The results demonstrate that three common methods exist for determination of the VJ phases from force platform data. Consequently, each produce different values for force-time variables when used on a neutral data pool. There is a clear need for a robust agreed method for VJ analysis.

Abstract:The aim of the present study was to examine and measure high intensity, intermittent upper body performance, in addition to identifying areas of the body that affect the variance in total work done during the 5 × 6 s sprint test. Fifteen males completed an upper body 5 × 6 s sprint test on a modified electro-magnetically braked cycle ergometer, which consisted of five maximal effort sprints, each 6 s in duration, separated by 24 s of passive recovery. A fly wheel braking force corresponding to 5% of the participants' body weight was used as the implemented resistance level. Body composition was measured using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA). Percent (%) decrement was calculated as 100 − (Total work/ideal work) × 100. Significant (P < 0.05) differences were found between sprints for both absolute and relative (W, W·kg −1 , W·kg −1 Lean body mass (LBM) and W·kg −1 Upper body lean body mass (UBLBM)) peak (PP) and mean (MP) power. The % decrement in total work done over the five sprints was 11.4%. Stepwise multiple linear regression analysis revealed that UBLBM accounts for 87% of the variance in total work done during the upper body 5 × 6 s sprint test. These results provide a descriptive analysis of upper body, high intensity intermittent exercise, demonstrating that PP and MP output decreased significantly during the upper body 5 × 6 s sprint test. OPEN ACCESSSports 2015, 3 137

The 30 second Wingate Anaerobic Test (WAnT) is the gold standard measure of anaerobic performance. The present investigation aimed to determine if a previous WAnT using one body region significantly affected a subsequent WAnT using a different body region. Twelve male university students (n = 12, 23 ± 2 years, 84 ± 16.1 kg, 178.5 ± 7.4 cm) (193.3 ± 11.4 1st vs 179.8 ± 14.4 2nd

Pages 1313-5, Table 1, column 1: The cell entries in the 'Reference' column, which previously read: Cormack et al. [28] Chiu et al. [29] Chiu and Salem [30] Crewther et al. [31] Floría and Harrison [32] Johnson and Bahamonde [33] McLellan et al. [18] Moir et al. [20] Moir [34] Moir et al. [19] Riggs and Sheppard [35] Street et al. [25] Vanrenterghem et al. [36] Cappa and Behm [37] Dowling and Vamos [38] Hatze [39] Leontijevic et al. [40] McElveen et al. [41] Meylan et al. [42] Meyland et al. [43] should read: Cormack et al. [69] Chiu et al. [36] Chiu and Salem [37] Crewther et al. [38] Floría and Harrison [39] Johnson and Bahamonde [40] McLellan et al. [20] Moir et al. [22] Moir [41] Moir et al. [21] Riggs and Sheppard [42] Street et al. [32] Vanrenterghem et al. [43] Cappa and Behm [44] Dowling and Vamos [45] Hatze [46] Leontijevic et al. [47] McElveen et al. [48] Meylan et al. [49] Meylan et al.

No abstract