Literature DB >> 23689341

Kinetic comparison of the power development between power clean variations.

Timothy J Suchomel1, Glenn A Wright, Thomas W Kernozek, Dennis E Kline.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the power production of the hang clean (HC), jump shrug (JS), and high pull (HP) when performed at different relative loads. Seventeen men with previous HC training experience, performed 3 repetitions each of the HC, JS, and HP at relative loads of 30, 45, 65, and 80% of their 1 repetition maximum (1RM) HC on a force platform over 3 different testing sessions. Peak power output (PPO), peak force (PF), and peak velocity (PV) of the lifter plus bar system during each repetition were compared. The JS produced a greater PPO, PF, and PV than both the HC (p < 0.001) and HP (p < 0.001). The HP also produced a greater PPO (p < 0.01) and PV (p < 0.001) than the HC. Peak power output, PF, and PV occurred at 45, 65, and 30% 1RM, respectively. Peak power output at 45% 1RM was greater than PPO at 65% (p = 0.043) and 80% 1RM (p = 0.004). Peak force at 30% was less than PF at 45% (p = 0.006), 65% (p < 0.001), and 80% 1RM (p = 0.003). Peak velocity at 30 and 45% was greater than PV at 65% (p < 0.001) and 80% 1RM (p < 0.001). Peak velocity at 65% 1RM was also greater than PV at 80% 1RM (p < 0.001). When designing resistance training programs, practitioners should consider implementing the JS and HP. To optimize PPO, loads of approximately 30 and 45% 1RM HC are recommended for the JS and HP, respectively.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 23689341     DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31829a36a3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Strength Cond Res        ISSN: 1064-8011            Impact factor:   3.775


  11 in total

1.  The Effects of Body Mass on Optimal Load for Power During Resistance Training.

Authors:  Li Li
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 2.  The Importance of Muscular Strength in Athletic Performance.

Authors:  Timothy J Suchomel; Sophia Nimphius; Michael H Stone
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 11.136

3.  The Optimal Load for Maximal Power Production During Lower-Body Resistance Exercises: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Marco A Soriano; Pedro Jiménez-Reyes; Matthew R Rhea; Pedro J Marín
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 4.  Weightlifting pulling derivatives: rationale for implementation and application.

Authors:  Timothy J Suchomel; Paul Comfort; Michael H Stone
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 11.136

5.  Influence of Different Loads on Force-Time Characteristics during Back Squats.

Authors:  Takafumi Kubo; Kuniaki Hirayama; Nobuhiro Nakamura; Mitsuru Higuchi
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2018-11-20       Impact factor: 2.988

6.  Examination of a lumbar spine biomechanical model for assessing axial compression, shear, and bending moment using selected Olympic lifts.

Authors:  Moataz Eltoukhy; Francesco Travascio; Shihab Asfour; Shady Elmasry; Hector Heredia-Vargas; Joseph Signorile
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2015-05-18

7.  Power-Time Curve Comparison between Weightlifting Derivatives.

Authors:  Timothy J Suchomel; Christopher J Sole
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2017-08-08       Impact factor: 2.988

Review 8.  The Importance of Muscular Strength: Training Considerations.

Authors:  Timothy J Suchomel; Sophia Nimphius; Christopher R Bellon; Michael H Stone
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 11.136

9.  Correlational Analysis between Joint-level Kinetics of Countermovement Jumps and Weightlifting Derivatives.

Authors:  Kristof Kipp; Timothy J Suchomel; Paul Comfort
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2019-11-19       Impact factor: 2.988

10.  Force-Time Differences between Ballistic and Non-Ballistic Half-Squats.

Authors:  Timothy J Suchomel; Christopher B Taber; Christopher J Sole; Michael H Stone
Journal:  Sports (Basel)       Date:  2018-08-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.