Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorHelland, Christian
dc.contributor.authorHole, Eirik
dc.contributor.authorOlsson, Monica Charlotte
dc.contributor.authorSeynnes, Olivier R.
dc.contributor.authorSolberg, Paul Andre
dc.contributor.authorPaulsen, Gøran
dc.date.accessioned2018-10-18T06:56:32Z
dc.date.available2018-10-18T06:56:32Z
dc.date.created2017-01-20T14:33:41Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.citationMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 2016, 49, 736-745.nb_NO
dc.identifier.issn0195-9131
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/2568540
dc.descriptionI Brage finner du siste tekst-versjon av artikkelen, og den kan inneholde ubetydelige forskjeller fra forlagets pdf-versjon. Forlagets pdf-versjon finner du på journals.lww.com / In Brage you'll find the final text version of the article, and it may contain insignificant differences from the journal's pdf version. The definitive version is available at journals.lww.comnb_NO
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: This efficacy study investigated the effects of (1) Olympic-style weightlifting (OWL), (2) motorized strength and power training (MSPT), and (3) free weight strength and power training (FSPT) on muscle power. Methods: Thirty-nine young athletes (20±3 yr.; ice hockey, volleyball and badminton) were randomized into the three training groups. All groups participated in 2-3 sessions/week for 8 weeks. The MSPT and FSPT groups trained using squats (two legs and single leg) with high force and high power, while the OWL group trained using clean and snatch exercises. MSPT was conducted as slow-speed isokinetic strength training and isotonic power training with augmented eccentric load, controlled by a computerized robotic engine system. FSPT used free weights. The training volume (sum of repetitions x kg) was similar between all three groups. Vertical jumping capabilities were assessed by countermovement jump (CMJ), squat jump (SJ), drop jump (DJ), and loaded CMJs (10-80 kg). Sprinting capacity was assessed in a 30 m sprint. Secondary variables were squat 1-repetitionmaximum, body composition and quadriceps thickness and architecture. Results: OWL resulted in trivial improvements, and inferior gains compared to FSPT and MSPT for CMJ, SJ, and DJ. MSPT demonstrated small, but robust effects on SJ, DJ and loaded CMJs (3-12%). MSPT was superior to FSPT in improving 30 m sprint performance. FSPT and MSPT, but not OWL, demonstrated increased thickness in the vastus lateralis and rectus femoris (4-7%). Conclusion: MSPT was time-efficient and equally or more effective than FSPT training in improving vertical jumping and sprinting performance. OWL was generally ineffective and inferior to the two other interventions.nb_NO
dc.language.isoengnb_NO
dc.subjectathletesnb_NO
dc.subjectpower trainingnb_NO
dc.subjectstrength trainingnb_NO
dc.subjectjump performancenb_NO
dc.subjectsprint runningnb_NO
dc.subjectmuscle architecturenb_NO
dc.titleTraining Strategies to Improve Muscle Power: Is Olympic-style Weightlifting Relevant?nb_NO
dc.title.alternativeTraining Strategies to Improve Muscle Power: Is Olympic-style Weightlifting Relevant?nb_NO
dc.typeJournal articlenb_NO
dc.typePeer reviewednb_NO
dc.description.versionacceptedVersionnb_NO
dc.source.pagenumber736-745nb_NO
dc.source.volume49nb_NO
dc.source.journalMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercisenb_NO
dc.source.issue4nb_NO
dc.identifier.doi10.1249/MSS.0000000000001145
dc.identifier.cristin1433987
dc.description.localcodeSeksjon for fysisk prestasjonsevne / Department of Physical Performancenb_NO
cristin.unitcode150,31,0,0
cristin.unitnameSeksjon for fysisk prestasjonsevne
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextpostprint
cristin.qualitycode2


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel