Biology of Sport
eISSN: 2083-1862
ISSN: 0860-021X
Biology of Sport
Current Issue Manuscripts accepted About the journal Editorial board Abstracting and indexing Archive Ethical standards and procedures Contact Instructions for authors Journal's Reviewers Special Information
SCImago Journal & Country Rank


4/2022
vol. 39
 
Share:
Share:
more
 
 
abstract:
Original paper

Squat and countermovement jump performance across a range of loads: a comparison between Smith machine and free weight execution modes in elite sprinters

Irineu Loturco
1, 2, 3
,
Michael R. McGuigan
4, 5
,
Tomás T. Freitas
1, 2, 6, 7
,
Fábio Y. Nakamura
8, 9
,
Daniel A. Boullosa
10, 11, 12
,
Pedro L. Valenzuela
13, 14
,
Lucas A. Pereira
1, 2
,
Fernando Pareja-Blanco
15

1.
NAR – Nucleus of High Performance in Sport, São Paulo, Brazil
2.
Department of Human Movement Sciences, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
3.
University of South Wales, Pontypridd, Wales, United Kingdom
4.
Sports Performance Research Institute New Zealand (SPRINZ), Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand
5.
School of Medical and Health Sciences, Edith Cowan University, Perth, Australia
6.
UCAM Research Center for High Performance Sport, Catholic University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain
7.
Faculty of Sport Sciences, Catholic University of Murcia (UCAM), Murcia, Spain
8.
Research Center in Sports Sciences, Health Sciences and Human Development (CIDESD), University Institute of Maia (ISMAI), Maia, Portugal
9.
Associate Graduate Program in Physical Education Universidade de Pernambuco (UPE)/Universidade Federal da Paraíba (UFPB), João Pessoa, Brazil
10.
College of Healthcare Sciences, Campus Townsville, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia
11.
INISA, Graduate Program of Movement Sciences, Campus Campo Grande, Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil
12.
Research and Development Department, iLOAD Solutions, Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil
13.
Faculty of Sport Sciences, Universidad Europea de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
14.
Department of Sport and Health, Spanish Agency for Health Protection in Sport (AEPSAD), Madrid, Spain
15.
Physical Performance & Sports Research Center, Pablo de Olavide University, Seville, Spain
Biol Sport. 2022;39(4):1043–1048
Online publish date: 2022/01/25
View full text
Get citation
ENW
EndNote
BIB
JabRef, Mendeley
RIS
Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero
AMA
APA
Chicago
Harvard
MLA
Vancouver
 
PlumX metrics:
The aims of this study were to: 1) provide and compare the height achieved during Smith machine (SM) and free weight (FW) loaded jumps executed over a wide spectrum of loads (40–120% of body mass [BM]); and 2) test the difference between loaded and unloaded squat jump (SJ) and countermovement jump (CMJ) attempts in ten highly trained male sprinters. On the first visit, athletes performed unloaded SJ and CMJ, loaded SJ with loads corresponding to 40, 60, 80, 100, and 120% BM, and loaded CMJ at 100% BM using an Olympic barbell (FW). On the second visit, they performed loaded SJ and CMJ tests under the same loading conditions on the SM device and,subsequently, a half-squat one-repetition maximum (1RM) assessment. The relative strength (RS = 1RM/BM) of the athletes was 2.54 ± 0.15. Loaded SJ performance was similar between SM and FW, and across all loading conditions. Differences in favour of CMJ (higher jump heights compared with SJ) were superior in the unloaded condition but decreased progressively as a function of loading. In summary, sprinters achieved similar SJ heights across a comprehensive range of loads, regardless of the execution mode (FW or SM). The positive effect of the countermovement on jump performance is progressively reduced with increasing load.
keywords:

athletic performance, track and field, vertical jump, loaded jump, resistance training, ballistic exercise

 
Quick links
© 2022 Termedia Sp. z o.o. All rights reserved.
Developed by Bentus.