Shyam Chavda

Data analysis for strength and conditioning coaches: using Excel to analyze reliability, differences, and relationships

ABSTRACT STATISTICAL ANALYSIS IS CRUCIAL TO THE ROLE OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING, AND COACHES SHOULD BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THEIR DATA ARE RELIABLE AND OBJECTIVELY DETERMINE DIFFERENCES AND RELATIONSHIPS. THESE ANALYTICAL SKILLS ARE CENTRAL TO OUR ABILITY OF UNCOVERING TRENDS AND ASSOCIATIONS, MAKING PREDICTIONS AND ASSESSING THE EFFICACY OF TRAINING PROGRAMS. THIS ARTICLE REVIEWS STATISTICAL TESTS AVAILABLE THROUGH MICROSOFT EXCEL, COVERING RELIABILITY (THROUGH THE COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION), THE SMALLEST WORTHWHILE CHANGE (I.E., THE FIRST MEANINGFUL DIFFERENCE IN SCORES), EFFECT SIZES (I.E., THE MAGNITUDE OF CHANGE BETWEEN PERFORMANCE SCORES), AND RELATIONSHIPS (I.E., CORRELATIONS).

Physical characteristics underpinning lunging and change of direction speed in fencing

Abstract Turner, A, Bishop, C, Chavda, S, Edwards, M, Brazier, J, Kilduff, LP. Physical characteristics underpinning lunging and change of direction speed in fencing. J Strength Cond Res 30(8): 2235–2241, 2016—Lunge velocity (LV) and change of direction speed (CODS) are considered fundamental to success during fencing competitions; investigating the physical characteristics that underpin these is the aim of this study. Seventy fencers from the British Fencing National Academy took part and on average (±SD) were 16.83 ± 1.72 years of age, 178.13 ± 8.91 cm tall, 68.20 ± 9.64 kg in mass, and had 6.25 ± 2.23 years fencing experience. The relationship between anthropometric characteristics (height, arm span, and adductor flexibility) and measures of lower-body power (bilateral and unilateral countermovement jump height and reactive strength index) were examined in their ability to influence LV and CODS. In testing the former, fencers lunged (over a self-selected distance) to and from a force plate, where front leg impact and rear leg propulsive force were quantified; the lunging distance was divided by time to establish LV. Change of direction speed was measured over 12 m involving shuttles of between 2 and 4 m. Results revealed that LV and CODS averaged at 3.35 m·s−1 and 5.45 seconds, respectively, and in both cases, standing broad jump was the strongest predictor (r = 0.51 and −0.65, respectively) of performance. Rear leg drive and front leg impact force averaged at 14.61 N·kg−1 and 3 times body weight, respectively, with single leg jumps revealing an asymmetry favoring the front leg of 9 ± 8%. In conclusion, fencers should train lower-body power emphasizing horizontal displacement, noting that this seems to offset any advantage one would expect fencers of a taller stature to have. Also, the commonly reported asymmetry between legs is apparent from adolescence and thus also requires some attention.

Physical Characteristics underpinning Repetitive Lunging In Fencing.

Abstract Turner, AN, Marshall, G, Phillips, J, Noto, A, Buttigieg, C, Chavda, S, Downing, W, Atlay, N, Dimitriou, L, and Kilduff, L. Physical characteristics underpinning repetitive lunging in fencing. J Strength Cond Res 30(11): 3134–3139, 2016—Given the repetitive demand to execute lunging and changes in direction within fencing, the ability to sustain these at maximal capacity is fundamental to performance. The aim of this study was threefold. First, to provide normative values for this variable referred to as repeat lunge ability (RLA) and second to identify the physical characteristics that underpin it. Third, was to establish if a cause and effect relationship existed by training the associated characteristics. Assessment of lower-body power, reactive strength, speed, change of direction speed (CODS), and a sport-specific RLA were conducted on senior and junior elite male fencers (n = 36). Fencers were on average (±SD) 18.9 ± 3.2 years of age, 174.35 ± 10.42 cm tall, 70.67 ± 7.35 kg in mass, and 8.5 ± 4.2 years fencing experience. The RLA test had average work times of 16.03 ± 1.40 seconds and demonstrated “large” to “very large” associations with all tested variables, but in particular CODS (r = 0.70) and standing broad jump (SBJ; r = −0.68). Through linear regression analysis, these also provided a 2-predictor model accounting for 61% of the common variance associated with RLA. A cause and effect relationship with SBJ and CODS was confirmed by the training group, where RLA performance in these fencers improved from 15.80 ± 1.07 to 14.90 ± 0.86 seconds, with the magnitude of change reported as “moderate” (effect size (ES) = 0.93). Concurrent improvements were also noted in both SBJ (216.86 ± 17.15 vs. 221.71 ± 17.59 cm) and CODS (4.44 ± 0.29 vs. 4.31 ± 0.09 seconds) and while differences were only significant in SBJ, magnitudes of change were classed as “small” (ES = 0.28) and “moderate” (ES = 0.61), respectively. In conclusion, to improve RLA strength and conditioning coaches should focus on improving lower-body power and reactive strength, noting that jump training and plyometrics designed to enhance horizontal propulsion may be most effective, and translate to improvement in CODS also.

