Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 6 of 6 items for

  • Author: Mário C. Marques x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Roland van den Tillaar and Mário C. Marques

Purpose:

The purpose of this study was to determine whether two throwing programs, based upon velocity or resistance with the same workload, would enhance soccer overhead throwing velocity.

Methods:

Sports science students (n = 64, age 21.1 ± 2.1 y, mass 71.1 ± 11 kg, height 1.75 ± 0.09 m; mean ± SD) divided into two groups matched on performance, participated in the study. The resistance-training group trained overhead throwing with a 5-kg medicine ball for two sets of 8 reps per session, whereas a velocity training group threw four sets of 16 reps with a regular soccer ball. These training programs were matched on workload. Throwing performance with a soccer ball and a 5-kg medicine ball were tested before and after a training period of 6 wk with two sessions per week.

Results:

Both groups significantly increased the throwing velocity with the soccer ball (resistance-training group: 3.2% [1.0–5.5%)]; P = .003 and velocity-training group: 5.1% [2.6–7.7%]; P < .001), whereas no substantial changes were found for throwing with the 5-kg medicine ball after the training period. No substantial differences between the groups were found, which indicates that both forms of training increased the throwing velocity.

Conclusions:

It is concluded that both velocity and resistance throwing training programs after a short period of training with the same workload can increase throwing velocity and that workload is of importance in designing training programs and comparing them with each other.

Restricted access

Pedro Jiménez-Reyes, Fernando Pareja-Blanco, David Rodríguez-Rosell, Mario C. Marques and Juan José González-Badillo

Purpose:

To determine what variables determine the differences in performance on 2 tests of squat jump (SJ) performed under light load in highly trained athletes using maximal velocity (Vmax) or flight time (FT) as the discriminating factor of SJ performance.

Methods:

Thirty-two participants performed 2 maximal weighted SJs using a force platform synchronized with a linear transducer. Mean force (Fmean), mean and maximal power (Pmean, Pmax), peak force (PF), maximal rate of force development (RFDmax), and time required to attain PF (TPF) and RFDmax (TRFDmax) were analyzed. SJs were divided into 2 segments: from the initiation of force application to PF1 and from the moment after PF1 to Vmax.

Results:

Traditional significance statistics revealed significant differences in the same variables between best and worst SJs using both FT and Vmax. However, to use an approach based on the magnitude of the effect, the best SJ showed greater Pmax (83/17/0%), Pmean (85/15/0%), Fmean (71/29/0%), RFDmax1 (73/27/0%), and PF1 (53/47/0%) and lower TPF2 (0/61/39%) than the worst SJ when Vmax was used to discriminate SJ performance. However, using FT to differentiate SJ performance, no difference was observed between best and worst.

Conclusions:

Although jump height assessed through FT is a valid measure, these results suggest that Vmax is a more sensitive variable than FT to detect differences in loaded-SJ performance.

Restricted access

Mário C. Marques, Roland van den Tillaar, Jason D. Vescovi and Juan José González-Badillo

Purpose:

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between ball-throwing velocity during a 3-step running throw and dynamic strength, power, and bar velocity during a concentric-only bench-press exercise in team-handball players.

Methods:

Fourteen elite senior male team-handball players volunteered to participate. Each volunteer had power and bar velocity measured during a concentric-only bench-press test with 26, 36, and 46 kg, as well as having 1-repetition-maximum (1-RMBP) strength determined. Ball-throwing velocity was evaluated with a standard 3-step running throw using a radar gun.

Results:

Ball-throwing velocity was related to the absolute load lifted during the 1-RMBP (r = .637, P = .014), peak power using 36 kg (r = .586, P = .028) and 46 kg (r = .582, P = .029), and peak bar velocity using 26 kg (r = .563, P = .036) and 36 kg (r = .625, P = .017).

Conclusions:

The results indicate that throwing velocity of elite team-handball players is related to maximal dynamic strength, peak power, and peak bar velocity. Thus, a training regimen designed to improve ball-throwing velocity in elite male team-handball players should include exercises that are aimed at increasing both strength and power in the upper body.

