Cargando…
Force-Time Differences between Ballistic and Non-Ballistic Half-Squats
The purpose of this study was to examine the force-time differences between concentric-only half-squats (COHS) performed with ballistic (BAL) or non-ballistic (NBAL) intent across a range of loads. Eighteen resistance-trained men performed either BAL or NBAL COHS at 30%, 50%, 70%, and 90% of their o...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6162472/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30103536 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/sports6030079 |
_version_ | 1783359154369331200 |
---|---|
author | Suchomel, Timothy J. Taber, Christopher B. Sole, Christopher J. Stone, Michael H. |
author_facet | Suchomel, Timothy J. Taber, Christopher B. Sole, Christopher J. Stone, Michael H. |
author_sort | Suchomel, Timothy J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | The purpose of this study was to examine the force-time differences between concentric-only half-squats (COHS) performed with ballistic (BAL) or non-ballistic (NBAL) intent across a range of loads. Eighteen resistance-trained men performed either BAL or NBAL COHS at 30%, 50%, 70%, and 90% of their one repetition maximum (1RM) COHS. Relative peak force (PF) and relative impulse from 0–50 ms (Imp50), 0–90 ms (Imp90), 0–200 ms (Imp200), and 0–250 ms (Imp250) were compared using a series of 2 × 4 (intent × load) repeated measures ANOVAs with Bonferroni post hoc tests. Cohen’s d effect sizes were calculated to provide measures of practical significance between the BAL and NBAL COHS and each load. BAL COHS produced statistically greater PF than NBAL COHS at 30% (d = 3.37), 50% (d = 2.88), 70% (d = 2.29), and 90% 1RM (d = 1.19) (all p < 0.001). Statistically significant main effect differences were found between load-averaged BAL and NBAL COHS for Imp90 (p = 0.006, d = 0.25), Imp200 (p = 0.001, d = 0.36), and Imp250 (p < 0.001, d = 0.41), but not for Imp50 (p = 0.018, d = 0.21). Considering the greater PF and impulse observed during the BAL condition, performing COHS with BAL intent may provide a favorable training stimulus compared to COHS performed with NBAL intent. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6162472 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-61624722018-10-09 Force-Time Differences between Ballistic and Non-Ballistic Half-Squats Suchomel, Timothy J. Taber, Christopher B. Sole, Christopher J. Stone, Michael H. Sports (Basel) Article The purpose of this study was to examine the force-time differences between concentric-only half-squats (COHS) performed with ballistic (BAL) or non-ballistic (NBAL) intent across a range of loads. Eighteen resistance-trained men performed either BAL or NBAL COHS at 30%, 50%, 70%, and 90% of their one repetition maximum (1RM) COHS. Relative peak force (PF) and relative impulse from 0–50 ms (Imp50), 0–90 ms (Imp90), 0–200 ms (Imp200), and 0–250 ms (Imp250) were compared using a series of 2 × 4 (intent × load) repeated measures ANOVAs with Bonferroni post hoc tests. Cohen’s d effect sizes were calculated to provide measures of practical significance between the BAL and NBAL COHS and each load. BAL COHS produced statistically greater PF than NBAL COHS at 30% (d = 3.37), 50% (d = 2.88), 70% (d = 2.29), and 90% 1RM (d = 1.19) (all p < 0.001). Statistically significant main effect differences were found between load-averaged BAL and NBAL COHS for Imp90 (p = 0.006, d = 0.25), Imp200 (p = 0.001, d = 0.36), and Imp250 (p < 0.001, d = 0.41), but not for Imp50 (p = 0.018, d = 0.21). Considering the greater PF and impulse observed during the BAL condition, performing COHS with BAL intent may provide a favorable training stimulus compared to COHS performed with NBAL intent. MDPI 2018-08-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6162472/ /pubmed/30103536 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/sports6030079 Text en © 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Suchomel, Timothy J. Taber, Christopher B. Sole, Christopher J. Stone, Michael H. Force-Time Differences between Ballistic and Non-Ballistic Half-Squats |
title | Force-Time Differences between Ballistic and Non-Ballistic Half-Squats |
title_full | Force-Time Differences between Ballistic and Non-Ballistic Half-Squats |
title_fullStr | Force-Time Differences between Ballistic and Non-Ballistic Half-Squats |
title_full_unstemmed | Force-Time Differences between Ballistic and Non-Ballistic Half-Squats |
title_short | Force-Time Differences between Ballistic and Non-Ballistic Half-Squats |
title_sort | force-time differences between ballistic and non-ballistic half-squats |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6162472/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30103536 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/sports6030079 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT suchomeltimothyj forcetimedifferencesbetweenballisticandnonballistichalfsquats AT taberchristopherb forcetimedifferencesbetweenballisticandnonballistichalfsquats AT solechristopherj forcetimedifferencesbetweenballisticandnonballistichalfsquats AT stonemichaelh forcetimedifferencesbetweenballisticandnonballistichalfsquats |