UPPER AND LOWER BODY ANAEROBIC POWER IN ELITE BIATHLETES

1985 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 247
Author(s):  
J. F. Patton ◽  
A. Duggan
Keyword(s):  
Anaerobic Power ◽  
Lower Body

scholarly journals Physical Qualities Pertaining to Shorter and Longer Change-of-Direction Speed Test Performance in Men and Women

Sports ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Lockie ◽  
Brett Post ◽  
J. Dawes
Keyword(s):  
Test Performance ◽  
Vertical Jump ◽  
Anaerobic Power ◽  
Regression Equations ◽  
Lower Body ◽  
Training Time ◽  
Linear Speed ◽  
Change Of Direction ◽  
Explained Variance ◽  
Lower Body Power

This study investigated relationships between shorter (505, change-of-direction (COD) deficit as a derived physical quality) and longer (Illinois agility test; IAT) COD tests with linear speed, lower-body power (multidirectional jumping), and strength in recreationally-trained individuals. Twenty-one males and 22 females (similar to collegiate club-sport and tactical athletes) were assessed in: 505 and COD deficit from each leg; IAT; 20 m sprint; vertical jump (VJ height, peak anaerobic power measured in watts (PAPw), power-to-body mass ratio); standing broad jump; lateral jump (LJ) from each leg; and absolute and relative isometric midthigh pull (IMTP) strength. Partial correlations calculated sex-determined relationships between the COD and performance tests, with regression equations calculated (p < 0.05). The 505 and IAT correlated with all tests except PAPw and absolute IMTP (r = ±0.43–0.71). COD deficit correlated with the LJ (r = −0.34–0.60). Left- and right-leg 505 was predicted by sex, 20 m sprint, and left-leg LJ (70–77% explained variance). Right-leg COD deficit was predicted by sex and left-leg LJ (27% explained variance). IAT was predicted by sex, 20 m sprint, right-leg LJ, and relative IMTP (84% explained variance). For individuals with limited training time, improving linear speed, and relative lower-body power and strength, could enhance shorter and longer COD performance.

scholarly journals Physical performance characteristics of university male tennis players in division I and II

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 256-261
Author(s):  
E. Özkatar Kaya ◽  
M. Karahan
Keyword(s):  
Physical Performance ◽  
Vertical Jump ◽  
Anaerobic Power ◽  
Performance Characteristics ◽  
Division I ◽  
Lower Body ◽  
Fatigue Index ◽  
Tennis Players ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Index Level

Purpose: The purposes of this study were to examine the physical performance characteristics of Division-I (D-I) and Division-II (D-II) university male tennis players and to evaluate whether these characteristics could be determinative on the divisional differentiation. Material: Twenty athletes who compete in D=I (n=10) and D-II (n=10) of Turkey university tennis league (n=10) and also ranked in top-ten in their division voluntarily participated in this study. Results: Measurement of agility, upper and lower body explosive powers, fatigue index, aerobic and anaerobic powers was conducted on two non-consecutive days. Significant differences were observed in physical performance characteristics powers between the groups (p<0.05). D-I players had significantly greater anaerobic power, agility, vertical jump height, upper and lower body explosive powers, and lower fatigue index level than D-II players. However, aerobic power did not differ between groups. Conclusions: It may be possible that these results allow us to suggest that physical performance characteristics should be regarded as one of the important discriminative factors in determining the competitive level of university male tennis players.

scholarly journals RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOWER BODY ANAEROBIC POWER AND COMPETITIVE SWIMMING RESULTS OF BULGARIAN SWIMMERS

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mihail Kachaunov ◽  
◽  
Lubomir Petrov ◽  
Lubomir Mladenov ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anaerobic Power ◽  
Lower Body ◽  
Competitive Swimming

scholarly journals Absolute and Relative Strength, Power and Physiological Characteristics of Indian Junior National-Level Judokas

Sports ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 14
Author(s):  
Dale M. Harris ◽  
Kristina Kendall ◽  
G. Gregory Haff ◽  
Christopher Latella
Keyword(s):  
Function Analysis ◽  
National Level ◽  
Anaerobic Power ◽  
Gold Medal ◽  
Relative Strength ◽  
Physiological Characteristics ◽  
Lower Body ◽  
Isometric Handgrip ◽  
Change Of Direction ◽  
Body Strength

