Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorCross, Matt R.
dc.contributor.authorLahti, Johan
dc.contributor.authorBrown, Scott
dc.contributor.authorChedati, Mehdi
dc.contributor.authorJimenez-Reyes, Pedro
dc.contributor.authorSamozino, Pierre
dc.contributor.authorEriksrud, Ola
dc.contributor.authorMorin, Jean-Benoit
dc.date.accessioned2018-11-01T08:00:10Z
dc.date.available2018-11-01T08:00:10Z
dc.date.created2018-10-09T14:03:43Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.citationPLoS ONE. 2018, 13, e0195477.nb_NO
dc.identifier.issn1932-6203
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/2570495
dc.descriptionThis is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.nb_NO
dc.description.abstractAims: In the current study we investigated the effects of resisted sprint training on sprinting performance and underlying mechanical parameters (force-velocity-power profile) based on two different training protocols: (i) loads that represented maximum power output (Lopt) and a 50% decrease in maximum unresisted sprinting velocity and (ii) lighter loads that represented a 10% decrease in maximum unresisted sprinting velocity, as drawn from previous research (L10). Methods: Soccer [n = 15 male] and rugby [n = 21; 9 male and 12 female] club-level athletes were individually assessed for horizontal force-velocity and load-velocity profiles using a battery of resisted sprints, sled or robotic resistance respectively. Athletes then performed a 12-session resisted (10 × 20-m; and pre- post-profiling) sprint training intervention following the L10 or Lopt protocol. Results: Both L10 and Lopt training protocols had minor effects on sprinting performance (average of -1.4 to -2.3% split-times respectively), and provided trivial, small and unclear changes in mechanical sprinting parameters. Unexpectedly, Lopt impacted velocity dominant variables to a greater degree than L10 (trivial benefit in maximum velocity; small increase in slope of the force-velocity relationship), while L10 improved force and power dominant metrics (trivial benefit in maximal power; small benefit in maximal effectiveness of ground force orientation). Conclusions: Both resisted-sprint training protocols were likely to improve performance after a short training intervention in already sprint trained athletes. However, widely varied individualised results indicated that adaptations may be dependent on pre-training force-velocity characteristics.nb_NO
dc.language.isoengnb_NO
dc.subjectrunningnb_NO
dc.subjectsportsnb_NO
dc.subjecthuman performancenb_NO
dc.subjectaccelerationnb_NO
dc.subjectvelocitynb_NO
dc.subjectlinear regression analysisnb_NO
dc.subjectroboticsnb_NO
dc.subjectradarnb_NO
dc.titleTraining at maximal power in resisted sprinting: Optimal load determination methodology and pilot results in team sport athletesnb_NO
dc.title.alternativeTraining at maximal power in resisted sprinting: Optimal load determination methodology and pilot results in team sport athletesnb_NO
dc.typeJournal articlenb_NO
dc.typePeer reviewednb_NO
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionnb_NO
dc.rights.holder© 2018 Cross et al.nb_NO
dc.source.pagenumber16nb_NO
dc.source.volume13nb_NO
dc.source.journalPLoS ONEnb_NO
dc.source.issue4nb_NO
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pone.0195477
dc.identifier.cristin1619039
dc.description.localcodeSeksjon for fysisk prestasjonsevne / Department of Physical Performancenb_NO
cristin.unitcode150,31,0,0
cristin.unitnameSeksjon for fysisk prestasjonsevne
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel