Characterization of the Differences in Strength and Power Between Different Levels of Competition in Rugby Union Athletes

Argus, Christos K.; Gill, Nicholas; Keogh, Justin W L

doi:10.1519/jsc.0b013e318241382a

Cited by 93 publications

(114 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

101

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Whilst the latter mentioned studies used field-based methods, the current study provides comparative data derived from laboratory based measures, including an accurate assessment of peak power and is the first to report these measures in rugby union academy players. The changes in jump height and peak power can be explained due to the adaptation of growth and maturation processes, and the stimulus provided by strength and power training programs which have reported increased power output with increased levels of maximal strength (2,4,6). Such types of programmes are commonplace in regional rugby union academies, with the relationship between maximal strength and jump height well reported (30, 37).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, some studies only use gym-based strength assessments (4)(5)(6); whereas tests such as the isometric mid-thigh pull (IMTP) using a portable force plate allows measures of maximal strength (peak force). Peak force measures, derived from the IMTP may further develop the understanding of the physical profiles of rugby union players by age category, as maximal strength has been demonstrated as a discriminating factor between playing levels (2,4,6) and between age categories (40, 41). Further, the IMTP has found significant correlations with dynamic performance in a number of sports, including Olympic weightlifting (27), sprint cycling (38) and more recently in rugby league players (44), with the latter suggesting that it may be a useful monitoring tool for both strength and power.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Anthropometric and Physical Profiles of English Academy Rugby Union Players

Darrall-Jones

Jones

Till

2015

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

106

175

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the anthropometric and physical characteristics of English regional academy rugby union academy players by age category (under 16, under 18 and under 21s) Intermittent Fitness Test; absolute and relative 3 repetition maximum (3RM) front squat, split squat, bench press, prone row and chin; and isometric mid-thigh pull). One way analysis of variance demonstrated significant increases across the three age categories (p < 0.05) for height (e.g., 16s = 178.8 ± 7.1; 18s = 183.5 ± 7.2; 21s = 186.7 ± 6.61 cm), body mass (e.g., 16s = 79.4 ± 12.8; 18s = 88.3 ± 11.9; 21s = 98.3 ± 10.4kg), countermovement jump height and peak power, sprint momentum, velocity and acceleration; absolute, relative and isometric (e.g., 16s = 2157.9 ± 309.9; 18s = 2561.3 ± 339.4; 21s = 3104.5 ± 354.0 N) strength.Momentum, maximal speed and the ability to maintain acceleration were all discriminating factors between age categories, suggesting that these variables may be more important to monitor rather than sprint times. These findings highlight that anthropometric and physical characteristics develop across age categories and provide comparative data for English academy Rugby Union players.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anthropometric and Physical Profiles of English Academy Rugby Union Players

Darrall-Jones

Jones

Till

2015

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

106

175

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Baker and Newton [56] found correlations between changes in the deep squat 1 RM and changes in the power output in jump squats (40-100 kg) of r = 0.83-0.96 over a 4-year period. Given that the highest power values are found in athletes with a high maximal strength level, it is obvious that the development of maximal strength must be considered a decisive factor in the long-term training process [28,50,55,56,73,74,77,79,80,82,87,101,[117][118][119].…”

Section: Effects Of Different Periodization Models On Strength and Spmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The higher the strength level of an athlete is, the less a further increase in the maximal strength will contribute to Short-term Periodization for Speed-strength Events an improvement in power output and speed-strength performances [55,57,74,94,101,109,[120][121][122][123]. The intervention periods that are cited in Sects.…”

Section: Effects Of Different Periodization Models On Strength and Spmentioning

confidence: 99%

Short-term Periodization Models: Effects on Strength and Speed-strength Performance

Hartmann

Wirth

Keiner³

et al. 2015

Sports Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dividing training objectives into consecutive phases to gain morphological adaptations (hypertrophy phase) and neural adaptations (strength and power phases) is called strength-power periodization (SPP). These phases differ in program variables (volume, intensity, and exercise choice or type) and use stepwise intensity progression and concomitant decreasing volume, converging to peak intensity (peaking phase). Undulating periodization strategies rotate these program variables in a bi-weekly, weekly, or daily fashion. The following review addresses the effects of different short-term periodization models on strength and speed-strength both with subjects of different performance levels and with competitive athletes from different sports who use a particular periodization model during off-season, pre-season, and in-season conditioning. In most periodization studies, it is obvious that the strength endurance sessions are characterized by repetition zones (12-15 repetitions) that induce muscle hypertrophy in persons with a low performance level. Strictly speaking, when examining subjects with a low training level, many periodization studies include mainly hypertrophy sessions interspersed with heavy strength/power sessions. Studies have demonstrated equal or statistically significant higher gains in maximal strength for daily undulating periodization compared with SPP in subjects with a low to moderate performance level. The relatively short intervention period and the lack of concomitant sports conditioning call into question the practical value of these findings for competitive athletes. Possibly owing to differences in mesocycle length, conditioning programs, and program variables, competitive athletes either maintained or improved strength and/or speed-strength performance by integrating daily undulating periodization and SPP during off-season, pre-season and in-season conditioning. In high-performance sports, high-repetition strength training (>15) should be avoided because it does not provide an adequate training stimulus for gains in muscle cross-sectional area and strength performance. High-volume circuit strength training performed over 2 years negatively affected the development of the power output and maximal strength of the upper extremities in professional rugby players. Indeed, meta-analyses and results with weightlifters, American Football players, and throwers confirm the necessity of the habitual use of ≥80% 1 RM: (1) to improve maximal strength during the off-season and in-season in American Football, (2) to reach peak performance in maximal strength and vertical jump power during tapering in track-and-field, and (3) to produce hypertrophy and strength improvements in advanced athletes. The integration and extent of hypertrophy strength training in in-season conditioning depend on the duration of the contest period, the frequency of the contests, and the proportion of the conditioning program. Based on the literature, 72 h between hypertrophy strength training and strength-power training should be pr...

show abstract

“…3 Given the importance of physical qualities for match performance 1,2 , limited studies exist that consider the height, body mass, and physical characteristics of netball players. The results of several studies have demonstrated that differences in performance characteristics exist between playing levels within rugby league 4,5 , rugby union 6,7 , and lacrosse 8 . Surprisingly, no study has examined the height, body mass, and physical characteristics of academy netball players.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physical Profiles of Regional Academy Netball Players

Thomas¹,

Ismail²,

Comfort³

et al. 2016

Journal of Trainology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives:The purpose of this study was to evaluate the height, body mass and physical characteristics of English regional academy netball players by age category (under 15s, under 17s and under 19s).Design and Methods: Data were collected on 50 regional academy players during the preseason period and comprised of height, body mass, and physical (single and triple hop, 5-and 10-m sprint, 505 change of direction speed, vertical jump, and cardiorespiratory fitness) characteristics. Conclusions: These findings highlight that height, body mass, and physical characteristics develop across age categories and provide normative data for English regional academy netball players. Results:(Journal of Trainology 2016;5:30-37)

show abstract

Characterization of the Differences in Strength and Power Between Different Levels of Competition in Rugby Union Athletes

Cited by 93 publications

References 30 publications

Anthropometric and Physical Profiles of English Academy Rugby Union Players

Anthropometric and Physical Profiles of English Academy Rugby Union Players

Short-term Periodization Models: Effects on Strength and Speed-strength Performance

Physical Profiles of Regional Academy Netball Players

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About