BackgroundStrength and power development are abilities important for athletic performance in many sports. Generally, resistance training based on gravity is used to improve these qualities. Flywheel training instead utilizes kinetic energy transferred to a flywheel. This allows for eccentric overload and variable resistance throughout the movement.The aim of this review was to identify the effects of flywheel training on multiple strength-related variables affecting athletic performance. The meta-analysis investigates the effects on (1) muscle growth (cross-sectional area (CSA) and volume/mass), (2) maximum dynamic strength, (3) development of power, (4) development of horizontal movement, and (5) development of vertical movement.MethodsThe meta-analysis includes 20 experimental studies that met the inclusion criteria. The quality of included studies was ranked according to the PEDro scale. Possible bias was identified in Funnel plot analyses. To enable the compilation of all results analyses, the random effect model was carried out using the software Review Manager Version 5.3 and presented with Forest plots.ResultsFlywheel training for a period of 4–24 weeks shows statistically significant increases in all strength aspects. Effect sizes were for hypertrophy, CSA 0.59; volume/mass 0.59; maximum strength 1.33; power 1.19; horizontal 1.01 and vertical movement 0.85. The evidence is particularly strong for beneficial effects from flywheel training in the development of maximal strength and power in trained younger individuals, and utilization of this training modality in shorter more intensive blocks.ConclusionsFlywheel training is an effective method for improving several aspects of strength and power with importance for sports performance.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s40798-018-0169-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Background The effect of concurrent training on the development of maximal strength is unclear, especially in individuals with different training statuses. Objective The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis study was to compare the effect of concurrent resistance and endurance training with that of resistance training only on the development of maximal dynamic strength in untrained, moderately trained, and trained individuals. Methods On the basis of the predetermined criteria, 27 studies that compared effects between concurrent and resistance training only on lower-body 1-repetition maximum (1RM) strength were included. The effect size (ES), calculated as the standardised difference in mean, was extracted from each study, pooled, and analysed with a random-effects model. Results The 1RM for leg press and squat exercises was negatively affected by concurrent training in trained individuals (ES = – 0.35, p < 0.01), but not in moderately trained ( – 0.20, p = 0.08) or untrained individuals (ES = 0.03, p = 0.87) as compared to resistance training only. A subgroup analysis revealed that the negative effect observed in trained individuals occurred only when resistance and endurance training were conducted within the same training session (ES same session = – 0.66, p < 0.01 vs. ES different sessions = – 0.10, p = 0.55). Conclusion This study demonstrated the novel and quantifiable effects of training status on lower-body strength development and shows that the addition of endurance training to a resistance training programme may have a negative impact on lower-body strength development in trained, but not in moderately trained or untrained individuals. This impairment seems to be more pronounced when training is performed within the same session than in different sessions. Trained individuals should therefore consider separating endurance from resistance training during periods where the development of dynamic maximal strength is prioritised.
Background: The effects of flywheel resistance training (FRT) on youth are relatively unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of autoregulated FRT with traditional strength training (TST) on jumping, running performance and resistance training load progression in youth athletes. Thirty youth athletes (11.8 ± 0.9 yr) were matched for peak height velocity (PHV) status and block-randomised into two groups: FRT (n = 15, PHV −0.8 ± 1.6) and TST (n = 15, PHV −0.8 ± 1.5). Twelve resistance training sessions over a six-week intervention with flywheel or barbell squats were performed using autoregulated load prescription. Squat jump (SJ); countermovement jump (CMJ); and 10 m, 20 m and 30 m sprints were assessed pre- and post-intervention. The external load increased similarly for FRT and TST (z = 3.8, p = 0.06). SJ increased for both groups (p < 0.05) but running performance was unaffected (p > 0.05). Conclusions: FRT resulted in similar load progression and motor skill development in youth athletes as TST, but the perceived exertion was less. Autoregulation is a practical method for adjusting training load during FRT and should be considered as an alternative to autoregulated TST.
Physical characteristics of elite male bandy players have not been studied for the last 30 years. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the physical characteristics of elite male bandy players with respect to playing positions. A cross-sectional study was performed that included 25 male bandy players from one of the highest-ranked bandy leagues in the world. Body weight, length, isometric mid-thigh pull, countermovement jump, squat jump, unilateral long jump, bilateral long jump, 15- and 30-m sprint, 15-m flying sprint, and VO2max were tested. Players were divided into forwards, midfielders, and defenders. Forwards had significantly (p = 0.012) higher relative VO2max than defenders (59.8 ± 4.3 compared to 53.0 ± 5.6 mL/kg/min). No significant differences for any of the other measurements were observed between positions. This is the first study to present the physical characteristics between playing positions in off- and on-ice tests for male bandy players competing at the highest level. Today’s bandy players are heavier and have lower relative VO2max compared with players in the early 1990s. However, their work capacities have increased since their absolute VO2max is higher. These results provide benchmark values that can serve as a foundation for strength and conditioning professionals when designing future training programs.
Isometric leg press (ILP) and countermovement jump (CMJ) are commonly used to obtain strength- and power-related variables with important implications for health maintenance and sports performance. To enable the identification of true changes in performance with these measurements, the reliability must be known. This study evaluates the between-session reliability of strength- and power-related measures obtained from ILP and CMJ. Thirteen female elite ice hockey players (21.5 ± 5.1 years; 66.3 ± 8.0 kg) performed three maximal ILPs and CMJs on two different occasions. Variables from the ILP (peak force and peak rate of force development) and CMJ (peak power, peak force, peak velocity, and peak jump height) were obtained. The results were reported using the best trial, an average of the two best trials, or an average of three trials. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of variation (CV) were high (ICC > 0.97; CV < 5.2%) for all outcomes. The CV for the CMJ (1.5–3.2%) was lower than that for the ILP (3.4–5.2%). There were no differences between reporting the best trial, an average of the two best trials, or an average of the three trials for the outcomes. ILP and CMJ are highly reliable when examining strength- and power-related variables in elite female ice hockey players.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.