Exercise‐Related Adaptations in Connective Tissue

Zernicke, Ronald F.; Loitz-Ramage, B.

doi:10.1002/9780470757215.ch6

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 95 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This belief is based on earlier studies in which it was suggested that elastic energy could be stored in the tendinous tissues during the downward phase and used during the upward phase to increase force production (12,44). More recently, several researchers have, however, argued that the storage and utilization of elastic energy does not explain the difference in jump height between the CMJ and SJ (1,2,5,7,50,77-79), even though elastic energy enhances force production in both SJ and CMJ performances (30,68,90). More specifically, during the initial upward phase of the SJ and CMJ, a concentric contraction of the muscle fibers stretches the tendinous tissues, which later in the upward phase will recoil in a catapult-like manner to enhance force production.…”

Section: Storage and Utilization Of Elastic Energymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Difference Between Countermovement and Squat Jump Performances: A Review of Underlying Mechanisms With Practical Applications

Hooren¹,

Zolotarjova

2017

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

179

127

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Van Hooren, B and Zolotarjova, J. The difference between countermovement and squat jump performances: a review of underlying mechanisms with practical applications. J Strength Cond Res 31(7): 2011-2020, 2017-Two movements that are widely used to monitor athletic performance are the countermovement jump (CMJ) and squat jump (SJ). Countermovement jump performance is almost always better than SJ performance, and the difference in performance is thought to reflect an effective utilization of the stretch-shortening cycle. However, the mechanisms responsible for the performance-enhancing effect of the stretch-shortening cycle are frequently undefined. Uncovering and understanding these mechanisms is essential to make an inference regarding the difference between the jumps. Therefore, we will review the potential mechanisms that explain the better performance in a CMJ as compared with a SJ. It is concluded that the difference in performance may primarily be related to the greater uptake of muscle slack and the buildup of stimulation during the countermovement in a CMJ. Elastic energy may also have a small contribution to an enhanced CMJ performance. Therefore, a larger difference between the jumps is not necessarily a better indicator of high-intensity sports performance. Although a larger difference may reflect the utilization of elastic energy in a small-amplitude CMJ as a result of a well-developed capability to co-activate muscles and quickly build up stimulation, a larger difference may also reflect a poor capability to reduce the degree of muscle slack and build up stimulation in the SJ. Because the capability to reduce the degree of muscle slack and quickly build up stimulation in the SJ may be especially important to high-intensity sports performance, training protocols might concentrate on attaining a smaller difference between the jumps.

show abstract

Section: Storage and Utilization Of Elastic Energymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Difference Between Countermovement and Squat Jump Performances: A Review of Underlying Mechanisms With Practical Applications

Hooren¹,

Zolotarjova

2017

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

179

127

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies have shown that when injured, under fatigue or under increased task demands the amount of strategic and execution variability is reduced [ 5 , 22 , 34 , 110 , 132 ]. This suggests stress is being applied repeatedly to the same tissues which may result in injury [ 17 , 20 , 30 – 32 ]. It is also unclear what happens if the task constraints change, and the available strategic and execution variability options are no longer viable.…”

