Lockie, RG, Dawes, JJ, Orr, RM, Stierli, M, Dulla, JM, and Orjalo, AJ. Analysis of the effects of sex and age on upper- and lower-body power for law enforcement agency recruits before academy training. J Strength Cond Res 32(7): 1968-1974, 2018-Power is an important characteristic for law enforcement officers. Tasks such as carrying or dragging a civilian to safety, jumping or vaulting, and suspect restraint and pursuit require power to be effective. Certain recruits may be lacking in these qualities even if they have been accepted to a law enforcement agency (LEA). This study investigated upper- and lower-body power in male and female LEA recruits, and recruits of different ages, before academy training. Retrospective analysis of recruit data from one LEA was conducted. The measurements were: vertical jump (VJ) height; peak anaerobic power calculated by the Sayers equation; power-to-body mass ratio (P:BM); seated medicine ball throw (MBT) distance; and MBT distance relative to body mass. Independent-sample t-tests were used to compare the sexes, whereas a 1-way analysis of variance with Bonferroni post hoc compared the pooled data for recruits across different age groups (20-24; 25-29; 30-34; and 35+ years). The male recruits demonstrated superior performance across all power tests compared with the female recruits (p < 0.001). Regarding age, the 35+ year group performed less than optimally in the VJ and P:BM compared with the 20-24 and 24-29 years groups, and in the relative MBT compared with the 20-24 and 30-34 years groups (p = 0.003-0.037). Despite being accepted to a LEA, female recruits and recruits aged 35+ years of age may be lacking in upper- and lower-body power. Female and older recruits should participate in strength and power training before academy attendance to maintain or enhance these qualities.

The close-grip bench press (CGBP) is a variation of the traditional bench press (TBP) that uses a narrower grip (~95% of biacromial distance (BAD)) and has potential application for athletes performing explosive arm actions from positions where the hands are held close to the torso. Limited research has investigated CGBP mechanics compared to the TBP. Twenty-seven resistance-trained individuals completed a one-repetition maximum TBP and CGBP. The TBP was performed with the preferred grip; the CGBP with a grip width of 95% BAD. A linear position transducer measured lift distance and duration; peak and mean power, velocity, and force; distance and time when peak power occurred; and work. Pre-sticking region (PrSR), sticking region, and post-sticking region distance and duration for each lift was measured. A repeated measures ANOVA was used to derive differences between TBP and CGBP mechanics (p < 0.01); effect sizes (d) were also calculated. A greater load was lifted in the TBP, thus mean force was greater (d = 0.16–0.17). Peak power and velocity were higher in the CGBP, which had a longer PrSR distance (d = 0.49–1.32). The CGBP could emphasize power for athletes that initiate explosive upper-body actions with the hands positioned close to the torso.

Lockie, RG, Moreno, MR, Lazar, A, Orjalo, AJ, Giuliano, DV, Risso, FG, Davis, DL, Crelling, JB, Lockwood, JR, and Jalilvand, F. The physical and athletic performance characteristics of Division I collegiate female soccer players by position. J Strength Cond Res 32(2): 334-343, 2018-Playing positions in soccer can exhibit different movement demands during a match, contributing to variations in physical and performance characteristics. National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) soccer features different substitution rules when compared to FIFA-sanctioned matches, which could influence each players' characteristics. Therefore, this study determined the athletic performance characteristics of Division I female soccer players. Twenty-six players (3 goalkeepers; 8 defenders; 10 midfielders; 5 forwards) from the same squad completed assessments of: lower-body power (vertical and standing broad jump); linear (0-5, 0-10, 0-30 meter [m] sprint intervals) and change-of-direction (pro-agility shuttle; arrowhead change-of-direction speed test) speed; and soccer-specific fitness (Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test [YYIRT] levels 1 and 2). Players were split into position groups, and a Kruskal-Wallis H test with post hoc pairwise analyses (p ≤ 0.05) calculated significant between-group differences. There were no differences in age, height, or body mass between the positions. Midfielders had a faster 0-5 m time compared with the defenders (p = 0.017) and the goalkeepers (p = 0.030). The defenders (p = 0.011) and midfielders (p = 0.013) covered a greater YYIRT2 distance compared with the goalkeepers. There were no other significant between-position differences. Overall, Division I collegiate female players from the same squad demonstrated similar characteristics as measured by soccer-specific performance tests, which could allow for flexibility in position assignments. However, a relatively homogenous squad could also indicate commonality in training prescription, particularly regarding acceleration and high-intensity running. Strength and conditioning coaches may have to consider the specific movement demands of individual positions when training these capacities.

The study aim was to determine relationships between mechanical variables in the one-repetition maximum (1RM) traditional bench press (TBP) and close-grip bench press (CGBP). Twenty resistance-trained men completed a TBP and CGBP 1RM. The TBP was performed with the preferred grip; the CGBP with a grip width of 95% biacromial distance. A linear position transducer measured: lift distance and duration; work; and peak and mean power, velocity, and force. Paired samples t-tests (p < 0.05) compared the 1RM and mechanical variables for the TBP and CGBP; effect sizes (d) were also calculated. Pearson’s correlations (r; p < 0.05) computed relationships between the TBP and CGBP. 1RM, lift duration, and mean force were greater in the TBP (d = 0.30-3.20). Peak power and velocity was greater for the CGBP (d = 0.50-1.29). The 1RM TBP correlated with CGBP 1RM, power, and force (r = 0.685-0.982). TBP work correlated with CGBP 1RM, lift distance, power, force, and work (r = 0.542-0.931). TBP power correlated with CGBP 1RM, power, force, velocity, and work (r = 0.484-0.704). TBP peak and mean force related to CGBP 1RM, power, and force (r = 0.596-0.980). Due to relationships between the load, work, power, and force for the TBP and CGBP, the CGBP could provide similar strength adaptations to the TBP with long-term use. The velocity profile for the CGBP was different to that of the TBP. The CGBP could be used specifically to improve high-velocity, upper-body pushing movements.