This study aimed at investigating the effects of a commercially available energy drink on shooting precision, jump performance and endurance capacity in young basketball players. Sixteen young basketball players (first division of a junior national league; 14.9 ± 0.8 years; 73.4 ± 12.4 kg; 182.3 ± 6.5 cm) volunteered to participate in the research. They ingested either (a) an energy drink that contained 3 mg of caffeine per kg of body weight or (b) a placebo energy drink with the same appearance and taste. After 60 min for caffeine absorption, they performed free throw shooting and three-point shooting tests. After that, participants performed a maximal countermovement jump (CMJ), a repeated maximal jumps test for 15 s (RJ-15), and the Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test level 1 (Yo-Yo IR1). Urine samples were obtained before and 30 min after testing. In comparison to the placebo, the ingestion of the caffeinated energy drink did not affect precision during the free throws (Caffeine = 70.7 ± 11.8 % vs placebo = 70.3 ± 11.0 %; P = 0.45), the three-point shooting test (39.9 ± 11.8 vs 38.1 ± 12.8 %; P = 0.33) or the distance covered in the Yo-Yo IR1 (2,000 ± 706 vs 1,925 ± 702 m; P = 0.19). However, the energy drink significantly increased jump height during the CMJ (38.3 ± 4.4 vs 37.5 ± 4.4 cm; P < 0.05) mean jump height during the RJ-15 (30.2 ± 3.6 vs 28.8 ± 3.4 cm; P < 0.05) and the excretion of urinary caffeine (1.2 ± 0.7 vs 0.1 ± 0.1 μg/mL; P < 0.05). The intake of a caffeine-containing energy drink (3 mg/kg body weight) increased jump performance although it did not affect basketball shooting precision.

The use of caffeine containing energy drinks has dramatically increased in the last few years, especially in the sport context because of its reported ergogenic effect. The ingestion of low to moderate doses of caffeinated energy drinks has been associated with adverse side effects such as insomnia or increased nervousness. The aim of the present study was to assess psycho-physiological changes and the prevalence of side effects resulting from the ingestion of 3 mg caffeine/kg body mass in the form of an energy drink. In a double-blind and placebo controlled experimental design, ninety experienced and low-caffeine-consuming athletes (fifty-three male and thirty-seven female) in two different sessions were provided with an energy drink that contained 3 mg/kg of caffeine or the same decaffeinated energy drink (placebo; 0 mg/kg). At 60 min after the ingestion of the energy drink, participants completed a training session. The effects of ingestion of these beverages on psycho-physiological variables during exercise and the rate of adverse side effects were measured using questionnaires. The caffeinated energy drink increased self-perceived muscle power during exercise compared with the placebo beverage (6·41 (SD 1·7) v. 5·66 (SD 1·51); P¼ 0·001). Moreover, the energy drink produced a higher prevalence of side effects such as insomnia (31·2 v. 10·4 %; P,0·001), nervousness (13·2 v. 0 %; P¼0·002) and activeness (16·9 v. 3·9 %; P¼ 0·007) than the placebo energy drink. There were no sex differences in the incidence of side effects (P. 0·05). The ingestion of an energy drink with 3 mg/kg of caffeine increased the prevalence of side effects. The presence of these side effects was similar between male and female participants.

The impact of genetics on physiology and sports performance is one of the most debated research aspects in sports sciences. Nearly 200 genetic polymorphisms have been found to influence sports performance traits, and over 20 polymorphisms may condition the status of the elite athlete. However, with the current evidence, it is certainly too early a stage to determine how to use genotyping as a tool for predicting exercise/sports performance or improving current methods of training. Research on this topic presents methodological limitations such as the lack of measurement of valid exercise performance phenotypes that make the study results difficult to interpret. Additionally, many studies present an insufficient cohort of athletes, or their classification as elite is dubious, which may introduce expectancy effects. Finally, the assessment of a progressively higher number of polymorphisms in the studies and the introduction of new analysis tools, such as the total genotype score (TGS) and genome-wide association studies (GWAS), have produced a considerable advance in the power of the analyses and a change from the study of single variants to determine pathways and systems associated with performance. The purpose of the present study was to comprehensively review evidence on the impact of genetics on endurance- and power-based exercise performance to clearly determine the potential utility of genotyping for detecting sports talent, enhancing training, or preventing exercise-related injuries, and to present an overview of recent research that has attempted to correct the methodological issues found in previous investigations.

