Pereirabray1456

From DigitalMaine Transcription Project
Revision as of 23:16, 21 November 2024 by Pereirabray1456 (talk | contribs) (Created page with "The current study investigated the effects of barbell placement on kinematics and muscle activity during the sticking region of back squats. Ten healthy medium- to well-traine...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

The current study investigated the effects of barbell placement on kinematics and muscle activity during the sticking region of back squats. Ten healthy medium- to well-trained male powerlifters [age 26.1 ± 11.2 years, body mass 90.2 ± 18.3 kg, height 1.83 ± 0.09 m, five repetition maximum (5RM) 158 ± 29 kg] with at least 3 years of resistance-training experience were recruited. In a single session, participants performed 5RM movements using high bar and low bar squats, where absolute load, descent depth, and stance width were matched between squat conditions. The final repetition was analyzed using 3D kinematics and electromyography (EMG) around the sticking region. No differences in barbell and joint kinematics were observed in any phase, between both barbell modalities. Increased muscle activity in the rectus femoris, vastus medialis, and lower part of the erector spinae with the high bar, when compared with low bar conditions, was recorded. Furthermore, the gluteus maximus and medius had increased muscle activity over the three regions (pre-sticking > sticking > post-sticking), while the erector spinae, soleus, vastus lateralis, and rectus femoris experienced decreased muscle activity during the ascending phase. When depth and stance width were matched, the low bar technique was associated with lower erector spinae and quadriceps activity than the high bar technique. Thus, when the goal is to maximally activate knee extensors and the external load is matched, high bar placement would appear preferable.Punching in boxing requires a combination of force and velocity of the acting arm, originating from an optimal synchronization of the different body segments. However, it is not well-understood what kinematic parameters of the punching execution influence boxing performance the most. This study aimed to investigate the differences in punching execution between 15 potential Olympic medalist boxers (Elite group) and 8 younger well trained boxers (Junior group). Each athlete was equipped with an instrumented suit composed of 17 inertial measurement units (IMU) and were asked to perform several series of 3 standardized punch types (cross, hook, and uppercut) with maximal force. Linear velocity, stability, and punch forces were computed from the different sensors. Our findings show that Elite boxers systematically produced more force and at a higher velocity for the three punch types compared to Juniors. selleck kinase inhibitor Further analysis revealed differences in joint contributions between Elite and Juniors, Juniors presenting a higher contribution of the shoulder for the three punch types. Finally ground reaction force imbalance between the front and rear foot was revealed in the cross only, in all boxers (60.6 ± 24.9 vs. 39.4 ± 24.9% and 54.1 ± 7.1 vs. 45.9 ± 7.1%, p ≤ 0.05, for the front vs. rear foot in Elite and Juniors, respectively) but not different between groups. These results have important implications for practitioners involved in the talent identification process, longitudinal follow-up, and training of boxers.The aim of the study was to compare neuromuscular activation, kinetics and kinematics in three variations of the deadlift (1) free weights, (2) free weights with elastic bands as resistance (bands anchored to the ground) and (3) free weights with elastic bands as assistance (bands attached above the bar). Sixteen resistance-trained men performed one repetition of the three variations as fast as possible using a 2-repetition maximum load in randomized and counterbalanced order. Muscle activation (gluteus maximus, semitendinosus, biceps femoris, erector spinae, vastus lateralis, and vastus medialis), kinematics (average-, peak-, and time to peak velocity), and kinetics (average-, peak,-and time to peak force) were measured during the ascending movement. Resisted and assisted deadlifts led to higher average and peak force outputs (p less then 0.001-0.037, ES = 0.29-0.58), and time to peak velocity was shorter when compared to the free weights deadlift (p = 0.005-0.010, ES = 0.83-1.01). However, peak force was achieved faster when using free weights (p less then 0.001, ES = 1.58-2.10) and assisted deadlifts had a lower peak velocity compared to resisted and free weights deadlift (p = 0.004-0.046, ES = 0.43-0.60). There were no significant differences in muscle activation between the different conditions (p = 0.082-1.000). In conclusion, the assisted and resisted deadlift produced higher force when compared to free weights. However, free weight and resisted deadlift seem more favorable for the barbell velocity. These findings are of importance for athletes and coaches which should select exercise depending on the goal of the session.Objectives The purpose of this study was to determine and weigh the anthropometric indicators that were associated with pacing performances for each Olympic rowing category. Methods Between 2010 and 2015, 1,148 rowers (650 men and 498 women) participated in the finals of World Championships in each heavyweight Olympic event. They were categorized into four morphological clusters according to their height and body mass index (BMI) tall and thin (TT), tall and robust (TR), small and thin (ST), and small and robust (SR). Time and speed, were collected every 50 m for all boats in each competition. Non-parametric inferential methods were used to understand the differences in performance between morphological clusters over the entire race. After, we calculated a new indicator to determine the differences between these morphotypes within the race. Results In this article, we determined which morphologies had a significant effect on speed for both men and women. For example, the biggest rowers were the fastest in skiff. Analysis of each 50 m demonstrated that between the four morphological categories that the TR male athletes were significantly faster than their ST counterparts between the 800 and 2,000 m of the race by 1.76% of mean speed. Furthermore, the SR were the fastest in female coxless pairs over the majority of the race. These differences in speed by morphological cluster are summarized, by race segment, for all categories and sex. Conclusion Anthropometric factors impact pacing among rowers' categories. Coupling anthropometry and race pacing is not only helpful to understand which factors work where, but is also helpful in improving training and performance. This can help both in the recruiting of rowers for specific boats and adapting the race strategy. In future, the method used can be adapted for factors other than anthropometry. It can also be individualized to enable athletes to prepare for their race according to future competitors.