COMPARISON OF FOUR DIFFERENT METHODS TO MEASURE POWER OUTPUT DURING THE HANG POWER CLEAN AND THE WEIGHTED JUMP SQUAT
COMPARISON OF FOUR DIFFERENT METHODS TO MEASURE POWER OUTPUT DURING THE HANG POWER CLEAN AND THE WEIGHTED JUMP SQUAT
复制标题
四种不同方法测量悬吊高翻和负重跳深蹲期间功率输出的比较
DOI：
10.1519/r-22896.1
复制
发表时间：
2007
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
K. Nosaka
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
N. Hori;R. Newton;W. Andrews;N. Kawamori;M. McGuigan;K. Nosaka
在力量训练和体能训练项目中，测量阻力训练中的力量输出变得越来越普遍，但所使用的方法有很大的差异。本研究的主要目的是比较从4种不同方法获得的功率输出值，并检查这些值之间的关系。男性半职业澳大利亚规则足球运动员（n = 30）进行悬挂功率清洁和加权跳蹲，而地面反作用力（GRF）的时间数据和杠铃位移时间数据同时采样使用力平台和线性位置传感器连接到杠铃。峰值和平均功率施加到杠铃获得杠铃位移时间数据（方法1）。应用于系统（杠铃+举重器）的峰值和平均功率通过3种其他方法获得：（a）使用GRF-时间数据（方法2），（B）使用杠铃位移-时间数据（方法3），以及（c）使用杠铃位移-时间数据和GRF-时间数据（方法4）。从方法1、2、3和4获得的峰值功率值（W）为（平均值±标准差）1，644 ± 295、3，079 ± 638、3，821 ± 917和4，017 ± 833（悬挂力清洁），1，184 ± 115、3，866 ± 451、3，567 ± 494和4，427 ± 557，负重跳蹲。从方法1与方法2、3和4以及方法2与方法3和4获得的功率输出值之间存在显著差异。杠铃输出功率与系统输出功率呈显著正相关（r = 0.65-0.81）。作为一个实际应用，重要的是要了解每种方法的特点，并考虑如何在悬挂功率清洁和加权跳蹲期间测量功率输出。
Measurement of power output during resistance training is becoming ubiquitous in strength and conditioning programs, but there is great variation in the methods used. The main purposes of this study were to compare the power output values obtained from 4 different methods and to examine the relationships between these values. Male semiprofessional Australian rules football players (n = 30) performed hang power clean and weighted jump squat while ground reaction force (GRF)-time data and barbell displacement-time data were sampled simultaneously using a force platform and a linear position transducer attached to the barbell. Peak and mean power applied to the barbell was obtained from barbell displacement-time data (method 1). Peak and mean power applied to the system (barbell + lifter) was obtained from 3 other methods: (a) using GRF-time data (method 2), (b) using barbell displacement-time data (method 3), and (c) using both barbell displacement-time data and GRF-time data (method 4). The peak power values (W) obtained from methods 1, 2, 3, and 4 were (mean ± SD) 1,644 ± 295, 3,079 ± 638, 3,821 ± 917, and 4,017 ± 833 in hang power clean and 1,184 ± 115, 3,866 ± 451, 3,567 ± 494, and 4,427 ± 557 in weighted jump squat. There were significant differences between power output values obtained from method 1 vs. methods 2, 3, and 4, as well as method 2 vs. methods 3 and 4. The power output applied to the barbell and that applied to the system was significantly correlated (r = 0.65–0.81). As a practical application, it is important to understand the characteristics of each method and consider how power output should be measured during the hang power clean and the weighted jump squat.