Different tempos of movement can be used during resistance training, but programming them is often a trial-and-error practice, as changing the speed at which the exercise is performed does not always correspond with the tempo at which the 1-repetition-maximum occurred. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the effect of different movement tempos during the bench press (BP) exercise on the one-repetition maximum (1RM) load. Ninety men (age = 25.8 ± 5.3 years, body mass = 80.2 ± 14.9 kg), with a minimum one year of resistance training experience took part in the study. Using a randomized crossover design, each participant completed the BP 1RM test with five different movement tempos: V/0/V/0, 2/0/V/0, 5/0/V/0, 8/0/V/0 and 10/0/V/0. Repeated measures ANOVA compared the differences between the 1RM at each tempo. The 1RM load was significantly greater during V/0/V/0 and 2/0/V/0 compared to 5/0/V/0, 8/0/V/0, and 10/0/V/0 (p < 0.01). Furthermore, the 1RM load was significantly greater during 5/0/V/0 compared to 8/0/V/0 and 10/0/V/0 (p < 0.01), but there were no differences between either V/0/V/0 and 2/0/V/0 (p = 0.92) or between 8/0/V/0 and 10/0/V/0 (p = 0.08). Therefore, different movement tempos used during training should be accompanied by their own tempo-specific 1RM testing, as slower eccentric phases significantly decrease maximal concentric performance. Furthermore, 1RM test procedures should include information about the movement tempo used during the test protocol. In addition, the standardization of the tempo should be taken into account in investigations that use the 1 RM test to assess the effects of any treatment on maximal muscle strength.

Purpose The main goal of this study was to assess the acute effects of 3 and 6 mg of caffeine intake per kg of body mass (b.m.) on maximal strength and strength-endurance in women habituated to caffeine. Methods Twenty-one healthy resistance-trained female students (23.0 ± 0.9 years, body mass: 59.0 ± 6.6 kg), with a daily caffeine intake of 5.8 ± 2.6 mg/kg/b.m. participated in a randomized, crossover, double-blind design. Each participant performed three experimental sessions after ingesting either a placebo (PLAC) or 3 mg/kg/b.m. (CAF-3) and 6 mg/kg/b.m. (CAF-6) of caffeine. In each experimental session, the participants underwent a 1RM test and a strength-endurance test at 50 %1RM in the bench press exercise. Maximal load was measured in the 1RM test and the time under tension, number of preformed repetitions, power output and bar velocity were registered in the strength-endurance test. Results The one-way ANOVA showed a main effect of caffeine on 1RM bench press performance (F = 14.74; p < 0.01). In comparison to the PLAC (40.48 ± 9.21 kg), CAF-3 (41.68 ± 8.98 kg; p = 0.01) and CAF-6 (42.98 ± 8.79 kg; p < 0.01) increased 1RM bench press test results. There was also a significant increase in 1RM for CAF-6 when compared to CAF-3 (p < 0.01). There was a main effect of caffeine on time under tension during the strength-endurance test (F = 13.09; p < 0.01). In comparison to the PLAC (53.52 ± 11.44 s), CAF-6 (61.76 ± 15.39 s; p < 0.01) significantly increased the time under tension during the maximal strength-endurance test. Conclusion An acute dose of 3-to-6 mg/kg/b.m. of caffeine improves maximum strength. However, these doses of caffeine had minimal ergogenic effect on strength-endurance performance in women habituated to caffeine.

