Welcome to CVASPS.com

I want to personally welcome you to our site and thank you for becoming involved.  Our goal is to provide you with the best information possible, both here on our site and at our yearly seminar held in Richmond, VA.  I am truly excited to be able to bring some of the best minds in our field to your computer screen and our facility, in order to educate performance coaches throughout the world so that our athlete’s can reap the benefits.  In the following weeks we will be posting interviews, articles and published research studies by individuals who I feel are the best of the best in our profession.  I hope that you find this information as useful and valuable as we have.  
Along with our web site, you will find all of the products from each of our presenters and contributors available for sale as well.  These people have spent their lives trying to find the most productive and efficient means of training athletes, so you will not find anything on this site that I personally have not read, do not own, and have not used on a daily basis in the training of my athletes. It goes with out saying that all of these resources are of top quality and highly recommended to anyone in our field.

I’d also like to take this opportunity to ask you to please “like” us on Facebook, follow us on Twitter and subscribe to our page on YouTube. All of the information on any updates, whether it be to the seminar, site or store, will be provided through those along with our news letter.

Thank you again for checking out our site.  I am sure that you will find what we provide to be the best information available in one spot on the web.

Rick Brunner Lecture from Michigan Tech

Matt Thome, Head Strength and Conditioning Coach at Michigan Tech, had 2014 Presenter Rick Brunner as a guest lecturer for his class this past semester. Matt was kind enough to share this with us so that our readers and attendees could get a preview of Rick’s presentation and learn more about Mr. Brunner.  In the 53 minute lecture that was given to Matt’s undergraduate Strength and Conditioning class Rick goes through his background, how he got into sport nutrition, and different supplement and nutrition strategies to help improve athletic performance.

To see more from Rick click here to book your seat for The 2014 Seminar Today!

To pick up Rick’s latest work through Ultimate Athlete Concepts, click here!

Introducing 2014 Presenter, Val Nasedkin

Today I am excited to reintroduce Val Nasedkin. Val Nasedkin, a former decathlete at the national level for the former Soviet Union, is the co-founder and technical director of Omegawave, a pioneering company in the field of functional preparedness and readiness in athletes. He has been a guest lecturer on the principles of training at numerous sport science and physical education universities around the world, and frequently acts as a consultant to Olympic committees, sports federations and national and professional teams for various sports including Dutch Olympic Committee, United States Track and Field Olympic Committee, EPL, Serie A and La Liga teams (Medical Staff), Autonoma University (Barcelona, Spain), Duke University (North Carolina, USA) and University of Calgary (Canadian National Sports Center). After a knock out performance at The 2012 Seminar Val is back to discuss program design and periodization. If you were in Boston this spring, Val will be continuing off of that great presentation, where he discussed training means. We are really excited to have Val back on the docket and can not wait to have him back on campus.

JD: Val! Welcome back to The Seminar! We’re really excited to have you back my friend. Before we get going, let’s catch up everyone on what has been going on with Val for the past 2 years.

VN: Hi, Jay. The most important thing that happened to me is the relocation to Finland. This allowed us at OW to invest into more research projects so more cool things will be coming out this year. Also I am excited to have our new scientist on board. His name is Dr. Roman Fomin and he will be responsible for validation of our training concepts. That means we will be presenting more and more educational and research articles as well as case studies that eventually will be put into book.

JD: Not only will you be translating, but presenting as well. If you could please, give us a quick taste of what to expect. (The implementation and periodization of Victor/Your methods).

VN: Well I can only talk about my part as I haven’t seen Victor’s presentation yet ( I am sure it will be great and give you different perspective on the training process).
On my side I would like to expand on my presentation in Boston last year by going into more details on the process of building a training approach.

JD: Ever since we met, you’ve spoken very highly of Victor. Talk to us about your relationship, how it started, where it started, and how he has influenced your programming.
In 2004 I read 3 pages of discussions between Victor Nikolaevich (Seluyanov) and one of the Russian coaches. Trying to create and systemize my own approach to the training process, this paper made a lot of sense to me.

VN: I really liked the approach he was proposing as it could fit well in my own assumptions. So I applied the training stimuli he was proposing to the methodology I was working on at the time and got positive results. Nowadays, Victor is contributing to OW knowledge. He is part of our coaches and scientists round table, and he will be writing a monthly column for OW Academy(out in the first quarter 2014)

JD: Everyone in the Omegawave community knows you as the go to resource when we have questions. When people begin to monitor their athletes, what are two things that you would advise them of right off the bat?

VN: I think the most important thing is to understand is the big picture of athlete preparation. Details are important but to be able to use them appropriately we need to figure out how they fit in the overall training philosophy. It is important to choose the right exercises(detail) but it is much more important when to use them and how much (big picture)

JD: I Can’t wait to have you back on campus Val, and am really excited to hear what you have to say. Any closing thoughts?

VN: I am looking forward to talking about training and not OW for once!

Today I am elated to introduce a new participant to The Seminar, Dr. Viktor Seluyanov. Viktor Nikolaevich Seluyanov was born in 1946. He is a PhD and professor in the Department of Physical Culture at the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, a state research University. He holds degrees in engineering, pedagogy and biology, and his areas of scientific interest are bio-mechanics, physiology of sports, and sports theory. He is the author of 16 monographs and textbooks, and of more than 300 scientific articles.  By creating a new field in scientific study–”Sports Adaptology”, Dr Seluyanov has successfully developed and applied relevant technologies in the training of athletes on national and club teams in football, hockey, judo, Sambo, wrestling, skating, skiing, Alpine skiing, swimming, orienteering, athletics and other sports. He is also on the Scientific Board of the Russian Olympic Committee.

