Sprint Training.pdf

8/14/2019 Sprint Training.pdf

1/8

HUMAN MOVEMENT2013,vol. 14(2), 116-122

TH E EFFECTS OF RESISTED SPRINT TR AIN INGON SPEED PERFORMANGIIM WOMENdoi : 10.2478/humo 2013 0013

BEATA M AKA RURi ,HENRYK SOZASKI^, HUBERT MAKARUK', TOMASZ SACEWICZ^' Biaia Podlaska Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Jzef Pilsudski University of Physical Education, Warszawa, Poland^Jzef Pifsudski University of Physical Education, Warszawa, PolandABSTRAGTPurpose The ma in aim of the studywasto exam ine the effects of resisted and stan dard sprint training on th e kinem atics of sprint-running acceleration in women.Methods Thirty-six untrained but physically active female college students were randomlyassigned to one of three groups: a runnin g resisted train ing group (RTG, = 12), a standard training group (STG, 12), anda control group (CON, 12). All participants in the experimental groups trained three times a week for four weeks, followedby a1 weektrainin g break, after w hich they trained again for four weeks. Pre-training, post-training an d det rainin g (three weeksafter completing the training programs) measures of mean running velocity, stride length, stride frequency, knee angle at toeoff an d footstrike, ground contact tim e, and flight time were analyzed by a 20 m sprint test.Results The RTG improved m eanrunning velocity and increased stride length and knee angle at toe off. Simultaneously, the RTG featured decreased stridefrequency and increased ground contact tim e. The STG demonstrated an increase in mean ru nnin g velocity due to higher stridefrequency and a decrease in ground contact time. All of the measured parameters did not significantly decrease after the three-weekdetraining period. The control group featured no changes. Conclusions Both resisted and standard sprint training improvesspeed in sprint-running acceleration in wom en by improving different sprint kinem atic parame ters.Key words: speed, acceleration performance, kinematics, stride length, stride frequency

IntroductionIt is speed tha t to a large extent determ ines athleticsuccess in sports [1]. Running speed is in a large partdetermined by running form, as it determines the bo dy'smov emen t as a function of time an d space by the diago-nal, cyclical stride of the lower limbs. Running strideand therefore speed, from a mechanical po int ofview,isdetermined by two antagonistic kinematic parameters,stride length and stride frequency. This makes run ningat the fastest speed possible only by exhibiting a com-bination of optim um stride length and frequency. Theyare not, however, constant values; the contribution ofeach in creating a golden ratio depends on runn inggait phase as well as sex, age, competitive level. It hasbeen suggested that stride frequency is dependent onnerve conduction velocity and thus strongly linked togenetic factors. Hence, research has focused more onthe second param eter - stride length - and how it can beimproved by adapting existing trainin g techniques [2].One of the most basic ways used to lengthen run-nin g stride is thro ug h th e use of resisted train ing, a ty pe

of conditioning performed by adding external load bypulling a sled, tire, or a specially designed parachute;resisted bands; or by runnin g uphill or against the w ind.The greatest benefits prov ided by such forms of condi-

Corresponding author.

tioning are increases in the strength and power of the legextensor muscles at toe off, mainly in the first stage ofrunning - the acceleration phase [3, 4]. This relation-ship between increasing strength and power with run -ning velocity has been observed by many researchers[5 7\ On th e other ha nd , Saraslanidis [8],among others,did not find an increase in running velocity after aneight-week resisted running program, although meas-urem ents were taken on ly after completing a run . In testscarried out by Zafeiridis et al. [9], an eight-week pro-gram led to improvements in max imum velocity duringacceleration (0-20 m) and in stride frequency, but notstride length. Similarly, Spinks et al. [10] noted a sig-nificant improvement in velocity when running shortdistances (up to 15 m) but noted n o significant changesin stride length or frequency.In view of the lack of clear results on the effects ofresisted sprint training on improving running velocity,as well as a lack of research and recom men dations tha ttake sex into acco unt (all of the above m ention ed testswere performed only on males), the aim of present studywas to evaluate the effectiveness of resisted sp rint train -ing in women by measuring changes in runnin g velocityand other kinematic parameters. With this in mind,the following research questions were formulated:1. Does resisted runn ing w ith the use of an extern alload improve speed in physically active women?2. Does the type of the sprint training programdifferentiate the kinematic parameters of stridein women?


