Purpose: Repeated-sprint training (RS) is commonly conducted in normoxia, but its completion with localized (blood-flow restriction [BFR]) or systemic hypoxia has been proven effective for performance enhancement. Yet, few studies have applied these types of RS sessions in racket sports. The authors aimed to determine the acute responses to these types of training in elite badminton players. Methods: Eight male elite badminton players participated in this randomized crossover study. They performed 3 on-court RS sessions, each consisting of 3 sets of 10 repetitions of 10-s badminton-specific movements in normoxia (RSN), systemic normobaric hypoxia (RSH, FiO2 = 14%), or with BFR (RS-BFR, 40% arterial occlusion pressure). Performance, perceptual (ie, rating of perceived exertion), and physiological (ie, pulse saturation, muscle oxygenation, blood lactate, creatine kinase, heart-rate variability) responses were measured after each set and up to 48 h postsession. Results: RS-BFR induced a greater performance impairment (lower distance and accelerations) and a higher local perceived exertion in the legs than RSN and RSH (P < .05), whereas greater overall fatigue was reported with RSH (P < .05). RSH induced a lower saturation (P < .001), but no differences were observed in muscle oxygenation between conditions. No differences in creatine kinase or heart-rate variability were observed at any time point (from baseline up to 48 h after the session). Conclusions: RS-BFR—and, to a lower extent, RSH—resulted in impaired performance and a higher perceived strain than RSN. However, these 2 hypoxic methods do not seem to induce a long-lasting (post 24–48 h) physiological stress in elite badminton players.
tDCS elicited a marked increase in vigor self-perception that was also maintained after exercise, but failed to improve swimming performance in elite triathletes.
Purpose: To analyze the differences in the force–velocity (F–v) profile assessed under unconstrained (ie, using free weights) and constrained (ie, on a Smith machine) vertical jumps, as well as to determine the between-day reliability. Methods: A total of 23 trained participants (18 [1] y) performed an incremental load squat jump test (with ∼35%, 45%, 60%, and 70% of the subjects’ body mass) on 2 different days using free weights and a Smith machine. Nine of these participants repeated the tests on 2 other days for an exploratory analysis of between-day reliability. F–v variables (ie, maximum theoretical force [F0], velocity [v0], and power, and the imbalance between the actual and the theoretically optimal F–v profile) were computed from jump height. Results: A poor agreement was observed between the F–v variables assessed under constrained and unconstrained conditions (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] < .50 for all). The height attained during each single jump performed under both constrained and unconstrained conditions showed an acceptable reliability (coefficient of variation < 10%, ICC > .70). The F–v variables computed under constrained conditions showed an overall good agreement (ICC = .75–.95 for all variables) and no significant differences between days (P > .05), but a high variability for v0, the imbalance between the actual and the theoretically optimal F–v profile, and maximal theoretical power (coefficient of variation = 17.0%–27.4%). No between-day differences were observed for any F–v variable assessed under unconstrained conditions (P > .05), but all of the variables presented a low between-day reliability (coefficient of variation > 10% and ICC < .70 for all). Conclusions: F–v variables differed meaningfully when obtained from constrained and unconstrained loaded jumps, and most importantly seemed to present a low between-day reliability.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.