Without research in sport science, we as athletes and coaches might fall prey to training advice such as: “super slow lifting is the way to go for strength and size”, or, “everything you learned in your exercise physiology textbook is completely correct”. Even for those people who fall asleep by coming within 10 feet of a research journal, it is important to be aware of some of the current new studies being done in our field, even if it has to be broken down into the format of a Sunday paper cartoon for you (which I think may be a useful idea…). As part of a new monthly project of mine, I would like to take advantage of a wonderful resource I am currently subscribed to, “Strength and Conditioning Research”, which is compiled by Chris Beardsley and Bret Contreras.
You can find their service at www.strengthandconditioningresearch.com.
I get around 50 studies that are reviewed and nearly summarized in this service, and I have decided to take the three studies I find most applicable to speed/power athletes each month and write a couple of paragraphs about each to spotlight some cutting edge research that is changing the face of running faster, jumping higher and becoming stronger! With that said, onto this month’s top picks.
- Effect of different pushing speeds on bench press
- Sprint Exercise Performance, does metabolic performance matter?
- Relationships between ground reaction impulse and sprint acceleration performance in team-sport athletes
Study #1.
Effect of different pushing speeds on bench press.
Padulo J, Mignogna P, Mignardi S, Tonni F, D’Ottavio S. International Journal of Sports Medicine. 2012 May;33(5):376-80. Epub 2012 Feb 8.
Abstract: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect on muscular strength after a 3-week training with the bench-press at a fixed pushing of 80-100% maximal speed (FPS) and self-selected pushing speed (SPS). 20 resistance-trained subjects were divided at random in 2 groups differing only regarding the pushing speed: in the FPS group (n=10) it was equal to 80-100% of the maximal speed while in the SPS group (n=10) the pushing speed was self-selected. Both groups were trained twice a week for 3 weeks with a load equal to 85% of 1RM and monitored with the encoder. Before and after the training we measured pushing speed and maximum load. Significant differences between and within the 2 groups were pointed out using a 2-way ANOVA for repeated measures. After 3 weeks a significant improvement was shown especially in the FPS group: the maximum load improved by 10.20% and the maximal speed by 2.22%, while in the SPS group the effect was <1%. This study shows that a high velocity training is required to increase the muscle strength further in subjects with a long training experience and this is possible by measuring the individual performance speed for each load.
Discussion: 20 resistance trained subjects were split into two groups in this study, a group of “fast benchers” and “normal speed benchers”. After a 3 week training program, a group of bench pressers managed to gain 10% on their bench press by ending their lifting sets when their maximal set speed dropped below 80% of their 1RM. Bench pressers who lifted at fixed speeds made no significant gains to their 1RM. The fast lifting group had higher muscle activation in the specific muscle groups via EMG rating, than the slow lifting group. Faster lifting speeds equal higher electrical activity in muscle, simple enough.
The researchers concluded the study by saying that the fast lifting group managed to increase their muscle activation in the prime movers of bench press and this lead to a greater gain in maximal strength. This type of lifting is common to strength training guidelines in the training of high jumpers in Eastern Bloc countries where the speed of the bar is not allowed to drop. I personally like low reps, with moderate weight, performed as fast as possible with long rest breaks to build power with minimal mass gain in jumpers. This study confirms what a lot of coaches and trainers are saying already about lifting at high velocities.
This study had a couple limitations that are important to mention. The first is that the “slow” group ended up performing around double the repetitions that the “fast” group did due to the nature of the study. The “fast” group also was suddenly introduced to a very new training stimulus from what they were previously performing, so that may have played a role in that groups improvements.
Sprint Exercise Performance, does metabolic performance matter?
Matthew Bundle and Peter Weyand Published ahead of print, 2012.
Abstract: Prevailing physiological paradigms explain both sprint and endurance exercise performance in terms of the availability of metabolic energy. However, for all-out efforts <= 60 seconds the prevailing view is no longer viable. Contemporary evidence indicates that sprinting performance is determined by musculoskeletal force application, with a duration-dependency explained by the intrinsically rapid rates at which skeletal muscle fatigues in vivo.