Purpose: To investigate the effects of acute caffeine (CAFF) intake on physical performance in elite women handball players. Methods: A total of 15 elite women handball players participated in a randomized, double-blind study. In 2 different trials, participants ingested either a placebo (cellulose) or 3 mg of CAFF per kilogram of body mass (mg/kg bm) before undergoing a battery of neuromuscular tests consisting of handball throws, an isometric handgrip strength test, a countermovement jump, a 30-m sprint test (SV) and a modified version of the agility T test. Then, participants performed a simulated handball game (2 × 20 min), and movement patterns were recorded with a local positioning system. Results: Compared with the placebo, CAFF increased ball velocity in all ball throws (P = .021–.044; effect size [ES] = 0.39–0.49), strength in isometric handgrip strength test (350.8 [41.2] vs 361.6 [46.1] N, P = .034; ES = 0.35), and countermovement-jump height (28.5 [5.5] vs 29.8 [5.5] cm; P = .006; ES = 0.22). In addition, CAFF decreased running time in the SV (4.9 [0.2] vs 4.8 [0.3] s; P = .042; ES = −0.34). In the simulated game, CAFF increased the frequency of accelerations (18.1 [1.2] vs 18.8 [1.0] number/min; P = .044; ES = 0.54), decelerations (18.0 [1.2] vs 18.7 [1.0] number/min; P = .032; ES = 0.56), and body impacts (20 [8] vs 22 [10] impacts/min; P = .032; ES = 0.30). However, postexercise surveys about self-reported feelings of performance indicate that players did not feel increased performance with CAFF. Conclusion: Preexercise ingestion of 3 mg/kg bm of CAFF improved ball-throwing velocity, jump, and sprint performance and the frequency of in-game accelerations and decelerations in elite women handball players.

To date, there is a lack of information about the optimal conditions of the warm-up to lead to a better performance in elite tennis players. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of two different warm-up protocols (dynamic vs. self-myofascial release with foam rolling) on neuromuscular variables associated with physical determinants of tennis performance. Using a crossover randomised experimental design, eleven professional men tennis players (20.6 ± 3.5 years) performed either a dynamic warm-up (DWU) or a self-myofascial release with foam rolling (SMFR) protocol. DWU consisted of 8 min of dynamic exercises at increasing intensity and SMFR consisted of 8 min of rolling on each lower extremity unilaterally. Just before (baseline) and after completing warm-up protocols, players performed a countermovement jump (CMJ), the 5-0-5 agility test, a 10-m sprint test and the Straight Leg Raise and Thomas tests to assess range of motion. Compared to baseline, the DWU was more effective to reduce the time in the 5-0-5 test than SMFR (-2.23 vs. 0.44%, respectively, p = 0.042, η p 2 = 0.19). However, both warm-up protocols similarly affected CMJ (2.32 vs. 0.61%, p = 0.373, η p 2 = 0.04) and 10-m sprint time changes (-1.26 vs. 1.03%, p = 0.124, η p 2 = 0.11). Changes in range of motion tests were also similar with both protocols (p = 0.448–1.000, η p 2 = 0.00–0.02). Overall, both DWU and SMFR were effective to prepare well-trained tennis players for highly demanding neuromuscular actions. However, DWU offered a better preparation for performing change of direction and sprint actions, and hence, in high-performance tennis players, the warm-up should include dynamic exercises.

Change of direction performance in young tennis players: a comparative study between sexes and age-categories. J Strength Cond Res 36(5): 1426-1430, 2022-The aim of this study was to examine the differences in linear sprint, change of direction (COD) performance, and COD deficit in a large sample of under-13 (U13) and under-15 (U15) male and female tennis players. One hundred and twentyeight junior tennis players grouped into 2 age-groups (U13 years [32 boys and 28 girls] and U15 [36 boys and 32 girls]) participated in this study. Tests included anthropometric measurements, sprints (5-, 10-and 20-m), and a modified version of the 505 COD test. The differences in performance between age-categories and sex were assessed via an independent t-test. The differences in the physical tests between U13 and U15 players were tested using a univariate analysis, with age and anthropometric variables as covariates. Effect sizes (ESs) were calculated for pairwise comparisons. Results showed that boys presented lower 20-m sprint times than girls in the U13 (ES: 0.54; p , 0.05), and lower linear sprint (5-20-m) and COD times than girls in the U15 category (ES varying from 0.67 to 1.60; p , 0.05). Comparing age-groups, U15 girls demonstrated a higher COD deficit than the U13 (p , 0.05), whereas no differences were found in the other variables. In boys, no significant differences were observed in any variable when comparing both categories. These results could be of great interest for coaches and researchers involved in the development and training of elite tennis players, suggesting the need to include strategies able to improve sprint and COD performance throughout the players' specialization process.