Fabrice G. Risso

The 1 repetition maximum mechanics of a high-handle hexagonal bar deadlift compared with a conventional deadlift as measured by a linear position transducer

Abstract Lockie, RG, Moreno, MR, Lazar, A, Risso, FG, Liu, TM, Stage, AA, Birmingham-Babauta, SA, Torne, IA, Stokes, JJ, Giuliano, DV, Davis, DL, Orjalo, AJ, and Callaghan, SJ. The 1 repetition maximum mechanics of a high-handle hexagonal bar deadlift compared with a conventional deadlift as measured by a linear position transducer. J Strength Cond Res 32(1): 150–161, 2018—The high-handle hexagonal bar deadlift (HHBD), a variation of the conventional deadlift (CD), is said to reduce the lift range of motion, which may change the mechanics of the lift. However, no research has investigated this. This study compared the mechanics between a 1 repetition maximum (1RM) CD and HHBD. Thirty-one strength-trained subjects (21 men, 10 women) completed a 1RM CD and HHBD. A linear position transducer measured lift distance, duration, and work; and peak and mean power, velocity, and force. The presence of a sticking region (SR) was determined for each lift. A repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) calculated differences between 1RM CD and HHBD mechanics. A one-way ANOVA compared the mechanics of each lift between subjects who exhibited an SR or not, and the SR between the CD and HHBD. Significance was set at p < 0.01. Subjects lifted a greater load in the HHBD (154.50 ± 45.29 kg) compared with the CD (134.72 ± 40.63 kg). Lift distance and duration were 22 and 25% shorter during the 1RM HHBD, respectively. The HHBD featured greater peak power and velocity, and peak and mean force; more work was done in the CD. Most subjects did not exhibit a CD (68%) or HHBD (77%) SR. There were no differences in CD or HHBD mechanics between subjects with or without an SR, and no differences in SR region distance or duration between the CD and HHBD. Greater force can be generated in the HHBD, which could have implications for strength-training adaptations over time.

Relationships and Predictive Capabilities of Jump Assessments to Soccer-Specific Field Test Performance in Division I Collegiate Players

Leg power is an important characteristic for soccer, and jump tests can measure this capacity. Limited research has analyzed relationships between jumping and soccer-specific field test performance in collegiate male players. Nineteen Division I players completed tests of: leg power (vertical jump (VJ), standing broad jump (SBJ), left- and right-leg triple hop (TH)); linear (30 m sprint; 0–5 m, 5–10 m, 0–10, 0–30 m intervals) and change-of-direction (505) speed; soccer-specific fitness (Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level 2); and 7 × 30-m sprints to measure repeated-sprint ability (RSA; total time (TT), performance decrement (PD)). Pearson’s correlations (r) determined jump and field test relationships; stepwise regression ascertained jump predictors of the tests (p < 0.05). All jumps correlated with the 0–5, 0–10, and 0–30 m sprint intervals (r = −0.65–−0.90). VJ, SBJ, and left- and right-leg TH correlated with RSA TT (r = −0.51–−0.59). Right-leg TH predicted the 0–5 and 0–10 m intervals (R2 = 0.55–0.81); the VJ predicted the 0–30 m interval and RSA TT (R2 = 0.41–0.84). Between-leg TH asymmetry correlated with and predicted left-leg 505 and RSA PD (r = −0.68–0.62; R2 = 0.39–0.46). Improvements in jumping ability could contribute to faster speed and RSA performance in collegiate soccer players.

An Investigation of the Mechanics and Sticking Region of a One-Repetition Maximum Close-Grip Bench Press versus the Traditional Bench Press

The close-grip bench press (CGBP) is a variation of the traditional bench press (TBP) that uses a narrower grip (~95% of biacromial distance (BAD)) and has potential application for athletes performing explosive arm actions from positions where the hands are held close to the torso. Limited research has investigated CGBP mechanics compared to the TBP. Twenty-seven resistance-trained individuals completed a one-repetition maximum TBP and CGBP. The TBP was performed with the preferred grip; the CGBP with a grip width of 95% BAD. A linear position transducer measured lift distance and duration; peak and mean power, velocity, and force; distance and time when peak power occurred; and work. Pre-sticking region (PrSR), sticking region, and post-sticking region distance and duration for each lift was measured. A repeated measures ANOVA was used to derive differences between TBP and CGBP mechanics (p < 0.01); effect sizes (d) were also calculated. A greater load was lifted in the TBP, thus mean force was greater (d = 0.16–0.17). Peak power and velocity were higher in the CGBP, which had a longer PrSR distance (d = 0.49–1.32). The CGBP could emphasize power for athletes that initiate explosive upper-body actions with the hands positioned close to the torso.

Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level 2 and Its Relationship With Other Typical Soccer Field Tests in Female Collegiate Soccer Players

Abstract Lockie, RG, Jalilvand, F, Moreno, MR, Orjalo, AJ, Risso, FG, and Nimphius, S. Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test level 2 and its relationship with other typical soccer field tests in female collegiate soccer players. J Strength Cond Res 31(10): 2667–2677, 2017—The ability to complete high-intensity running is essential for soccer. The Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level 2 (YYIRT2) can measure this capacity, but there is limited information regarding this assessment in collegiate female soccer players. This study investigated the YYIRT2 as a measure of high-intensity running in this population, and its relationship to other soccer field tests. Twenty-one players from a Division I team were recruited. In addition to the YYIRT2, subjects completed linear (0–5, 0–10, and 0–30 m sprint intervals) and change-of-direction (pro-agility and 60-yard shuttle) speed tests, as well as the YYIRT Level 1 (YYIRT1), to assess relationships with YYIRT2 by correlations (p ⩽ 0.05). The correlation of YYIRT1 with the speed tests was also assessed. The YYIRT1 and YYIRT2 were standardized using z-scores for comparison with elite benchmarks to investigate relative performance on each test. The YYIRT2 and YYIRT1 distances did not significantly correlate with those of the speed tests (r = −0.251 to 0.274). There was a large relationship between YYIRT2 and YYIRT1 distances (r = 0.582), although the explained variance was low (33.87%). Mean YYIRT2 z-scores (−4.29 ± 1.66) indicated a performance further from elite benchmarks than those of the YYIRT1 (−1.92 ± 1.61), and 90.5% (19 of 21) subjects performed relatively better in the YYIRT1 than YYIRT2. The YYIRT2 provided a more specific measure of high-intensity running to that of the YYIRT1 in collegiate female soccer players. Coaches may consider using the YYIRT2 to gauge and track progress of high-intensity running capabilities and create training programs to improve this ability in female players.

Relationships between mechanical variables in the traditional and close-grip bench press

Abstract The study aim was to determine relationships between mechanical variables in the one-repetition maximum (1RM) traditional bench press (TBP) and close-grip bench press (CGBP). Twenty resistance-trained men completed a TBP and CGBP 1RM. The TBP was performed with the preferred grip; the CGBP with a grip width of 95% biacromial distance. A linear position transducer measured: lift distance and duration; work; and peak and mean power, velocity, and force. Paired samples t-tests (p < 0.05) compared the 1RM and mechanical variables for the TBP and CGBP; effect sizes (d) were also calculated. Pearson’s correlations (r; p < 0.05) computed relationships between the TBP and CGBP. 1RM, lift duration, and mean force were greater in the TBP (d = 0.30-3.20). Peak power and velocity was greater for the CGBP (d = 0.50-1.29). The 1RM TBP correlated with CGBP 1RM, power, and force (r = 0.685-0.982). TBP work correlated with CGBP 1RM, lift distance, power, force, and work (r = 0.542-0.931). TBP power correlated with CGBP 1RM, power, force, velocity, and work (r = 0.484-0.704). TBP peak and mean force related to CGBP 1RM, power, and force (r = 0.596-0.980). Due to relationships between the load, work, power, and force for the TBP and CGBP, the CGBP could provide similar strength adaptations to the TBP with long-term use. The velocity profile for the CGBP was different to that of the TBP. The CGBP could be used specifically to improve high-velocity, upper-body pushing movements.

A Preliminary Case Analysis of the Post- Activation Potentiation Effects of Plyometrics on Sprint Performance in Women

Abstract This study provided a case analysis of the effects of plyometrics on post-activation potentiation (PAP) of 20-m (0-5, 0-10, 0-20 m intervals) sprint performance in strength-trained females. Three college-aged participants performed a one-repetition maximum (1RM) squat, which was used to set the load for a jump squat with 30% 1RM (JS30). Over three sessions, participants performed three PAP protocols: a control condition of 4 min rest (CC); 3 sets x 5 repetitions of the JS30; and 3 sets x 10 repetitions of the alternate leg bound (ALB). Peak and mean power were recorded during the JS30. Participants performed two baseline sprints prior to each condition, and then six sprints from immediately after for 16 min post. Results indicated that the JS30 and ALB could potentiate sprinting, although responses were highly individual. The two more powerful participants experienced more sprint enhancements across more time points than the less powerful participant. Any performance changes were in the range of 1-4%, which is typical of PAP research. It cannot, however, be confirmed whether the JS30 and ALB were superior to the CC. Nonetheless, the data suggest the JS30 and ALB could potentiate sprinting in females. Further research is needed to confirm these findings.

