Changes in sprint performance and sagittal plane kinematics after heavy resisted sprint training in professional soccer players
Sprint performance is an essential skill to target within soccer, which can be likely achieved with a variety of methods, including different on-field training options. One such method could be heavy resisted sprint training. However, the effects of such overload on sprint performance and the relate...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | PeerJ (San Francisco, CA) CA), 2020-12, Vol.8, p.e10507-e10507, Article e10507 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Sprint performance is an essential skill to target within soccer, which can be likely achieved with a variety of methods, including different on-field training options. One such method could be heavy resisted sprint training. However, the effects of such overload on sprint performance and the related kinetic changes are unknown in a professional setting. Another unknown factor is whether violating kinematic specificity via heavy resistance will lead to changes in unloaded sprinting kinematics. We investigated whether heavy resisted sled training (HS) affects sprint performance, kinetics, sagittal plane kinematics, and spatiotemporal parameters in professional male soccer players.
After familiarization, a nine-week training protocol and a two-week taper was completed with sprint performance and force-velocity (FV) profiles compared before and after. Out of the two recruited homogenous soccer teams (
= 32, age: 24.1 ± 5.1 years: height: 180 ± 10 cm; body-mass: 76.7 ± 7.7 kg, 30-m split-time: 4.63 ± 0.13 s), one was used as a control group continuing training as normal with no systematic acceleration training (CON,
= 13), while the intervention team was matched into two HS subgroups based on their sprint performance. Subgroup one trained with a resistance that induced a 60% velocity decrement from maximal velocity (
= 10, HS60%) and subgroup two used a 50% velocity decrement resistance (
= 9, HS50%) based on individual load-velocity profiles.
Both heavy resistance subgroups improved significantly all 10-30-m split times (
|
---|---|
ISSN: | 2167-8359 2167-8359 |
DOI: | 10.7717/peerj.10507 |