Restricted access

Henrique P. Neiva, Mario C. Marques, Ricardo J. Fernandes, João L. Viana, Tiago M. Barbosa and Daniel A. Marinho

Purpose:

To investigate the effect of warm-up on 100-m swimming performance.

Methods:

Twenty competitive swimmers (with a training frequency of 8.0 ± 1.0 sessions/wk) performed 2 maximal 100-m freestyle trials on separate days, with and without prior warm-up, in a counterbalanced and randomized design. The warm-up distance totaled 1000 m and replicated the swimmers’ usual precompetition warm-up strategy. Performance (time), physiological (capillary blood lactate concentrations), psychophysiological (perceived exertion), and biomechanical variables (distance per stroke, stroke frequency, and stroke index) were assessed on both trials.

Results:

Performance in the 100-m was fastest in the warm-up condition (67.15 ± 5.60 vs 68.10 ± 5.14 s; P = .01), although 3 swimmers swam faster without warm-up. Critical to this was the 1st 50-m lap (32.10 ± 2.59 vs 32.78 ± 2.33 s; P < .01), where the swimmers presented higher distance per stroke (2.06 ± 0.19 vs. 1.98 ± 0.16 m; P = .04) and swimming efficiency compared with the no-warm-up condition (stroke index 3.46 ± 0.53 vs 3.14 ± 0.44 m2 · c−1 · s−1; P < .01). Notwithstanding this better stroke-kinematic pattern, blood lactate concentrations and perceived exertion were similar between trials.

Conclusions:

These results suggest that swimmers’ usual warm-up routines lead to faster 100-m freestyle swimming performance, a factor that appears to be related to better swimming efficiency in the 1st lap of the race. This study highlights the importance of performing swimming drills (for higher distance per stroke) before a maximal 100-m freestyle effort in similar groups of swimmers.

Restricted access

Rodrigo Ramírez-Campillo, Cristian Martínez, Carlos I. de La Fuente, Eduardo L. Cadore, Mário C. Marques, Fabio Y. Nakamura, Irineu Loturco, Alexis Caniuqueo, Rodrigo Cañas and Mikel Izquierdo

Older women participated in a 12-week high-speed resistance training program under two supervisor-to-subject ratio methods (i.e., high versus low supervision) to assess its effects on muscle strength, power, functional performance, and quality of life assessed before (T1) and after (T2) intervention. Women were divided into either the control group (CG, n = 15), high supervision group (HSG, n = 30), or low supervision group (LSG, n = 28). The training program included exercises requiring high-speed concentric muscle actions. No differences were observed among groups at T1. Between T1 and T2, the HSG showed a higher (p < .05) improvement in muscle strength (ES = 0.36–1.26), power (ES = 0.5–0.88), functional performance (ES = 0.52–0.78), and quality of life (ES = 0.44–0.82) compared with LSG and CG. High-speed resistance training under closer supervision is more effective for improving muscle strength, power, functional performance, and quality of life in older women.

Restricted access

Carlos Marta, Ana R. Alves, Pedro T. Esteves, Natalina Casanova, Daniel Marinho, Henrique P. Neiva, Roberto Aguado-Jimenez, Alicia M. Alonso-Martínez, Mikel Izquierdo and Mário C. Marques

Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine the effects of an 8-week program of resistance training (RT) or suspension training (ST) on explosive strength in prepubescent boys. Methods: Fifty-seven boys aged 10–11 years were assigned to 2 training groups, RT or ST or a control group (no training program). Boys trained twice weekly for 8 weeks. Results: A significant interaction was reported with a large (P < .001, ηp2=.463), medium (P < .001, ηp2=.395), and small effect sized (P ≤ .001, ηp2=.218) in the 1-kg ball throw, 3-kg ball throw, and time-at-20-m test, respectively. There was no significant interaction in the countermovement vertical jump or the standing long jump. Changes from preintervention to postintervention for the 1-kg ball throw were 5.94% and 5.82% for the ST and RT, respectively, and 8.82% and 8.14% in the 3-kg ball throw for the ST and RT, respectively. The improvement in the 20-m sprint was 1.19% for the ST and 2.33% for the RT. Conclusion: Traditional RT and ST seem to be effective methods for improving explosive strength in prepubescent boys. ST could be considered as an alternative modality to optimize explosive strength training in school-based programs.