Pediatric exercise science · 2024
Physical Determinants of Sprint and Long Jump Performance in Male Youth Track-and-Field Athletes With Differing Maturity Statuses.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Baker James, Read Paul, Graham-Smith Philip, Monaco Mauricio, Varamenti Evdokia, Cardinale Marco, Jones Thomas W
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study examined the physical determinants of 60-m sprint and long jump (LJ) performance and differences between maturity groups in physical characteristics in young male track-and-field athletes.
METHODS: Competition results, countermovement jump, isometric leg press, 10-5 repeated jump test, and 50-m sprint were collected over 3 seasons for 54 male athletes (age 13 [1] y; stature 160.0 [8.9] cm; body mass, 48.0 [9.8] kg; percentage predicted adult height 92.2% [5.5%]) grouped by maturity status: approaching- (n = 16), circa- (n = 19), and post-peak height velocity (PHV) (n = 19).
RESULTS: There were significant between-group differences in 60 m, LJ, and all physical testing variables (P < .001, g = 0.88-5.44) when comparing the approaching- and circa-PHV groups with the post-PHV group. Significant differences were identified between the approaching- and circa-PHV groups in 40-m (P = .033, g = 0.89), 50-m (P = .024, g = 1.64), and 60-m (P < .001, g = 0.89) sprint times. Countermovement jump and 50-m sprint variables were consistently important for projection of 60 m and LJ performance across the valid multivariate models.
CONCLUSIONS: Large differences in performance across maturity groups highlight the importance of understanding athletes' maturity status to accurately interpret performance. Several physical performance variables were important for projecting competition 60 m and LJ performance.
METHODS: Competition results, countermovement jump, isometric leg press, 10-5 repeated jump test, and 50-m sprint were collected over 3 seasons for 54 male athletes (age 13 [1] y; stature 160.0 [8.9] cm; body mass, 48.0 [9.8] kg; percentage predicted adult height 92.2% [5.5%]) grouped by maturity status: approaching- (n = 16), circa- (n = 19), and post-peak height velocity (PHV) (n = 19).
RESULTS: There were significant between-group differences in 60 m, LJ, and all physical testing variables (P < .001, g = 0.88-5.44) when comparing the approaching- and circa-PHV groups with the post-PHV group. Significant differences were identified between the approaching- and circa-PHV groups in 40-m (P = .033, g = 0.89), 50-m (P = .024, g = 1.64), and 60-m (P < .001, g = 0.89) sprint times. Countermovement jump and 50-m sprint variables were consistently important for projection of 60 m and LJ performance across the valid multivariate models.
CONCLUSIONS: Large differences in performance across maturity groups highlight the importance of understanding athletes' maturity status to accurately interpret performance. Several physical performance variables were important for projecting competition 60 m and LJ performance.