-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Countermovement, Hurdle, and Box Jumps: Data-Driven Exercise Selection
MT. Janikov, J. Pádecký, V. Doguet, JJ. Tufano
Status neindexováno Jazyk angličtina Země Švýcarsko
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články
Grantová podpora
Cooperatio Program, research area SPOB
Charles University
SVV260599
Charles University
NLK
Directory of Open Access Journals
od 2016
PubMed Central
od 2018
ProQuest Central
od 2021-01-01
Nursing & Allied Health Database (ProQuest)
od 2021-01-01
Health & Medicine (ProQuest)
od 2021-01-01
ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources
od 2016
PubMed
37218857
DOI
10.3390/jfmk8020061
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
Apart from squat jumps, countermovement jumps (CMJ), and drop jumps, differences among other jump variations are not as well researched, making data-driven exercise selection difficult. To address this gap, this study compared selected concentric and eccentric jump parameters of maximal effort CMJ, hurdle jumps over 50 cm hurdle (HJ), and box jumps onto a 50 cm box (BJ). Twenty recreationally trained men (25.2 ± 3.5 years) performed 3 repetitions of CMJs, HJs, and BJs, each on separate days. The data were collected using force platforms and a linear position transducer. The mean of 3 trials of each jump variation was analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA and Cohen's d. Countermovement depth was significantly greater (p ≤ 0.05) and peak horizontal force significantly lower during CMJ compared to HJ and BJ. However, there were no differences in peak velocity, peak vertical and resultant force, and total impulsion time. Finally, BJ significantly decreased peak impact force by ~51% compared to CMJ and HJ. Therefore, the propulsive parameters of HJ and BJ seem to be similar to CMJ, despite CMJ having a greater countermovement depth. Furthermore, overall training load can be decreased dramatically by using BJ, which reduced peak impact force by approximately half.
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc23009789
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20230721095447.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 230707s2023 sz f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.3390/jfmk8020061 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)37218857
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a sz
- 100 1_
- $a Janikov, M Tino $u Sport Sciences-Biomedical Department, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Charles University, 162 52 Prague, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000249121001
- 245 10
- $a Countermovement, Hurdle, and Box Jumps: Data-Driven Exercise Selection / $c MT. Janikov, J. Pádecký, V. Doguet, JJ. Tufano
- 520 9_
- $a Apart from squat jumps, countermovement jumps (CMJ), and drop jumps, differences among other jump variations are not as well researched, making data-driven exercise selection difficult. To address this gap, this study compared selected concentric and eccentric jump parameters of maximal effort CMJ, hurdle jumps over 50 cm hurdle (HJ), and box jumps onto a 50 cm box (BJ). Twenty recreationally trained men (25.2 ± 3.5 years) performed 3 repetitions of CMJs, HJs, and BJs, each on separate days. The data were collected using force platforms and a linear position transducer. The mean of 3 trials of each jump variation was analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA and Cohen's d. Countermovement depth was significantly greater (p ≤ 0.05) and peak horizontal force significantly lower during CMJ compared to HJ and BJ. However, there were no differences in peak velocity, peak vertical and resultant force, and total impulsion time. Finally, BJ significantly decreased peak impact force by ~51% compared to CMJ and HJ. Therefore, the propulsive parameters of HJ and BJ seem to be similar to CMJ, despite CMJ having a greater countermovement depth. Furthermore, overall training load can be decreased dramatically by using BJ, which reduced peak impact force by approximately half.
- 590 __
- $a NEINDEXOVÁNO
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Pádecký, Jan $u Sport Sciences-Biomedical Department, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Charles University, 162 52 Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Doguet, Valentin $u Atelier Maker®, 497 00 Doué-en-Anjou, France
- 700 1_
- $a Tufano, James J $u Sport Sciences-Biomedical Department, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Charles University, 162 52 Prague, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000183250344 $7 xx0230753
- 773 0_
- $w MED00209369 $t Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology $x 2411-5142 $g Roč. 8, č. 2 (2023)
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37218857 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20230707 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20230721095440 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1958503 $s 1196053
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC-PubMed-not-MEDLINE
- BMC __
- $a 2023 $b 8 $c 2 $e 20230511 $i 2411-5142 $m Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology $n J. funct. morphol. kinesiol. $x MED00209369
- GRA __
- $a Cooperatio Program, research area SPOB $p Charles University
- GRA __
- $a SVV260599 $p Charles University
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20230707