No abstract

Turner, A, Bishop, C, Chavda, S, Edwards, M, Brazier, J, Kilduff, LP. Physical characteristics underpinning lunging and change of direction speed in fencing. J Strength Cond Res 30(8): 2235-2241, 2016-Lunge velocity (LV) and change of direction speed (CODS) are considered fundamental to success during fencing competitions; investigating the physical characteristics that underpin these is the aim of this study. Seventy fencers from the British Fencing National Academy took part and on average (±SD) were 16.83 ± 1.72 years of age, 178.13 ± 8.91 cm tall, 68.20 ± 9.64 kg in mass, and had 6.25 ± 2.23 years fencing experience. The relationship between anthropometric characteristics (height, arm span, and adductor flexibility) and measures of lower-body power (bilateral and unilateral countermovement jump height and reactive strength index) were examined in their ability to influence LV and CODS. In testing the former, fencers lunged (over a self-selected distance) to and from a force plate, where front leg impact and rear leg propulsive force were quantified; the lunging distance was divided by time to establish LV. Change of direction speed was measured over 12 m involving shuttles of between 2 and 4 m. Results revealed that LV and CODS averaged at 3.35 m·s and 5.45 seconds, respectively, and in both cases, standing broad jump was the strongest predictor (r = 0.51 and -0.65, respectively) of performance. Rear leg drive and front leg impact force averaged at 14.61 N·kg and 3 times body weight, respectively, with single leg jumps revealing an asymmetry favoring the front leg of 9 ± 8%. In conclusion, fencers should train lower-body power emphasizing horizontal displacement, noting that this seems to offset any advantage one would expect fencers of a taller stature to have. Also, the commonly reported asymmetry between legs is apparent from adolescence and thus also requires some attention.

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of an 8-week barbell hip thrust strength training program on sprint performance. Twenty-one collegiate athletes (15 males and 6 females) were randomly assigned to either an intervention (n = 11, age 27.36 ± 3.17 years, height 169.55 ± 10.38 cm, weight 72.7± 18 kg) or control group (n = 10, age 27.2 ± 3.36 years, height 176.2 ± 7.94 cm, weight 76.39 ± 11.47 kg). 1RM hip thrust, 40m sprint time, and individual 10m split timings: 0-10, 10-20, 20-30, 30-40m, were the measured variables; these recorded at both the baseline and post testing time points. Following the 8-week hip thrust strength training intervention significantly greater 1RM hip thrust scores for the training group were observed (p < 0.001, d = 0.77 [mean difference 44.09 kg]), however this failed to translate into changes in sprint time for any of the measured distances (all sprint performance measures: p > 0.05, r = 0.05 - 0.37). No significant differences were seen for the control group for 1RM hip thrust (p = 0.106, d = 0.24 [mean difference 9.4 kg]) or sprint time (all sprint performance measures: p > 0.05, r = 0.13 - 0.47). These findings suggest that increasing maximum hip thrust strength through use of the barbell hip thrust does not appear to transfer into improvements in sprint performance in collegiate level athletes.

Student coaches undertake internships to develop practical skills and gain experience to improve employability prospects. The characteristics of the coaches who undertake these internships, their experiences and the nature of the work being performed are currently unknown. The purpose of this study was to report the characteristics of strength and conditioning (S&C) coaches who have undertaken internships and their experiences during their respective placements. A total of 113 men and 6 women completed an online survey. Placements generally lasted 6-12 months (66%), were unpaid (93%) and took place at professional teams (63%). All respondents had a standard of experience prior to commencement (82%); a higher-education degree (bachelor's degree 56%; master's degree 18%) and others were qualified S&C coaches (16%). Activities consisted largely of coaching (47%), data collection (22%) and equipment set-up (25%) but lacked provision of appropriate training. Mentors were allocated to interns; however, often developmental objectives were not discussed, meetings were rarely documented, and in some cases, no meetings took place. This study suggests that internships offer worthwhile experiences and assistance in skill development to progress in S&C. However, clearer guidelines are required to define the responsibilities of employers and interns, to maximise these experiential learning opportunities and avoid the exploitation of willing students.

There are 3 types of weapons used in Olympic fencing: the épée, foil, and sabre. The aim of this study was to determine if fencers exhibited different physical characteristics across weapons. Seventy-nine male (n = 46) and female (n = 33) national standard fencers took part in this study. Fencers from each weapon (male and female), i.e., épée (n = 19 and 10), foil (n = 22 and 14), and sabre (n = 13 and 10), were (mean ± SD) 15.9 ± 0.7 years of age, 178.5 ± 7.9 cm tall, 67.4 ± 12.2 kg in mass and had 6.3 ± 2.3 years fencing experience; all were in regular training (∼4 times per week). Results revealed that across all performance tests (lower-body power, reactive strength index, change of direction speed, and repeat lunge ability), there was no significant main effect for weapon in male fencers (p = 0.63) or female fencers (p = 0.232), but a significant main affect for gender (p < 0.001). Pairwise comparisons revealed that male fencers scored better during the countermovement jump, change of direction speed, and repeat lunge ability test (p < 0.001). The former findings may be because of similarities in bout intensity and time, movement types (lunging and changing direction), and the need to execute competition actions as explosively as possible. Based on the findings of the present study, it could be indicated that épée, foil, and sabre fencers do not require a weapon-specific approach to strength and conditioning training. Each fencer should target the area they are weakest at, rather than an area that they feel best represents the unique demands of their weapon.