Limited Post-activation Potentiation Effects Provided by the Walking Lunge on Sprint Acceleration: A Preliminary Analysis

RESEARCH ARTICLE Limited Post-activation Potentiation Effects Provided by the Walking Lunge on Sprint Acceleration: A Preliminary Analysis Robert G. Lockie, Adrina Lazar, Fabrice G. Risso, Dominic V. Giuliano, Tricia M. Liu, Alyssa A. Stage, Samantha A. Birmingham-Babauta, John J. Stokes, DeShaun L. Davis, Matthew R. Moreno and Ashley J. Orjalo Department of Kinesiology, California State University, Fullerton, USA Department of Kinesiology, California State University, Northridge, USA

Between-Leg Mechanical Differences as Measured by the Bulgarian Split-Squat: Exploring Asymmetries and Relationships with Sprint Acceleration

Between-leg strength differences can negatively influence sprint acceleration. The challenge is to find a method to measure this within a unilateral exercise. This study analyzed a five repetition-maximum (5RM) Bulgarian split-squat (BSS) to identify between-leg differences for the dominant and non-dominant legs in peak and mean power, force, and velocity as measured by a linear position transducer. Between-leg differences in these variables were correlated with 20-m (0–5, 0–10, 0–20 m intervals) sprint velocity. Eight men were assessed in the 5RM BSS and 20-m sprint. T-tests calculated between-leg differences in power, force, and velocity. Spearman’s correlations calculated relationships between the between-leg differences in the mechanical variables with velocity over each interval. When comparing the dominant and non-dominant legs, there were significant (p = 0.002–0.056) differences in 11 of 12 variables. However, percentage differences were low (~0.3–12%). There was one large, non-significant correlation (best repetition mean force between-leg difference and 0–5 m velocity; ρ = −0.810) out of 36 relationships. The BSS can provide a profile of between-leg differences in power, force, and velocity. There were limited relationships between the BSS between-leg differences and 20-m sprint velocities. Smaller between-leg differences in BSS power, force, and velocity could ensure minimal impact on acceleration.

Profiling of Junior College Football Players and Differences between Position Groups

This study profiled junior college football players. Sixty-two subjects completed vertical jump (VJ; height and peak power), standing broad jump (SBJ), 36.58 m sprint, pro-agility shuttle, three-cone drill, and maximal-repetition bench press and front squat. The sample included 2 quarterbacks (QB), 7 running backs (RB), 13 wide receivers (WR), 1 tight end (TE), 18 defensive backs (DB), 8 linebackers (LB), and 13 offensive and defensive linemen (LM). To investigate positional differences, subjects were split into skill (SK; WR, DB), big skill (BSK; QB, RB, TE, LB), and LM groups. A one-way ANOVA determined between-group differences. LM were taller and heavier than SK and BSK players. The SK and BSK groups were faster than LM in the 0–36.58 m sprint, pro-agility shuttle, and three-cone drill (p ≤ 0.009). The SK group had greater VJ height and SBJ distance; LM generated greater VJ peak power (p ≤ 0.022). There were no between-group differences in the strength endurance tests. Compared to Division I data, junior college players were smaller, slower, and performed worse in jump tests. Positional differences in junior college football are typical to that of established research. Junior college players should attempt to increase body mass, and improve speed and lower-body power.

An introductory analysis as to the influence of lower-body power on multidirectional speed in collegiate female rugby players

Abstract This study investigated relationships between lower-body power, measured by a vertical jump (VJ) and standing broad jump (SBJ), with multidirectional speed in collegiate female rugby players. The rugby player data was compared to that of general team sport athletes to ascertain whether there were characteristics specific to collegiate rugby players. Multi-directional speed was measured by a 20-meter (m) sprint (0-5, 0-10, 0-20 m intervals) and 505 change-of-direction speed test. Eight rugby players and eight team sport athletes completed all tests. Spearman’s correlations calculated relationships between the VJ and SBJ with the speed tests, and stepwise multiple regressions determined whether the jump tests predicted speed performance (p ≤ 0.05). For the rugby players, the VJ correlated with the 0-20 m interval (r = −0.73). The SBJ correlated with the 0-5 and 0-10 m intervals, and the left-leg 505 (r = −0.71 to −0.88), and predicted 0-5 m and left-leg 505 time (r2 = 0.50-0.58). For the team sport athletes, only the VJ correlated with left-leg 505 (r = −0.80), and predicted left- and right-leg 505 times (r2 = 0.61-0.69). The results suggest that horizontal power measured by a SBJ has a greater contribution to multidirectional speed in collegiate female rugby players.