Section: Discussion Of Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This hypothesis has since been expanded upon by other researchers (e.g. [ 17 , 29 ]), building on the well-established mechanism of overuse injuries [ 20 , 30 – 32 ]. The variability-overuse injury hypothesis also suggests movement variability may be a method to mitigate these injuries [ 32 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[ 17 , 29 ]), building on the well-established mechanism of overuse injuries [ 20 , 30 – 32 ]. The variability-overuse injury hypothesis also suggests movement variability may be a method to mitigate these injuries [ 32 ]. This is particularly relevant for sporting performance where high tissue forces and repetitive actions are commonplace.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Proposed Framework to Describe Movement Variability within Sporting Tasks: A Scoping Review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Movement variability is defined as the normal variations in motor performance across multiple repetitions of a task. However, the term “movement variability” can mean different things depending on context, and when used by itself does not capture the specifics of what has been investigated. Within sport, complex movements are performed repeatedly under a variety of different constraints (e.g. different situations, presence of defenders, time pressure). Movement variability has implications for sport performance and injury risk management. Given the importance of movement variability, it is important to understand the terms used to measure and describe it. This broad term of “movement variability” does not specify the different types of movement variability that are currently being assessed in the sporting literature. We conducted a scoping review (1) to assess the current terms and definitions used to describe movement variability within sporting tasks and (2) to utilise the results of the review for a proposed framework that distinguishes and defines the different types of movement variability within sporting tasks. To be considered eligible, sources must have assessed a sporting movement or skill and had at least one quantifiable measure of movement variability. A total of 43 peer-reviewed journal article sources were included in the scoping review. A total of 280 terms relating to movement variability terminology were extracted using a data-charting form jointly developed by two reviewers. One source out of 43 (2%) supplied definitions for all types of movement variability discussed. Moreover, 169 of 280 terms (60%) were undefined in the source material. Our proposed theoretical framework explains three types of movement variability: strategic, execution, and outcome. Strategic variability describes the different approaches or methods of movement used to complete a task. Execution variability describes the intentional and unintentional adjustments of the body between repetitions within the same strategy. Outcome variability describes the differences in the result or product of a movement. These types emerged from broader frameworks in motor control and were adapted to fit the movement variability needs in sports literature. By providing specific terms with explicit definitions, our proposed framework can ensure like-to-like comparisons of previous terms used in the literature. The practical goal of this framework is to aid athletes, coaches, and support staff to gain a better understanding of how the different types of movement variability within sporting tasks contribute to performance. The framework may allow training methods to be tailored to optimise the specific aspects of movement variability that contribute to success. This review was retrospectively registered using the Open Science Framework (OSF) Registries (https://osf.io/q73fd).

show abstract

“…10,26 A few participants specifically mentioned using strength training to achieve neural adaptations which typically improve rate of force development, important in explosive sports (that require high acceleration from the start). 27,28 Despite strength training having been shown to lead to other adaptations which contribute to increased muscle strength, such as changes to muscle-tendon stiffness and compliance, tendon properties 29 and muscle architectural changes, 30 the coaches did not specially refer to these adaptations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coaches’ philosophies on the transfer of strength training to elite sports performance

Burnie

Barratt

Davids

et al. 2017

International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of the study was to explore coaches' philosophies regarding strength training (repetitive muscle actions against high loads) and the transfer of strength training to sports performance. Thirteen world class coaches and athletes from track cycling, BMX, sprint kayaking, rowing and athletics sprinting were interviewed using an open-ended, semi-structured approach. Participants were asked about their coaching philosophies, design of athlete training programmes, strength training and its transfer to sports performance. A thematic analysis was conducted. Data trustworthiness was enhanced by methods of member checking and analyst triangulation. Coaches believed that task-specific strength is essential for sports performance.They reported that non-specific strength training ("traditional" gym-based strength exercises that are not specific to a sport movement) is important for increasing athletes' muscle size and strength. This is typically used in conjunction with resisted sport movement training (for example, increased resistance running, pedalling or rowing), believed to achieve an effective transfer of enhanced muscle strength to sports performance. Coaches described the transfer process as complex, with factors associated with fatigue and coordination having particular significance. The importance that coaches place on coordination is supported by a theoretical model that demonstrates increases in muscle strength from strength training may need to be accompanied with a change in inter-muscular coordination to improve sport performance. The idea that each athlete needs to adapt intermuscular coordination in response to a change in his/her unique set of "organism constraints" (e.g. muscle strength) is well described by the theory of ecological dynamics and Newell's model of constraints.3

show abstract

Exercise‐Related Adaptations in Connective Tissue

Cited by 5 publications

References 95 publications

The Difference Between Countermovement and Squat Jump Performances: A Review of Underlying Mechanisms With Practical Applications

The Difference Between Countermovement and Squat Jump Performances: A Review of Underlying Mechanisms With Practical Applications

A Proposed Framework to Describe Movement Variability within Sporting Tasks: A Scoping Review

Coaches’ philosophies on the transfer of strength training to elite sports performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About