Asymmetries of the Lower Limb: The Calculation Conundrum in Strength Training and Conditioning

ABSTRACT ASYMMETRY DETECTION HAS BEEN A TOPIC OF INTEREST IN THE STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING (SC) LITERATURE WITH NUMEROUS STUDIES PROPOSING MANY DIFFERENT EQUATIONS FOR CALCULATING BETWEEN-LIMB DIFFERENCES. HOWEVER, THERE DOES NOT SEEM TO BE A CLEAR DELINEATION AS TO WHICH EQUATION SHOULD BE USED WHEN QUANTIFYING ASYMMETRIES. CONSEQUENTLY, THE AUTHORS HAVE UNCOVERED 9 DIFFERENT EQUATIONS THAT POSE CONFUSION AS TO WHICH METHOD THE SC SPECIALIST SHOULD USE DURING DATA INTERPRETATION. THE AIM OF THIS ARTICLE IS TO IDENTIFY THE DIFFERENT EQUATIONS CURRENTLY BEING USED TO CALCULATE ASYMMETRIES AND OFFER PRACTITIONERS A GUIDE AS TO WHICH METHOD MAY BE MOST APPROPRIATE WHEN MEASURING ASYMMETRIES.

A needs analysis and field-based testing battery for basketball

ABSTRACT BASKETBALL IS A HIGH-INTENSITY SPORT REQUIRING A RANGE OF ATHLETIC ABILITIES: EXPLOSIVE STRENGTH AND RATE OF FORCE DEVELOPMENT, AGILITY, COORDINATION, SPEED, ANAEROBIC LACTATE, AND ALACTIC CAPACITIES. WITHIN ELITE BASKETBALL STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING PROGRAMS, DISTINCT VARIATION IN THE ASSESSMENT OF SUCH QUALITIES IS EVIDENT, HIGHLIGHTING THE NEED FOR EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE TO DETERMINE ACCEPTABLE VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF THE MEASURES USED. THEREFORE, THE PURPOSE OF THIS REVIEW IS TO DETERMINE THE PHYSIOLOGICAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE SPORT, SO THAT SUITABLE TESTING APPROACHES CAN BE IDENTIFIED FROM WHICH COACHES CAN OPTIMALLY ASSESS THE PHYSICAL CAPABILITIES OF THEIR ATHLETES.

Do fencers require a weapon-specific approach to strength and conditioning training?

Abstract Turner, AN, Bishop, CJ, Cree, JA, Edwards, ML, Chavda, S, Read, PJ, and Kirby, DMJ. Do fencers require a weapon-specific approach to strength and conditioning training? J Strength Cond Res 31(6): 1662–1668, 2017—There are 3 types of weapons used in Olympic fencing: the épée, foil, and sabre. The aim of this study was to determine if fencers exhibited different physical characteristics across weapons. Seventy-nine male (n = 46) and female (n = 33) national standard fencers took part in this study. Fencers from each weapon (male and female), i.e., épée (n = 19 and 10), foil (n = 22 and 14), and sabre (n = 13 and 10), were (mean ± SD) 15.9 ± 0.7 years of age, 178.5 ± 7.9 cm tall, 67.4 ± 12.2 kg in mass and had 6.3 ± 2.3 years fencing experience; all were in regular training (∼4 times per week). Results revealed that across all performance tests (lower-body power, reactive strength index, change of direction speed, and repeat lunge ability), there was no significant main effect for weapon in male fencers (p = 0.63) or female fencers (p = 0.232), but a significant main affect for gender (p < 0.001). Pairwise comparisons revealed that male fencers scored better during the countermovement jump, change of direction speed, and repeat lunge ability test (p < 0.001). The former findings may be because of similarities in bout intensity and time, movement types (lunging and changing direction), and the need to execute competition actions as explosively as possible. Based on the findings of the present study, it could be indicated that épée, foil, and sabre fencers do not require a weapon-specific approach to strength and conditioning training. Each fencer should target the area they are weakest at, rather than an area that they feel best represents the unique demands of their weapon.

