Kinetička analiza stražnjeg čučnja kod različitih struktura setova

master's thesis

• Title (english): Kinetic analysis of the back squat exercise using different set structures
• Author: Ivan Jukić
• Mentor: Sanja Šalaj (mentor)
• Committee member: Sanja Šalaj (predsjednik povjerenstva)
• Committee member: Cvita Gregov (član povjerenstva)
• Committee member: Pavle Mikulić (član povjerenstva)
• Granter: University of Zagreb; Faculty of Kinesiology; Zagreb
• Defense date and country: 2018-04-27, Croatia
• Scientific / art field, discipline and subdiscipline: SOCIAL SCIENCES; Kinesiology

Abstract

Mnoge strukture setova se danas primjenjuju prilikom izvođenja vježbi s vanjskim opterećenjem. Najčešće zastupljena struktura seta je ona tradicionalna (TS) koja podrazumijeva izvođenje ponavljanja bez intervala odmora unutar pojedinog seta. Za razliku od nje, strukture setova redistribuiranih intervala odmora (RR) kao i visoko redistribuiranih intervala odmora (HFRR) koje uključuju češće periode odmora, se također koriste u praksi. Cilj ovog istraživanja je bio usporediti utjecaje HFRR, RR i... More TS struktrua na brzinu izvođenja koncentričnog dijela pokreta (MV), izlaz snage (MP) kao i njihovo opadanje kroz ponavljanja te subjektivni osjećaj opterećenja (RPE). 26 iskusnih rekreativnih vježbača (starosti: 28 ± 5.44, tjelesne mase: 84.6 ± 10.5 kg, omjer 1RM/tjelesna masa: 1.82 ± 0.33) su pristupili laboratoriju četiri puta kako bi odradili 1RM test u stražnjem čučnju i tri eksperimentalna testa s pripadajućim strukturama setova. Svaka struktura se izvodila sa 70% od njihovog predodređenog 1RM-a dok je njihov redosljed bio određen po slučaju. Rezultati su pokazali značajne razlike u kojima se HFRR struktura pokazala superiornijim nad RR (p<0.05, ES=0.61) i TS (p<0.05, ES=0.81) za sprječavanje opadanja MV ali i MP (p<0.05, ES=0.56; p<0.05, ES=0.71) kroz ponavljanja kao i nižim RPE ocjenama usporedno s RR (p<0.01, ES=0.88) i TS (p<0.01, ES=1.99). Razlike između RR i TS nisu bile značajne kod analize opadanja MV (p>0.05, ES=0.12) i MP (p>0.05, ES=0.09) dok je RPE bio značajno niži kod RR usporedno s TS (p>0.05, ES=0.93). S višim RPE ocjenama i opadanjem kinetičkih parametara uočenih kod TS i RR, HFRR struktura se čini mnogo boljim izborom u treningu kada je cilj maksimalan razvoj brzine, snage i snižavanje RPE ocjena kod sportaša. Treneri bi trebali biti svjesni potencijalnog pada kinetičkih parametara i viših RPE ocjena povezanih s TS i RR. Sukladno tome, kraći, ali visoko frekventni intervali odmora koji su karakteristika HFRR strukture seta, bi se trebali implementirati kako bi se osigurale maksimalne trenažne adaptacije u identičnom trajanju treninga. Less

Abstract (english)

Traditionally, repetitions in each set are performed in sequence with no rest between repetitions and therefore has been defined as traditional set structure (TS). One potential strategy to overcome this problem is to implement rest redistribution (RR) and high frequency rest redistribution (HFRR) protocols which consist of more frequent rest periods compared to TS. The purpose of this study was to compare the influence of TS, RR and HFRR set structures on RPE, velocity and power decrement... More during a high volume back squat session where the total time, number of repetitions, and load were equal across structure protocols. 26 strength-trained males (age 28 ± 5.44, body mass 84.6 ± 10.5 kg, 1RM-to-body-mass ratio 1.82 ± 0.33) reported to the lab four times to perform 1RM testing and three experimental sessions with their respective protocols. Each protocol was performed with 70% of participants’ predetermined 1RM. The order of each protocol was randomized. The results showed significant differences between the protocols where HFRR was superior to RR (p<0.05, ES=0.61) and TS (p<0.05, ES=0.81) while attempting to prevent velocity decrement across the repetitions. In addition, the same was observed in power measures compared to RR (p<0.05, ES=0.56) and TS (p<0.05, ES=0.71) respectively. Significantly lower RPE scores were observed in HFRR compared with RR (p<0.01, ES=0.88) and TS (p<0.01, ES=1.99). Differences between RR and TS were not observed in velocity (p>0.05, ES=0.12) and power decrement (p>0.05, ES=0.12) while significantly lower RPE scores were observed in RR compared to TS (p>0.05, ES=0.93). With the higher RPE scores and decreases in velocity and power observed in TS and RR, HFRR appears to be a more appropriate protocol when the goal is to maximize velocity and power and reduce RPE scores of an athlete. Coaches should be aware of potential velocity/power decrement and higher RPE scores associated not only with TS, but to a lesser extent with RR. Therefore, shorter but more frequent rest periods should be utilized to ensure maximum training adaptation while keeping total training time the same. Less

• Keywords: Trening s vanjskim opterećenjem; brzina; snaga; RPE
• Keywords (english): Resistance Traininig; Velocity; Power; RPE
• Language: croatian
• URN:NBN: urn:nbn:hr:117:555656
• Study programme: Title: Integrated undergraduate and graduate university study of kinesiology; Study programme type: university; Study level: integrated undergraduate and graduate; Academic / professional title: magistar / magistra kineziologije (magistar / magistra kineziologije)
• Type of resource: Text
• File origin: Born digital
• Access conditions: Open access; Embargo expiration date: 2019-05-02
• Created on: 2018-05-02 09:39:02