Journal of Athletic EnhancementISSN: 2324-9080

Reach Us +44 7482 874137
All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.

Research Article, J Athl Enhanc Vol: 5 Issue: 6

Comparison of Two Modes of Inducing Potentiation of Sprint Cycling Performance

Blake Carney1, Louise A Kelly1 and Hugh Lamont2*
1Department of Exercise Science, California Lutheran University, Thousand Oaks, California, USA
2Department of Kinesiology, recreation, and Sports Science, Costal Carolina University, Conway, South Carolina, USA
Corresponding author : Hugh Lamont
Department of Kinesiology
recreation, and Sports Science, Costal Carolina University, #3400, 60 W.
Olsen Road, Thousand Oaks, California 91360, USA
Tel: 001 805-493-3407
Fax: 001 805-493-3860
E-mail: [email protected]
Received: July 29, 2016 Accepted: September 26, 2016 Published: October 01, 2016
Citation: Carney B, Kelly LA, Lamont H (2016) Comparison of Two Modes of Inducing Potentiation of Sprint Cycling Performance. J Athl Enhanc 5:6. doi: 10.4172/2324-9080.1000243

Abstract

Background: The use of Post-activation potentiation (PAP) techniques is becoming increasingly popular prior to power-based sports training and competition. A Wingate cycle test is widely used to measure work and power output during short, high-intensity bouts.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the differences between two conditioning activities (Loaded Counter Movement Vertical jumps vs. Dynamic Mid-Thigh Pulls) upon a 15s Alactic cycle test.

Methods: 11 male subjects (Mean Age=22.3 ± 4.6 years, were utilized in this study, each performed 3, 15 second maximal bouts of exercise on the cycle ergometer, with a relative load of 0.08 kg/kg BW. The order of conditions was randomized, following a mandatory warm up one maximal bout was a control, the others tested possible potentiation following the two separate conditioning activities, Lower extremity plyometrics with 5 sets of 3 maximal explosive bouts with 10% body weight (condition 1) and dynamic mid-thigh pulls with 5 sets of 3 maximal explosive bout with 1.5 times body weight (condition2). 2-ANOVA”s where used to compare between conditions, significance was set at p<0.05.

Results: Both conditioning activities showed significant improvement compared to control for Maximum Power (p<0.05), and condition2 showed a significant improvement compared to control for Relative Peak Power (p<0.05). There were no significant differences seen between the 2 PAP protocols (p>0.05).

Conclusion: Both PAP protocols improved power measured by ALactic cycle test greater than the control. The use of loaded CMVJ’s prior to BMX competition may be a viable practical alternative to DMTCP’s.

Keywords: Conditioning activity; Wingate; Power; Complex training; Phosphorylation; Mid-thigh pulls

Track Your Manuscript

Share This Page