Display options
Cite
Stien N, Strate M, Andersen V, et al. Effects of Overspeed or Overload Plyometric Training on Jump Height and Lifting Velocity. Sports Med Int Open. 2020;4(2):E32-E38doi: 10.1055/a-1116-0749.
Stien, N., Strate, M., Andersen, V., & Saeterbakken, A. H. (2020). Effects of Overspeed or Overload Plyometric Training on Jump Height and Lifting Velocity. Sports medicine international open, 4(2), E32-E38. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1116-0749
Stien, Nicolay, et al. "Effects of Overspeed or Overload Plyometric Training on Jump Height and Lifting Velocity." Sports medicine international open vol. 4,2 (2020): E32-E38. doi: https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1116-0749
Stien N, Strate M, Andersen V, Saeterbakken AH. Effects of Overspeed or Overload Plyometric Training on Jump Height and Lifting Velocity. Sports Med Int Open. 2020 Apr 01;4(2):E32-E38. doi: 10.1055/a-1116-0749. eCollection 2020 Aug. PMID: 32258385; PMCID: PMC7113009.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Sports Med Int Open. 2020 Apr 01;4(2):E32-E38. doi: 10.1055/a-1116-0749. eCollection 2020 Aug.

Effects of Overspeed or Overload Plyometric Training on Jump Height and Lifting Velocity.

Sports medicine international open

Nicolay Stien, Morten Strate, Vidar Andersen, Atle Hole Saeterbakken

Affiliations

  1. Department of Sport, Food and Natural Sciences, Hogskulen pa Vestlandet - Campus Sogndal, Sogndal, Norway.

PMID: 32258385 PMCID: PMC7113009 DOI: 10.1055/a-1116-0749

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine the effects of overspeed or overload plyometric training on jump height and lifting velocity in resistance trained females without plyometric training experience. Fifty-six participants (age: 21.2±1.7 years; body mass: 65.1±8.2 kg; height: 168.0±5.9 cm) were randomly allocated to either an overspeed (n=18), overload (n=18), or passive control (n=16) group. The two training groups completed 18.7±1.7 sessions consisting of three different plyometric exercises with overspeed or overload over eight weeks. Apart from the external loading, the two training modalities were identical. Following the training period, the changes in the recorded variables were not significantly different from those in the control group, nor did the training groups differ from each other. The training groups improved peak and average lifting velocity in the 40 and 60% of body mass loading conditions (9.50-33.37%, p=<0.001-0.038), whereas only the average lifting velocity improved in the 80% of body mass loading condition (OS: 14.47%, p<0.001 and OL: 23.13%, p<0.001). No significant changes occurred in the control group (9.18-13.55%, P=0.062-0.980). Overspeed and overload plyometric training may be viable methods for improving lifting velocity, but not squat jump height, in a population without plyometric training experience.

Keywords: muscle thickness; testing; training; velocity

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2013 Oct;113(10):2511-21 - PubMed
  2. Sports Med. 2010 Oct 1;40(10):859-95 - PubMed
  3. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2013 Aug;113(8):2133-42 - PubMed
  4. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2019 Oct 15;:1-7 - PubMed
  5. Clin Anat. 2007 Mar;20(2):144-9 - PubMed
  6. Front Physiol. 2017 Sep 26;8:742 - PubMed
  7. Front Physiol. 2017 Jan 09;7:677 - PubMed
  8. Br J Sports Med. 2007 Jun;41(6):349-55; discussion 355 - PubMed
  9. Int J Sports Med. 2016 Dec;37(13):1060-1065 - PubMed
  10. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007 Oct;39(10):1757-64 - PubMed
  11. Int J Sports Med. 2011 May;32(5):365-72 - PubMed
  12. J Strength Cond Res. 2005 Feb;19(1):169-76 - PubMed
  13. Int J Sports Med. 2019 Dec;40(13):813-817 - PubMed
  14. J Sci Med Sport. 2011 Jan;14(1):85-9 - PubMed
  15. Physiol Rep. 2015 Aug;3(8): - PubMed
  16. Can J Appl Sport Sci. 1981 Jun;6(2):87-92 - PubMed
  17. J Appl Physiol (1985). 1993 Jan;74(1):359-68 - PubMed
  18. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2018 Apr;50(4):729-738 - PubMed
  19. J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Aug;25(8):2219-27 - PubMed

Publication Types