2/8

HUMAN MOVEMENT15.M akaru k, IT. So/a ski, M. M akar uk, T. Sacewicz, Resisted sp rint tra ininginwomen

3 . W ha t are the long-term effectsofresisted sprin ttraining when compared with standard sprinttraining? aterial and metho ds

The research group consisted of36 female physicalwho did not practice professional. However, in light oftheparticipants' field of studyh ofphysical activity perweek),they can be speci-ashighly physically active ind ividuals. The studyly divided into three sub-groups:theal load (RTG,n 12),the second trained unde r

al sprint training technique (STG,M=12), and thewasa control group (CON,n= 12 who participatedin the measurement sessions. Age, body height,bod y m ass are presented in Table 1. All were askedin any physical activityoftheir n orm al university classes. The p artici- the aim of thestudyandprocedure, which was accepted hy the ResearchofPhysi- inWarsaw, Poland.TestingThe participants' sprint performance was tested on thetrain-forthe ex perimental groups were to begin the programs wereandthen three weeks latertest consistedof a20-m sprint (R20),

g start position w ith the legsinstride, the front 30 cmbehind. They were checkedforaslight bend at the kn ees

Table 1. Characteristics of the participantsroup Age Body height Body mass(years) (m) (kg)TG (n=12)TG n= 12)

N n = 12)22.0 0.922.3 0.821.9 0.7

1.67 0.071.66 0.061.68 0.08

61.5 4.761.3 5.462.1 4.9

TG - running resisted training groupTG - standard training group

an d the torso slightly bent forward. Allparticipantsperformed thetask in appropriate sportswear (t-shirtand shorts).The participants completed two trials; they wereallowedtostartattheir leisure,nostarting commandwas given. The r un with th e highest m ean velocity wasrecordedforlater analysis. All tests were performedata track andfield stadiumat anambient airtempera-tureof 21-23 degrees Celsius with minor wind (0.3-0.6 m s ),measured by an electronic anemometer(Slandi 2000, Poland)in thedirectionoftrack. Sevento eightmin of rest was provided between trials [11]:the first fourminconsisted of absolute rest,thenextthreeorfour min were spent preparingforth erun byperforming dynam ic stretching exercises, each of wh ichwere followed byshakingtheleg m uscles.A warm-up prior to measurement taking wasper-formed, beginning with alow-intensity ru n (5 min)anddynam ic stretching exercises (7-8 m in)ofthe mostin-volved muscle groups when sprinting, i.e., hip, knee, andankle extensorsand flexors [12].The rest intervalbe-tween each stretching exercise was 10-15 s.Afterthegeneral warm-up, skipping exercises were performed(1X20 m) andanotherrun at submaximal intensity(1X40 m). The warm up was performed while wearinga sweatshirt and sweatpants, which were removed justbefore completingthesprint test.The sprin t test (R20) was preceded by apilot studywhoseaimwa stodeterminethereliabilityofthe R20test as well as calculate the external load forthe partici-pan ts who would take part in the resisted sprint trainingprog ram . Previous studies have suggested an optimal loadthat can reduce normal running velocity by10 [14].For this purpose,asled was constructed from two 70-cmcircular runners held together hy perpendicular tubing45 cm inlength. Locatedin thecenterofthe sled wasa vertical shaft on w hichdiscweights (plates) were placed.A 5-mharness was usedtocon nect t he sled toaleatherbelt worn above the hip bones. The total weightofsledwithout additional plateswas 3 kg. Theparticipantsperformed three runs with anexternal loadof5 ,7.5 ,and 10 body mass, performed inrandom order. Theprocedure andconditions for this pilot test werethesame as when performing theRaotest. External load wasdetermined by multiplying b ody mass by the percent ofexternal loadto beused (e.g., 5 bod y mass=0.05),subtracting the massofthe sled [15]. Basedon thecri-

Figure 1. Resisted running.- with an external load


3/8

HUMAN MOVEMENTB.M akaruk,H.Sozaski,H.M akur uk, T. Sacewicz, Resisted spr int tr ain inginwomen

teriaforselecting resisted run nin g load (10 reductionin m ean ru nnin g velocity), a weight of7.5 of body m asswas used foreightofthe pa rticipants, wh ileforthe re-maining fouraweightof10 ofbody mass was used.

