Literature DB >> 28912659

Power-Time Curve Comparison between Weightlifting Derivatives.

Timothy J Suchomel1, Christopher J Sole2.   

Abstract

This study examined the power production differences between weightlifting derivatives through a comparison of power-time (P-t) curves. Thirteen resistance-trained males performed hang power clean (HPC), jump shrug (JS), and hang high pull (HHP) repetitions at relative loads of 30%, 45%, 65%, and 80% of their one repetition maximum (1RM) HPC. Relative peak power (PPRel), work (WRel), and P-t curves were compared. The JS produced greater PPRel than the HPC (p < 0.001, d = 2.53) and the HHP (p < 0.001, d = 2.14). In addition, the HHP PPRel was statistically greater than the HPC (p = 0.008, d = 0.80). Similarly, the JS produced greater WRel compared to the HPC (p < 0.001, d = 1.89) and HHP (p < 0.001, d = 1.42). Furthermore, HHP WRel was statistically greater than the HPC (p = 0.003, d = 0.73). The P-t profiles of each exercise were similar during the first 80-85% of the movement; however, during the final 15-20% of the movement the P-t profile of the JS was found to be greater than the HPC and HHP. The JS produced greater PPRel and WRel compared to the HPC and HHP with large effect size differences. The HHP produced greater PPRel and WRel than the HPC with moderate effect size differences. The JS and HHP produced markedly different P-t profiles in the final 15-20% of the movement compared to the HPC. Thus, these exercises may be superior methods of training to enhance PPRel. The greatest differences in PPRel between the JS and HHP and the HPC occurred at lighter loads, suggesting that loads of 30-45% 1RM HPC may provide the best training stimulus when using the JS and HHP. In contrast, loads ranging 65-80% 1RM HPC may provide an optimal stimulus for power production during the HPC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Hang power clean; hang high pull; jump shrug; mechanical work; time normalization

Year:  2017        PMID: 28912659      PMCID: PMC5592293     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Sports Sci Med        ISSN: 1303-2968            Impact factor:   2.988


  30 in total

1.  Comparison of Olympic vs. traditional power lifting training programs in football players.

Authors:  Jay R Hoffman; Joshua Cooper; Michael Wendell; Jie Kang
Journal:  J Strength Cond Res       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 3.775

2.  Influence of different relative intensities on power output during the hang power clean: identification of the optimal load.

Authors:  Naoki Kawamori; Aaron J Crum; Peter A Blumert; Justin R Kulik; James T Childers; Julie A Wood; Michael H Stone; G Gregory Haff
Journal:  J Strength Cond Res       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 3.775

3.  Optimal loading for maximal power output during lower-body resistance exercises.

Authors:  Prue Cormie; Grant O McCaulley; N Travis Triplett; Jeffrey M McBride
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 5.411

4.  Power-time, force-time, and velocity-time curve analysis of the countermovement jump: impact of training.

Authors:  Prue Cormie; Jeffrey M McBride; Grant O McCaulley
Journal:  J Strength Cond Res       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 3.775

5.  The biological limits to running speed are imposed from the ground up.

Authors:  Peter G Weyand; Rosalind F Sandell; Danille N L Prime; Matthew W Bundle
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  2010-01-21

6.  Jump Shrug Height and Landing Forces Across Various Loads.

Authors:  Timothy J Suchomel; Christopher B Taber; Glenn A Wright
Journal:  Int J Sports Physiol Perform       Date:  2015-05-01       Impact factor: 4.010

7.  Kinetic comparison of the power development between power clean variations.

Authors:  Timothy J Suchomel; Glenn A Wright; Thomas W Kernozek; Dennis E Kline
Journal:  J Strength Cond Res       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 3.775

8.  The impact of load on lower body performance variables during the hang power clean.

Authors:  Timothy J Suchomel; George K Beckham; Glenn A Wright
Journal:  Sports Biomech       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 2.832

9.  Mechanical Demands of the Hang Power Clean and Jump Shrug: A Joint-Level Perspective.

Authors:  Kristof Kipp; Philip J Malloy; Jordan C Smith; Matthew D Giordanelli; Michael T Kiely; Christopher F Geiser; Timothy J Suchomel
Journal:  J Strength Cond Res       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 3.775

10.  Maximal power at different percentages of one repetition maximum: influence of resistance and gender.

Authors:  Gwendolyn A Thomas; William J Kraemer; Barry A Spiering; Jeff S Volek; Jeffrey M Anderson; Carl M Maresh
Journal:  J Strength Cond Res       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 3.775

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  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

3.  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
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.