的单次最大负重 PP 为相对负荷,分别做了 3 次 PP、PJ 和 SJ。在下蹲和推举阶段,测定了 PP、PJ 和 SJ 的动力学(峰值和平均力、峰值和平均功率以及冲量)。同时还计算了三种举重的下蹲和推举位移和持续时间。此外,还分析了三种练习中每个变量的重复间可靠性。PP(类内相关系数[ICC] = 0.91-1.00)、PJ(ICC = 0.86-1.00)和SJ(ICC = 0.55-0.99)动作的可靠性为中等至优秀。单因素方差分析显示,PP、PJ 和 SJ 之间的任何动力学指标均无显著或有意义的差异(P > 0.05,η2 ≤ 0.010)。总之,在相同的标准化负荷(80% 1RM PP)下,PP、PJ 和 SJ 的动力学没有差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
No differences in weightlifting overhead pressing exercises kinetics.

This study aimed to compare the kinetics between the push press (PP), push jerk (PJ), and split jerk (SJ). Sixteen resistance-trained participants (12 men and 4 women; age: 23.8 ± 4.4 years; height: 1.7 ± 0.1 m; body mass: 75.7 ± 13.0 kg; weightlifting experience: 2.2 ± 1.3 years; one repetition maximum [1RM] PP: 76.5 ± 19.5 kg) performed 3 repetitions each of the PP, PJ, and SJ at a relative load of 80% 1RM PP on a force platform. The kinetics (peak and mean force, peak and mean power, and impulse) of the PP, PJ, and SJ were determined during the dip and thrust phases. Dip and thrust displacement and duration were also calculated for the three lifts. In addition, the inter-repetition reliability of each variable across the three exercises was analysed. Moderate to excellent reliability was evident for the PP (Intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.91-1.00), PJ (ICC = 0.86-1.00), and SJ (ICC = 0.55-0.99) kinetics. A one-way analysis of variance revealed no significant or meaningful differences (p > 0.05, η2 ≤ 0.010) for any kinetic measure between the PP, PJ, and SJ. In conclusion, there were no differences in kinetics between the PP, PJ, and SJ when performed at the same standardised load of 80% 1RM PP.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sports Biomechanics
Sports Biomechanics 医学-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
9.10%
发文量
135
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Sports Biomechanics is the Thomson Reuters listed scientific journal of the International Society of Biomechanics in Sports (ISBS). The journal sets out to generate knowledge to improve human performance and reduce the incidence of injury, and to communicate this knowledge to scientists, coaches, clinicians, teachers, and participants. The target performance realms include not only the conventional areas of sports and exercise, but also fundamental motor skills and other highly specialized human movements such as dance (both sport and artistic). Sports Biomechanics is unique in its emphasis on a broad biomechanical spectrum of human performance including, but not limited to, technique, skill acquisition, training, strength and conditioning, exercise, coaching, teaching, equipment, modeling and simulation, measurement, and injury prevention and rehabilitation. As well as maintaining scientific rigour, there is a strong editorial emphasis on ''reader friendliness''. By emphasising the practical implications and applications of research, the journal seeks to benefit practitioners directly. Sports Biomechanics publishes papers in four sections: Original Research, Reviews, Teaching, and Methods and Theoretical Perspectives.
×
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