The physical qualities that underpin successful junior judokas requires continuing investigation. We investigated the physical and physiological characteristics of junior national level judokas. We tested 25 (15 male, 10 female) Indian judokas for absolute and relative strength (back-squat and bench-press one-repetition maximum (1RM) as well as isometric handgrip), aerobic (RAMP test) and lower-body anaerobic power (Wingate 6-s sprint and countermovement jump), change-of-direction (5-0-5 test) and speed (30 m sprint). Athletes were grouped according to national-level competition placing (gold-medal winners (GM; n = 8), all medal winners (MW; n = 13), non-medallists (NM; n = 12), and NM plus silver and bronze; all others (AO; n = 17)). Stepwise discriminant function analysis determined characteristics likely to predict successful performance. Independent t-tests and effect size (Hedge’s g) analyses were performed between groups. GM demonstrated greater lower-body absolute (20.0%; g = 0.87, p = 0.046) and relative 1RM strength (21.0%; g = 0.87, p = 0.047), and greater lower-body absolute (25.4%; g=1.32, p=0.004) and relative (27.3%; g = 1.27, p = 0.005) anaerobic power compared to AO. Furthermore, anaerobic power can correctly predict 76.5% and 62.5% of AO and GM athletes, respectively. No differences were observed between MW and NM groups. The results suggest the importance of lower-body strength and power for junior national-level judokas and provides information for professionals working with these athletes.

EFFECTS OF PLYOMETRIC AND WEIGHTED PLYOMETRIC TRAINING ON LOWER BODY ANAEROBIC POWER OUTPUT

2001 ◽  
Vol 33 (5) ◽  
pp. S134
Author(s):  
M P. Durham ◽  
J A. Shimp-Bowerman ◽  
K J. Adams ◽  
J M. Berning ◽  
R L. Kipp ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Power Output ◽  
Anaerobic Power ◽  
Lower Body ◽  
Plyometric Training ◽  
Anaerobic Power Output

Comparing Aerobic and Anaerobic Power during Upper and Lower Body Exercise in Pediatric Subjects

2010 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
pp. 715-716
Author(s):  
James E. Potts ◽  
D. Kathryn Duff ◽  
Kristin M. Houghton ◽  
Astrid M. De Souza ◽  
Bonita J. Sawatzky ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anaerobic Power ◽  
Lower Body ◽  
Aerobic And Anaerobic

Oxygen uptake during upper body and lower body Wingate anaerobic tests

2014 ◽  
Vol 39 (12) ◽  
pp. 1345-1351 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Price ◽  
Christopher Beckford ◽  
Adam Dorricott ◽  
Cameron Hill ◽  
Megan Kershaw ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Oxygen Uptake ◽  
Power Output ◽  
Anaerobic Power ◽  
Peak Oxygen Uptake ◽  
Gas Analysis ◽  
Upper Body ◽  
Peak Power Output ◽  
Lower Body ◽  
Mean Power ◽  
Exercise Tests

The aim of this study was to determine the aerobic contribution to upper body and lower body Wingate Anaerobic tests (WAnT). Eight nonspecifically trained males volunteered to take part in this study. Participants undertook incremental exercise tests for peak oxygen uptake and two 30-s WAnT (habituation and experimental) for both the upper and lower body. The resistive loadings used were 0.040 and 0.075 kg·kg body mass−1, respectively. Peak power output (PPO) and mean power output (MPO) were calculated for each WAnT. The aerobic contribution of each WAnT was assessed using breath by breath expired gas analysis. Peak oxygen uptake was lower for the upper body when compared with the lower body (P = 0.001). Similarly, PPO and MPO were greater for the lower body (both P < 0.001). Absolute oxygen uptake during the upper body WAnT was lower than for the lower body (P = 0.013), whereas relative oxygen uptake (% peak oxygen uptake) was similar (P = 0.997). The mean aerobic contribution for the upper body WAnT (43.5% ± 29.3%) was greater than for the lower body (29.4% ± 15.8%; P < 0.001). The greater aerobic contribution to the WAnT observed for the upper body in comparison with the lower body is likely due to methodological differences in upper and lower body WAnT protocols and potentially differences in anaerobic power production and exercise efficiency. The results of this study suggest that differences may exist for the aerobic contribution of upper and lower body Wingate anaerobic tests.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document