Kinematic analysisTwo digital cameras were used torecord the sprinttrialsata sampling rateof100 Hz; video was later an a-lyzed using SteamPix 3.34.0software (Norpix, Ganada).The cameras weresetperpendicularly to thetrackata dista nce of 24 m (Eig. 2), each filming a 10-m por tionof the track including m before and m after the startand finish lines with anoverlapof 2 m at thecenter.

Only every 3rd and4'*'stride were considered for analysis.Eive tracking mark ers were placed onthe right sideof the body during measurement taking: atthe heightof anterior superior iliac spine,thegreater trochan terof the femur, the lateral condyleofthe tibia, the lateralmalleolus, and the5thm etatarsal [15, 16]. Later, two -dimensional kinematic analysis of the recorded testrunswas performed using APAS-XP marker-trackingsoftware (Ariel Dyn am ics, USA). Th e video was scaledwiththeuseof aflat calibration system.The following k inematic param eters were measuredduring thetests,all of which were performed onlyonthe rig ht sideofthe body :mean runningspeed(ms ),calculated byfirst adding grou nd contact timeandflight, then havin g this value divide stride length [16];stride length(m), determined by the d istance from the tipofthefront shoeat toe off to the tip of theoppositeshoe at footstrike;stridefrequency calculated on the basisof the num berofstepsin acertain periodoftime;knee nglea ttoeoff an d footstrike measured by the angle be-tween the thigh and lower thigh by a straight line passingthrough the greater trochanter of thefemurand thelateral condyleofthe tibiaand aline passing throu gh

the lateral condyleof thetibia and lateral malleolus;ground contact time as the time between footstrike a ndto eoff;a ndflight time measured as the time betweento eoffby one foot until footstrike by the o pposite foot.The reliability of the above-measured parameters, deter-min ed by intraclass c orrelation coefficients (IGG), wasfound to behigh and ranged betw een 0.7 9-0.9 2 [13].Sprint training programsDue to the intensive nature of the sprint training pro-grams, the participants in the two experimental groups(RTG andSTG) conclud eda three-week compensatoryphysical fitness cou rse, held twice a week, before their

actual training program s weretobegin. Average du ra-tion of each class was approximately 50 min . The coursefocused on basic exercises aimedat improving sprintTable 2. Sprint training programs implemented

by both experimental groups(resisted and standard sprint training)

Week

123456789

Training programSet X repetitionX distance [m]

3 X 3 X 204 X 3 X 203X3 X254 X 3 X 25

Rest3X3 X304 X 3 X 303 X 3 X 353X3X20

Rest intervals*Set [min]

X repetition [s]3x603x603x903x90Rest

4x1204x1204x1504x150

* rest provided in accordance with previousrecommendations [11]

2

START

CAMERA

FINISH

Figure 2. Graphic representation of the track used to measure sprint velocity at a distance of 20 m


4/8

HUMAN MOVEMENTB.Makaru k, H . Sozanski, 11.M aka ruk , . Sacevvic/., Resisted sprint train in g in wom en

er com pleting th e comp ensatory physicalness course , groups RTG and STG began a nine-weekd trainin g program (with a rest interval during th eining was performed) with classes

er of studies [1 , 17]. The training programsning . Time was measured with a 83520 stop-

e" or "try to ru n faster". In addition, sprint techn iqueonitored, such as performing largerns of the rear leg at the knee at toe off or m ain-

idual; the STG

Statistical analysisThe collected data were summarized as mean and

deviation (SD).T he Shapiro-Wilk test was used

measures ANOVA. Tukey's ttest was a pplied ifwas set at p


5/8

HUMAN MOVl'MKNT1). M akari ik , I I . So/a t 'isk i , i L \ iak; ir t i k , T . .S;H:CVVCZ, Resis ted sprin t t ra in ing in women