Discussion: Peter Weyand is the man; any of his studies are worth taking note on. The big take-home point of this study is that losses in sprint speed are brought about by neuromuscular mechanisms and not a loss of ATP supply to the muscles. For those of you who have taken an exercise physiology course, one of the main things that you learned was the energy systems of human performance, and how the immediate ATP levels in muscle system were what allowed us our maximal bursts of speed and power for a few seconds, and then we had to bump our speed down a notch once the ATP-CP system started to chime in (let’s not even get started about the lactic acid system…).
Bundle and Weyand’s research showed that the creatine-phosphate (CP) system (which uses creatine phosphate to put an extra “P” on ADP to resynthesize ATP), can actually put energy back in the muscle at a faster rate than it is used in the short term. In the past, researchers thought that the drop that occurs in sprint speed was due to the shortage of ATP when the CP system had to come into play, but this study shows that is not the case. The muscles themselves are unable to use the energy supplied to them as fast as it is coming in! The researchers concluded that due to this, the muscles just must not be able to use the energy as fast as it is coming in, and fatigue must be due to another mechanism. They proposed that a drop in sprint speed is due to neuromuscular causes and not a lack of energy (at least initially).
Hopefully this study will lead to some new and exiting work detailing more of the fatigue mechanisms present in the human nervous system in relation to high intensity efforts.
Study #3.
Relationships between ground reaction impulse and sprint acceleration performance in team-sport athletes
Kawamori, Naoki; Nosaka, Kazunori; Newton, Robert U Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, April 2012.
Abstract: Large horizontal acceleration in short-sprints is a critical performance parameter for many team-sport athletes. It is often stated that producing large horizontal impulse at each ground contact is essential for high short sprint performance, but the optimal pattern of horizontal and vertical impulses is not well understood, especially when the sprints are initiated from a standing start. This study was an investigation of the relationships between ground reaction impulses and sprint acceleration performance from a standing start in team-sport athletes. Thirty physically active young men with team-sport background performed 10-m sprint from a standing start, while sprint time and ground reaction forces were recorded during the first ground contact and at 8 m from the start. Associations between sprint time and ground reaction impulses (normalized to body mass) were determined by a Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) analysis. The 10-m sprint time was significantly (P < 0.01) correlated with net horizontal impulse (r = -0.52) and propulsive impulse (r = -0.66) measured at 8 m from the start. No significant correlations were found between sprint time and impulses recorded during the first ground contact after the start. These results suggest that applying ground reaction impulse in a more horizontal direction is important for sprint acceleration from a standing start. This is consistent with the hypothesis of training to increase net horizontal impulse production using sled towing or using elastic resistance devices, which needs to be validated by future longitudinal training studies.
Discussion: In this study, researchers tested forces in the standing start of a 10 meter sprint, rather than a crouched or track start and then measured the corresponding horizontal, vertical and braking forces. They found that the greater horizontal impulses were what determined faster performances. Braking impulses were fairly limited in the study, as athletes don’t tend to encounter high braking forces until top-end speeds.
A recent conversation of mine with researcher J.B. Morin brought me some wonderful new information on the difference between force contribution in a sprint start vs. a standing start as would be encountered in basketball or soccer. J.B. mentioned that a track sprinter who starts in a low position will use their quads more early in the sprint, and as they move into an upright sprinting position, the role of the quads will be diminished. Now consider the team sport athlete who begins most plays in a standing or “athletic” position. This team sport athlete will require a big motor in their hips and hamstrings to generate the horizontal force to move quickly.
This particular study confirms that, when starting in a high stance, horizontal propulsion is everything! This means that an athlete in team sports needs to make sure that they are optimizing their glutes in their training programs. Even when looking at track athletes, there isn’t much new in this study in terms of the researcher’s recommendations; sprinters are directed to accelerate while “pushing down and back” (horizontally), and then turn it into more of a lifting vertical based stride at the top end speed. Just because the action at top end is more vertical in terms of the knees and arms and instruction to the athlete, this doesn’t mean that the athlete is now using their quads to direct force; rather these coaching cues help the athlete to minimize braking forces and be maximally efficient via hip height, and reflexive to minimize braking forces while the hips and hamstrings push them down the track.
Conclusion: Research in strength and conditioning is piling in these days, and it is useful to keep up with some of the exciting new work that is in our field. These three studies represent some of the best work that is being done today. Study tuned for the best of July coming up shortly.
Free Training Guides!
Sign up for the newsletter, get your FREE eBooks, and receive weekly updates on cutting edge training information that will help take your knowledge of athletic performance to a new level.