Effects of Concurrent Activation Potentiation on Countermovement Jump Performance.

Abstract Mullane, MD, Maloney, SJ, Chavda, S, Williams, S, and Turner, AN. Effects of concurrent activation potentiation on countermovement jump performance. J Strength Cond Res 29(12): 3311–3316, 2015—The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of concurrent activation potentiation (CAP) on countermovement jump (CMJ) performance. Twenty-four resistance-trained males (mean ± SD; age: 25 ± 4 years, body mass: 78.7 ± 10.3 kg) performed a CMJ on a force plate under 4 different conditions: (a) a control condition where the CMJ was performed with hands on hips and lips pursed, thus preventing jaw or fist contraction from occurring, (b) a jaw condition where the CMJ was performed with maximal contraction of the jaw, (c) a fist condition where the CMJ was performed with maximal contraction of the fists, and (d) a combined condition where the CMJ was performed with maximal contraction of both jaw and fists. Jump height (JH), peak force (PF), rate of force development (RFD), and time to peak force (TTPF) were calculated from the vertical force trace. There was no significant difference in PF (p = 0.88), TTPF (p = 0.96), JH (p = 0.45), or RFD (p = 0.06) between the 4 conditions. Effect size (ES) comparisons suggest a potential for CMJ with fist and jaw contraction (BOTH condition) to augment both PF (2.4%; ES: 0.62) and RFD (9.9%; ES: 0.94) over a normal CMJ (NORM condition). It is concluded that CAP by singular and combined contractions has no significant impact on CMJ performance; however, substantial interindividual variation in response to CAP was observed, and such techniques may therefore warrant consideration on an individual basis.

Force-time Characteristics of the Countermovement Jump: Analyzing the Curve in Excel

ABSTRACT INCREASED POPULARITY IN THE UTILIZATION OF FORCE PLATES TO MEASURE COUNTERMOVEMENT JUMPS (CMJS) FOR PERFORMANCE MONITORING WARRANTS THE NEED FOR STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING COACHES AND SPORT SCIENTISTS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND ITS FORCE-TIME CHARACTERISTICS AND THE CALCULATION OF ITS ASSOCIATED VARIABLES. THIS ARTICLE AIMS TO PROVIDE INFORMATION ON HOW TO UNDERSTAND AND ANALYZE THE FORCE-TIME CURVE OF CMJS IN MICROSOFT EXCEL, THUS PROVIDING PRACTITIONERS AN INEXPENSIVE AND ACCESSIBLE ALTERNATIVE TO READILY AVAILABLE SOFTWARE ON THE MARKET.

Heavy Barbell Hip Thrusts Do Not Effect Sprint Performance: An 8-Week Randomized-Controlled Study.

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of an 8-week barbell hip thrust strength training program on sprint performance. Twenty-one collegiate athletes (15 males and 6 females) were randomly assigned to either an intervention (n = 11, age 27.36 ± 3.17 years, height 169.55 ± 10.38 cm, weight 72.7± 18 kg) or control group (n = 10, age 27.2 ± 3.36 years, height 176.2 ± 7.94 cm, weight 76.39 ± 11.47 kg). 1RM hip thrust, 40m sprint time, and individual 10m split timings: 0-10, 10-20, 20-30, 30-40m, were the measured variables; these recorded at both the baseline and post testing time points. Following the 8-week hip thrust strength training intervention significantly greater 1RM hip thrust scores for the training group were observed (p < 0.001, d = 0.77 [mean difference 44.09 kg]), however this failed to translate into changes in sprint time for any of the measured distances (all sprint performance measures: p > 0.05, r = 0.05 - 0.37). No significant differences were seen for the control group for 1RM hip thrust (p = 0.106, d = 0.24 [mean difference 9.4 kg]) or sprint time (all sprint performance measures: p > 0.05, r = 0.13 - 0.47). These findings suggest that increasing maximum hip thrust strength through use of the barbell hip thrust does not appear to transfer into improvements in sprint performance in collegiate level athletes.