Pre-trainingD Post-trainingMDetraining180

176172 -i168 1164160 -H RG STG CON - significantly different (p < 0.05) from pre-tra ining vaiuesRTG - running resisted training groupSTG - standard training groupCON -con t ro l g roupFigure 6. Mean SD knee angle at toe off measuredpre-training, post-training, and three weeksafter completing training (detraining)

Pre-trainingD Post-trainingDetraining156

RTG STG CONRTG - running resisted training groupSTG - standard training groupCON - control groupFigure 7. Mean SD knee angle at footstrike meas uredpre-training, post-training, and three weeksafter completing training (detraining)

Pre-trainingD Post-trainingDetraining0.160.15

' 0.14 -0.130.12 RIG STG CON - significa ntly different (p < 0.05) from pre-train ing valuesRTG - running resisted training groupSTG - standard training groupCON - control groupFigure 8. Mean SD ground co ntact time measuredpre-training, post-training, and three weeksafter completing training (detraining)

0.14

0.13

0.12 -

0.11 RTG STG CONRTG - running resisted training groupSTG - standard training groupCON - control groupFigure 9. Mean SDflight time measured pre-training,

post-training, and three weeks after completing training(detraining)leng tb, the on ly significant differences were observedamong tbe resisted training group (RTG) after com-pleting the trainin g program (by 5.9 ; p


6/8

l'>. M ak ar u k , I I . So za ns k i , 11 . Mc ikHUMAN MOVl-MKN r

-.isted sprint training in women

al.[10],w ho did not observe anych ngein stride length .s wo rth m entionin g th at the differences in the results

f the m ethodology used was in fact th e causeineftive con trols, such as when providing instruc tions on

ad participan ts to perform an even largerd at the knee tha n necessary, resulting in shorter stride

eeks after completing the training program (de-werethere no decreases in stride lengthcompared w ith post-training values, but this para-

Nonetheless, not all of the effects of resisted sprintuency. These findings are in complete discrep ancy [9],who observed an in-[10],whonge. We believe that groups decrease in stride frequency may have been the

longer ground contact time (withinf; this is advantag eous, as Weyand e tal.[20] observed,

It is highly probable th at th e increase in stride fre-y by group STG was due to shorter groun d co ntactalthoug h th is result was not statistically significantp >0.05). Shortened gro und contac t time has beenit, thus allowing for more efficient use oftheextension-ction cycle [21], as Markovic et al. argued [22].It also is worth emphasizing that no changes were

ct with the grou nd (footstrike) in either of

d tha t greater knee angle is equivalen t to increasedhe bod y's center of mass and the p oint of foot-

strike. Therefore, as this distance increases so does b rak-ing force [23], which consequently carries with it anincreased risk in strainin g th e rear thigh muscles [24].This type of injury is very common amon g individualswho practice speed-strength sports [25].One of the limitations of this study, besides thesmall sample size and relatively short duration of thetraining programs,istha t only th e lower limbs were sub-jected to analysis. However, the significance of omit-ting the upp er limbs from analysis may be minim ized bytaking into co nsideration the results of Spinks et al. [10],wh o found no changes in the kinematic parameters of theupper limbs after stan dard and resisted sprint train ing,emphasizing the relatively minor role the upper limbsplay in improving running speed [26].It needs to be highlighted that the implementationof a resisted sprint train ing p rogram requires carefullyresearch, especially during the competitive season, asresearch has shown that this form of training signifi-cantly impacts a number of kinematic parameters thatform the core of run ning techniq ue, such as by loweringstride frequency. Significant changes introduced duringthe ru nnin g season may lead to instable locomotor pat-terns and thus adversely affect running times. On theother h an d, it would be desirable for future studies todetermine which solutions are suitable for developingstrength, especially when b eginning trainin g with theuse of resisted train ing . This is im po rtan t in light of thefindings by Moira et al. [27], who noticed a decreasein running speed and a reduction in stride frequency(increased ground contac t time an d flight time) as theresult of strength training, where solutions based onresisted training could provide an alternative to standardstrength-building exercises.The above aspect also requires careful considerationwhen choosing the correct external load. We foundtha t the w eight used in this study(7.5 of bodymass,butalso 10 ) was adequate in terms oftheexercise po tentialof the relatively untra ined , altho ugh physically active,female students. However, depending on the desiredoutcome, every situation requires an individual andcareful assessment as to best decide the most optimalload. This includes taking into consideration n ot just sex,age or physical fitness level, but also the mo vemen t a ndfunctional specifics of given sport an ditsrequirementsas to speed.

