Home > Riviste > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness > Fascicoli precedenti > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2002 September;42(3) > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2002 September;42(3):274-81

ULTIMO FASCICOLO
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
Per abbonarsi
Sottometti un articolo
Segnala alla tua biblioteca
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Estratti
Permessi

 

Original articles  EXERCISE PHYSIOLOGY AND BIOMECHANICS 

The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2002 September;42(3):274-81

Copyright © 2009 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

lingua: Inglese

Leg strength and stiffness as ability factors in 100 m sprint running

Bret C. 1, 2, Rahmani A. 1, Dufour A. B. 3, Messonnier L. 1, 4, Lacour J. R. 1

1 Laboratoire de Physiologie de l’Exercice, GIP Exercice, Faculté de Médecine Lyon-Sud, Oullins Cedex, France 2 Centre de Recherche et d’Innovation sur le Sport (CRIS) and 3 Laboratoire de Biométrie et de Biologie Evolutive, Université Claude Bernard - Lyon I, Villeurbanne Cedex, France 4 Laboratoire de Modélisation des Activités Sportives, Campus Universitaire, Le Bourget du Lac Cedex, France


PDF


Background. The pur­pose of ­this ­study was to deter­mine the impor­tance of leg ­strength and stiff­ness rel­a­tive to i) 100 m ­sprint per­for­mance, ii) ­mean ­speed on the ­three phas­es of the 100 m ­race (30-60-100 m) and iii) the ­speed dif­fer­enc­es ­between ­these phas­es.
Methods. Nineteen region­al to nation­al lev­el ­male sprint­ers com­pet­ed in a 100 m ­race. Video anal­y­sis was ­used to deter­mine ­mean veloc­ity param­e­ters. Two sub­groups ­were creat­ed ­since ­some of the run­ners ­decreased ­their veloc­ity dur­ing the ­third ­phase (G1), where­as oth­ers main­tained or accel­er­at­ed it (G2). Leg ­strength (con­cen­tric ­half-­squats - coun­ter move­ment ­jump) and stiff­ness (hop­ping) ­were deter­mined. Simple (r) and mul­ti­ple regres­sions (R) ­were ­used.
Results. The ­mean per­for­mance ­over 100 m was 11.43 sec (10.72-12.87 sec). The con­cen­tric ­half-­squats ­were relat­ed to 100 m (r=0.74, p<0.001) and to the ­mean ­speed of ­each ­phase (R=0.75, p<0.01). The coun­ter move­ment ­jump was relat­ed to 100 m (r=0.57, p<0.05) and was the pre­dic­tor of the ­first ­phase (r=0.66, p<0.01). The hop­ping ­test was the pre­dic­tor of the two ­last phas­es (R=0.66, p<0.05). Athletes who had the great­est leg stiff­ness (G1) pro­duced the high­est accel­er­a­tion ­between the ­first and the sec­ond phas­es, and pre­sent­ed a decel­er­a­tion ­between the sec­ond and the ­third ­ones.
Conclusions. The con­cen­tric ­half-­squats ­test was the ­best pre­dic­tor in the 100 m ­sprint. Leg stiff­ness ­plays a ­major ­role in the sec­ond ­phase.

inizio pagina