Relationship of Power to Static and Dynamic Strength

Berger, Richard A.; Henderson, Joe Mack

doi:10.1080/10671188.1966.10614730

Cited by 12 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The impact of lower limb strength on jumping ability is well documented in the scientific literature [2,19,34,39,49,67,68]. For example, Berger and Henderson [67] reported that when relatively weak participants focused their training on the development of maximal strength, there were significantly greater increases in lower body power as compared to the changes in performance when power training was the targeted training attribute. Due to the importance of lower body strength and its relationship to jumping performance a number of studies have compared lower body isometric force-time characteristics (i.e.…”

Section: Jumpingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The drop jump (DJ), SJ and countermovement jump (CMJ) are often used to assess an athletes' lower limb power and jumping ability [65,66]. The impact of lower limb strength on jumping ability is well documented in the scientific literature [2,19,34,39,49,67,68]. For example, Berger and Henderson [67] reported that when relatively weak participants focused their training on the development of maximal strength, there were significantly greater increases in lower body power as compared to the changes in performance when power training was the targeted training attribute.…”

Section: Jumpingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Relationship between Isometric Force-Time Characteristics and Dynamic Performance: A Systematic Review

Lum

Haff

Barbosa

2020

Sports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this article was to review the data on the relationship between multi-joint isometric strength test (IsoTest) force-time characteristics (peak force, rate of force development and impulse) and dynamic performance that is available in the current literature. Four electronic databases were searched using search terms related to IsoTest. Studies were considered eligible if they were original research studies that investigated the relationships between multi-joint IsoTest and performance of dynamic movements; published in peer-reviewed journals; had participants who were athletes or active individuals who participate in recreational sports or resistance training, with no restriction on sex; and had full text available. A total of 47 studies were selected. These studies showed significant small to large correlations between isometric bench press (IBP) force-time variables and upper body dynamic performances (r2 = 0.221 to 0.608, p < 0.05) and significant small to very large correlation between isometric squat (ISqT) (r2 = 0.085 to 0.746, p < 0.05) and isometric mid-thigh pull (IMTP) (r2 = 0.120 to 0.941, p < 0.05) force-time variables with lower body dynamic performances. IsoTest force-time characteristics were shown to have small to very large correlations with dynamic performances of the upper and lower limbs as well as performance of sporting movements (r2 = 0.118 to 0.700, p < 0.05). These data suggest that IsoTest force-time characteristics provide insights into the force production capability of athletes which give insight into dynamic performance capabilities.

show abstract

Section: Jumpingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Jumpingmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Relationship between Isometric Force-Time Characteristics and Dynamic Performance: A Systematic Review

Lum

Haff

Barbosa

2020

Sports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Relationships between CMJ and strength have also been identified: isometric and dynamic force [ 5 , 7 , 8 ], or power, strength, and displacement velocity (30), or 1RM force, CMJ, and velocity [ 9 , 10 ]. Other studies indicate that 1RM has a high incidence in peak power [ 11 ], and the variation between power and maximum force is approximately 50% [ 12 ], and others [ 13 , 14 ] observed that when adding additional resistance to a movement, the relationship between maximum force, power, and velocity tended to increase with the additional resistance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship between Dynamic and Isometric Strength, Power, Speed, and Average Propulsive Speed of Recreational Athletes

Ortega

Romero

Sarmento

et al. 2022

JFMK

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to examine the type of relationship between measures of maximal force (dynamic and isometric), maximal power, and mean propulsive velocity. In total, 355 recreational athletes, 96 women (age 20.5 ± 2.5 years; height 158.2 ± 17.3 cm; weight 61.8 ± 48.4 kg) and 259 men (age 21.0 ± 2.6 years; height 170.5 ± 12.6 cm; weight 65.9 ± 9.2 kg) were evaluated in three sessions separated by 72 h each in isometric midthigh pull exercise (ISOS) (kg), bench press maximum strength (1RM MSBP) (kg), jump height (CMJ) (m), and maximum pedaling power (WT) the maximum squat strength (1RM MSS) (kg), the mean propulsive velocity in the bench press (MPVBP) (m·s−1), and the peak power (PPBP) (w), mean propulsive squat velocity (MPVS) (m·s−1), peak power (PP) (w), maximum handgrip force (ISOHG) (kg), and 30 m movement speed (V30) (s). Significant correlations (p ≤ 0.01) were identified between 95% of the various manifestations of force, and only 5% presented a significance of p ≤ 0.05; however, when the magnitude of these correlations is observed, there is great heterogeneity. In this sense, the dynamic strength tests present the best correlations with the other strength and power tests used in the present study, followed by PPBP and PP. The results of this study complement what is reported in the literature regarding the correlation between different types of force manifestations being heterogeneous and contradictory.

show abstract

“…Although muscular efforts are involved both in exertion of static strength and in dynamic work, one can not be predicted accurately from the other, and training of one may not much affect the other as discussed by Asmussen, Hansen, and Lammert, 1965;Ball, Rich, and Wallis, 1964;Bender and Kaplan, 1966;Berger, 1962Berger, , 1963Berger and Henderson, 1966;Chui, 1964;Clarke, 1962Clarke, , 1968Colgate, 1966;Dern, Leverne, and Blair, 1947;Gentry and Randall, 1966;Harrison, 1963;Hunsicker, 1955;Ikai and Steinhaus, 1961;Kogi, Mueller, and Rohmert, 1965;Kroemer, 1967bKroemer, , 1969Martens and Sharkey, 1966;Mueller, 19962, 1964;Pearson, McGinley and Butzel, 1963;Petersen, 1962;Rasch and Pierson, 1963;Singh and Karpovich, 1966;Smith, 1964, andTornvall, 1963. Data on static force capabilities should not be used for equipment evaluation if dynamic work is to be periormed by the operator.…”

Section: !1mentioning

confidence: 99%

Push Forces Exerted in Sixty-Five Common Working Positions

Kroemer¹

1969

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Relationship of Power to Static and Dynamic Strength

Cited by 12 publications

References 8 publications

The Relationship between Isometric Force-Time Characteristics and Dynamic Performance: A Systematic Review

The Relationship between Isometric Force-Time Characteristics and Dynamic Performance: A Systematic Review

Relationship between Dynamic and Isometric Strength, Power, Speed, and Average Propulsive Speed of Recreational Athletes

Push Forces Exerted in Sixty-Five Common Working Positions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About