on lusions

1.The results of the present study indicate that re-sisted sprint training in wom en, by pulling an externalload, improves short-distance running velocity.2. Resisted sprint training led to increases in stridelength and completing fuller leg extensions at the kneejoint during toe off but, concomitantly, caused an de-crease in stride frequency and increase in ground contacttime. Standard sprint training was found to increase


7/8

HUMAN.o/ai iski, 11. Makaruk,V Snccwic/, Resisted sprint

stride frequency, without any significant changes instride length.3 . The long-term effects of the sprint training pro-grams (resisted and standard) used in present study weresimilar for both experimental groups. The three-weekdetraining period following the completion of the train-ing programs had no significant effect on any of therunning gait parameters.References

1. Sozaski H., Witczak T. Starzyski T., The basis of speedtraining [in Polish]. GOS, Warszawa 1999.2. Mackata K., Kowalski P., Sprint running training [inPolish].AWF, Wroclaw 2007.3 . Dona ti A., The association betw een the development ofstrength and speed.New Stud Athl 1996, 2 (3), 51-58.4. Murray A., Aitchison T.G., Ross G., Suthedan d K., Watt 1.,McLean D., Grant S., The effect of towing a range ofrelative resistances on sprint performance. / Sports Sei2005,23 (9),927 -935, doi: 10.1080/02640410400023332.5. Mero A., Komi P.V., Gregor R.J., Biomecha nics of spri ntrunning. A review. Sports Med 1992, 13 (6), 376-392,doi: 10.2165/00007256-199213060-00002.6. Hunter J.P, Marshall R.N., McNair P.J., Relationshipsbetween ground reaction force impulse and kinematicsof sprint-running acceleration. J Appl Biomeeh 2005,21 (1),3 1 - 4 3 .7. Giacci S., Di Michle R., Merni F., Kinematic analysisof the braking and propulsion phases during the sup-port time in sprint running. GaitPosture 2010, 31 (2),209-212, doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.10.007.8. Saraslanidis P., Training for the improvement of maxi-mum speed: flat running or resistance training? NewStud Athl 2000 15(3/4), 4 5 - 5 1 .9. Zafeiridis A., Saraslanidis P., Manou V., Ioakimidis P.,DiplaK. KellisS. The effects of resisted sled-pulling sprinttraining on acceleration and maximum speed perfor-mance. /SportsM edPhysFitness 2005, 45 (3), 284 -29 0.10. Spinks Gh.D., Murphy A.J., Spinks W.L., Lockie R.G.,The effects of resisted sprint training on acceleration per-

formance and kinematics in soccer, rugby union, andAustralian football players.J Strength Cond Res 200721 (1), 77-85, doi:10.151 9/00124278-200702000-00015.1 1. Prus G., Zaj^c A., Sprint trainin g. Practical app lications[in Polish].Sport Wyczynowy 1986, 2-3 , 39-46.1 2. M akaru k H ., M akaru k B., Kdra S., Effects of warm -upstretching exercises on sprint performance. Phys EdueSport 2008, 52 (1), 23-26, doi: 10.2478/vl0030-008-0005-7.1 3. Makaruk B., Makaruk H., Sacewicz T., Makaruk T.,Kdra S., Dlugolcka B., The accuracy and reliability ofkinematic measurements in tests measuring runningvelocity [in Polish].Pol J Sport Tourism 2009, 16 (2),85- 92 .14. McFarlane B.,Speed a basic and advanced technical mo del.TraekTeehnique 1994, 96, 4016-40 20.15. Lockie R.G., Murp hy A.J., Spinks G.D., Effects of resistedsled towing on sprint kinematics in field-sport athletes.JStrengthCond Res 2 003 , 17 (4), 760-767.

