Proposal of a Conditioning Activity Model on Sprint Swimming Performance
This study aimed to propose a conditioning activity (CA) model to stimulate improvement on neuromuscular responses, mechanical parameters and for the 50-m freestyle swimming. Thirteen male swimmers (19 +/- 3 years and performances of 77% in relation to World Championship records) performed four CA p...
| Autores: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de documento: | artigo |
| Estado: | Versão publicada |
| Data de publicação: | 2020 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Recursos: | Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
| Repositório: | Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
| Idioma: | inglês |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/208920 |
| Acesso em linha: | http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2020.580711 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/208920 |
| Access Level: | Acceso aberto |
| Palavra-chave: | training competition fatigue Twitch post-activation potentiation sports science |
| Resumo: | This study aimed to propose a conditioning activity (CA) model to stimulate improvement on neuromuscular responses, mechanical parameters and for the 50-m freestyle swimming. Thirteen male swimmers (19 +/- 3 years and performances of 77% in relation to World Championship records) performed four CA protocols followed by a maximum performance in the 50-m freestyle. In the first protocol (P1) swimmers performed a standard warm-up (similar to 15 min); in the second protocol (P2) lunges (3 x 85% of the one-repetition maximum); in the third (P3) pull-ups (3 maximum repetitions) and box jumps 40 cm high and 60 cm deep (1 x 5 with 10% of the corporal weight); and in the fourth protocol (P4) a combination of exercises from the second and third protocols. CA protocols had no effect on the standard warm-up. However, P2 performance (27.01 +/- 1.25 s) was similar to P1 (27.01 +/- 1.18 s) and presented higher positive effects in mechanical parameters for the swim start performance in comparison to other protocols, contributing to improvements in the 50-m freestyle. In addition, turnaround time also had a negative effect, mainly in P3 (3.12 +/- 0.28 s), signaling the improvement of this variable in all protocols (P1: 3.30 +/- 0.38 s; P2: 3.17 +/- 0.30 s; P4: 3.17 +/- 0.34 s). P2 (after: 80 +/- 11%; before: 82.7 +/- 9.9%) and P3 (after: 82.7 +/- 9.9%; before: 85.1 +/- 9.7%) presented a possible positive effect on the percentage of voluntary activation in relation to P1 (after: 79.3 +/- 10.7%; before: 76.3 +/- 12%). In conclusion, the proposed conditioning activity protocols were not efficient for performance improvement in the 50-m freestyle compared to the standard model and seem to specifically influence each phase of the event. |
|---|