A variety of resistance training interventions are used to improve field sport acceleration (e.g., free sprinting, weights, plyometrics, resisted sprinting). The effects these protocols have on acceleration performance and components of sprint technique have not been clearly defined in the literature. This study assessed 4 common protocols (free sprint training [FST], weight training [WT], plyometric training [PT], and resisted sprint training [RST]) for changes in acceleration kinematics, power, and strength in field sport athletes. Thirty-five men were divided into 4 groups (FST: n = 9; WT: n = 8; PT: n = 9; RST: n = 9) matched for 10-m velocity. Training involved two 60-minute sessions per week for 6 weeks. After the interventions, paired-sample t-tests identified significant (p ≤ 0.05) within-group changes. All the groups increased the 0- to 5-m and 0- to 10-m velocity by 9-10%. The WT and PT groups increased the 5- to 10-m velocity by approximately 10%. All the groups increased step length for all distance intervals. The FST group decreased 0- to 5-m flight time and step frequency in all intervals and increased 0- to 5-m and 0- to 10-m contact time. Power and strength adaptations were protocol specific. The FST group improved horizontal power as measured by a 5-bound test. The FST, PT, and RST groups all improved reactive strength index derived from a 40-cm drop jump, indicating enhanced muscle stretch-shortening capacity during rebound from impacts. The WT group increased absolute and relative strength measured by a 3-repetition maximum squat by approximately 15%. Step length was the major limiting sprint performance factor for the athletes in this study. Correctly administered, each training protocol can be effective in improving acceleration. To increase step length and improve acceleration, field sport athletes should develop specific horizontal and reactive power.

There is little research investigating relationships between the Functional Movement Screen (FMS) and athletic performance in female athletes. This study analyzed the relationships between FMS (deep squat; hurdle step [HS]; in-line lunge [ILL]; shoulder mobility; active straight-leg raise [ASLR]; trunk stability push-up; rotary stability) scores, and performance tests (bilateral and unilateral sit-and-reach [flexibility]; 20-m sprint [linear speed]; 505 with turns from each leg; modified T-test with movement to left and right [change-of-direction speed]; bilateral and unilateral vertical and standing broad jumps; lateral jumps [leg power]). Nine healthy female recreational team sport athletes (age = 22.67 ± 5.12 years; height = 1.66 ± 0.05 m; body mass = 64.22 ± 4.44 kilograms) were screened in the FMS and completed the afore-mentioned tests. Percentage between-leg differences in unilateral sit-and-reach, 505 turns and the jumps, and difference between the T-test conditions, were also calculated. Spearman's correlations (p ≤ 0.05) examined relationships between the FMS and performance tests. Stepwise multiple regressions (p ≤ 0.05) were conducted for the performance tests to determine FMS predictors. Unilateral sit-and-reach positive correlated with the left-leg ASLR (r = 0.704-0.725). However, higher-scoring HS, ILL, and ASLR related to poorer 505 and T-test performance (r = 0.722-0.829). A higher-scored left-leg ASLR related to a poorer unilateral vertical and standing broad jump, which were the only significant relationships for jump performance. Predictive data tended to confirm the correlations. The results suggest limitations in using the FMS to identify movement deficiencies that could negatively impact athletic performance in female team sport athletes.

The results reemphasized that planned and reactive agility are separate physical qualities. Reactive agility discriminated between the semiprofessional and amateur basketball players; planned agility did not. To distinguish between male basketball players of different ability levels, agility tests should include a perceptual and decision-making component.

This study investigated the effects of a traditional speed and agility training program (TSA) and an enforced stopping program emphasizing deceleration (ESSA). Twenty college-aged team sport athletes (16 males, 4 females) were allocated into the training groups. Pretesting and posttesting included: 0-10, 0-20, 0-40 m sprint intervals, change-of-direction, and acceleration test (CODAT), T-test (multidirectional speed); vertical, standing broad, lateral, and drop jumps, medicine ball throw (power); Star Excursion Balance Test (posteromedial, medial, anteromedial reaches; dynamic stability); and concentric (240° · s(-1)) and eccentric (30° · s(-1)) knee extensor and flexor isokinetic testing (unilateral strength). Both groups completed a 6-week speed and agility program. The ESSA subjects decelerated to a stop within a specified distance in each drill. A repeated measures analysis of variance determined significant (p ≤ 0.05) within- and between-group changes. Effect sizes (Cohen's d) were calculated. The TSA group improved all speed tests (d = 0.29-0.96), and most power tests (d = 0.57-1.10). The ESSA group improved the 40-m sprint, CODAT, T-test, and most power tests (d = 0.46-1.31) but did not significantly decrease 0-10 and 0-20 m times. The TSA group increased posteromedial and medial excursions (d = 0.97-1.89); the ESSA group increased medial excursions (d = 0.99-1.09). The ESSA group increased concentric knee extensor and flexor strength, but also increased between-leg knee flexor strength differences (d = 0.50-1.39). The loading associated with stopping can increase unilateral strength. Coaches should ensure deceleration drills allow for appropriate sprint distances before stopping, and athletes do not favor 1 leg for stopping after deceleration.

No abstract