16. Paradisis G.P., Gooke G.B., The effects of sprin t r un ni ngtraining on sloping surfaces. JStrengthCond Res 2 0 0 6 ,20 (4), 767-777, doi:10.151 9/R-16834.1.17. Hauschildt M.D., Integrating high-speed treadmills intoa traditional strength and co nditioning program for speedand power sports.StrengthCondJ 2010, 32 (2), 21 -32 ,doi: 10.1519/SSG.0b013e3181caddd9.18. Delecluse G.H., Influence of strength training on sprintrunning performance: Gurrent findings and implicationsfor training. Sports Med 1997, 24 (3), 147-156, doi:10.2165/00007256-199724030-00001.19. Mero A., KomiP.V. Force-, EMG-, and elasticity-velocityrelationships at submaximal, maximal and supramaximalrunning speeds in sprinters.EurJ Ap pl Physiol Oeeup

Physiol 1986,55 (5), 553 -561 , doi: 10.1007/BF00421652.20. Weyand P.G., Sternlight D.B., Bellizzi M.J., Wright S.,Faster top running speeds are achieved with greatergrou nd forces not m ore rapid leg mo vem ents. / ApplPhysiol 2000, 89 (5), 1991-1999.21 . M akaru k H., Sacewicz T., Effects of plyom etric trai nin gon maximal power output and jumping ability. HumMov 2010,11 (1), 17-22, doi: 10.2478/vl0038-010-0007-l.2 2 . Markovic G ., Jukic 1., Milano vic D ., Metikos D ., Effectsof sprint and plyometric training on muscle functionand athletic perform ance. J Srew^/jCondRes 2007 21(2), 543-49, doi:10.1519/R-19535.1.2 3 . Gorn R., Knudson D. Effect of elastic-cord towing on thekinematics ofthe acceleration phase of sprinting./Srew^/?CondRes 2 003 , 17 (1), 72-7 5.

24. Orchard J., Biomechanics of muscle strain injury. NZJSports Med 2002, 30, 92-98.25. W itvrou w E., Dann eels L., Asselman P., D Have T., Gam-bier D., Muscle flexibility as a risk factor for developingmuscle injuries in m ale professional soccer players. pro-spective study.A m JSportsMed 2 003 , 31 (1), 41-46.26. Hinrichs R.N., Upper extremity function in running. II:Angular momentum considerations.IntJSportBiomeeh1987,3 , 2 4 2 - 2 6 3 .27. Moir G., Sanders R., Button Gh., Glaister M., The effectof periodized resistance training on accelerative sprintperformance.SportsBiomeeh 2007 6 (3), 285-300, doi:10.1080/14763140701489793.Paper received by the Editors: October 30, 2012Paper accepted for publication: March 18, 2013

orrespondence addressBeata MakarukWydziat Wychowania Fizycznego i Sportuw Bialej PodlaskiejAkademia Wychowania FizycznegoJzefa Pitsudskiegoul. Akademicka 221-500 Biata Podlaska, Polande-mail: [email protected]


8/8

C o p y r i g h t o f H u m a n M o v e m e n t i s t h e p r o p e r t y o f V e r s i t a a n d i t s c o n t e n t m a y n o t b e c o p i e d

o r e m a i l e d t o m u l t i p l e s i t e s o r p o s t e d t o a l i s t s e r v w i t h o u t t h e c o p y r i g h t h o l d e r ' s e x p r e s s

w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . H o w e v e r , u s e r s m a y p r i n t , d o w n l o a d , o r e m a i l a r t i c l e s f o r i n d i v i d u a l u s e .

Sprint Training.pdf

Documents

Transcript of Sprint Training.pdf