JD: Dr. Seluyanov, please discuss with us the mistakes you see made by strength and conditioning coaches in the United States and around the world, and what you feel should be done differently/how to correct these issues

VS: The fundamental error in the development of training processes in Russia, the USA, and other countries of the world is in using an empirical approach combined with a low level of understanding of the adaptation processes in the organism of athletes. A successful approach to training requires a comprehensive and systemic approach to the analysis of immediate and long-term adaptation processes, with the utilization of mathematical modelling.

To improve the level of their qualifications, coaches must be familiar with my publications, which outline the theoretical foundations of sports adaptology and technology, and their application in sports.

JD: Discuss your experience working with the preparation of athletes please.

VS: My experience includes working with Olympic champions in football (soccer), skiing, and the biathlon, as well as working with winners of the World Cup in the modern pentathlon, cycling, Sambo, judo, field hockey, and ice hockey.

JD: What will our attendees expect from your presentation here on April 25th, 2013?

VS: At the lecture attendees will learn about new approaches to creating a training process that is based on biological patterns of adaptation to the training load.  They will also learn about the models of primary biological systems, bio-energetic muscle activity with regard to physiological patterns, methods of controlling physical preparation, training methods that produce hyper-plasia of myofibers and mitochondria.

A science-based theoretical approach to the training process will significantly expand the creative possibilities of the coach.  This is the message I hope to share with all of those in attendance.

Introducing 2014 Presenter, Henk Kraaijenhof

With a great excitement I introduce the third presenter for The 2014 Seminar, Henk Kraaijenhof. Henk gave two fantastic presentations at The 2013 Edition of The Seminar, and I could not be any happier to have him back on the docket. A coach working with a wide range of individuals from field hockey, to soccer, to special operation military personal, to, of course, athletics, Henk’s background not only in coaching, but in a scientific approach to coaching is what has made him one of the most sought after coaches in the world for consulting. On top of his great level of knowledge and impressive coaching resume, Henk’s also one of the best guys you’ll meet in coaching.

JD: Henk!  Welcome back to The Seminar!  We’re really excited to have you back my friend.  Before we get going, let’s catch up everyone on what has been going on with Henk for the past 12 months.

HK: Hello Jay, the pleasure is mine, I have fond memories of your seminar last year, meeting a lot of interesting and interested colleagues. Like always a lot of different things are going on here, some things I already posted on my blog: e.g. I lectured at the Nike Performance Summit, went to the best track meet in Athletics, and currently I am working for the Olympic Committee in Holland as teacher and mentor for young national coaches. Of course my clients for testing, athletes and coaches for consulting, tons of lectures, workshops and courses, e.g. on performance nutrition or stress management new style, and in my spare time writing three books at the same time. Next week I am going to work with SF operators abroad. Time, it’s the only thing I have plenty of  ;-)

JD: Henk, your bread and butter has been in athletics, and more specifically in sprinting.  You’ll be discussing how to develop speed with athletes at the 2014 Seminar.  Do you find one portion (start, acceleration, top end) more difficult or requiring more time?  If so, which and why?

HK: Each factor has its own difficulty e.g. reaction time and block start, is there much time to gain? No, but there is time to be lost. Most of the time people react and start faster in the semifinals than in the finals, so I spend time stabilizing reaction time under stress. Acceleration is the most valuable one: it is closely related to strength qualities, it is the largest part of the race, and a better acceleration also gives you a higher maximum speed, apart from a better first part of the race. Maximum speed is hard to improve, since you cannot spend much time running at maximum speed. Speed endurance is a tricky one, because it might negatively influence the other factors. One can spend a lot of time here, e.g. running lots of high intensity tempo’s – 3 sets of 5 times 80 meters = 135 secs, 6x150m in 15.5 = 92.5 seconds.  This in comparison with the little time spent on improving maximum speed (6 times 30m flying start = 6 times 3 secs = 18 secs) or reaction time.  Also at the tape you can lose a race by not dipping or dipping at the wrong time.

JD: You are well known for your work with sprinters, but what many overlook is your work with Tactical Units and team sport athletes.  Could you briefly touch upon the differences with how you handled, say the Dutch Field Hockey Team vs. someone in athletics?

HK: This is an easy question: in case of athletes, I am the one in charge, being responsible for all parts of the training process. In case of team sports I am most of the time only responsible for the conditioning part, so my role and influence depends on the demands of the head coach and I have to interact and communicate my work with him/her and the other coaching staff members.

Besides that, I coach athletes for at least 3 years up to 12 years and within a smaller group, maximum 4-5 athletes at the most, and being present on the track almost every day. Working in teams is always almost of a shorter duration 1-3 years as the head coach often changes in an Olympic cycle.  Still I believe that there is little difference in my approach of team vs. individual athletes.

JD: Though all our discussion I’ve come to know that not only are you well schooled, but well-traveled as well.  Through all of this, who, as coaches, has had the biggest influence on how you approach training your athletes?

HK: Holland is a small country with a history of trading and a language not spoken by many. Therefore most Dutch people are multilingual. So speaking Dutch, English and German and many of us speak French or Spanish, this is a great advantage.

I think that the willingness to learn e.g. another language or investigate new fields of interest basically comes down to your motivation for your own improvement.

Since Europe has a lot of different countries with a lot of different and rather isolated cultures also in sprints and approach to training, there is a lot to learn. I was influenced by the ideas of Valentin Petrovski from Kiev, the whole Russian school of sports, like Verkhoshanski, Matveyev, Bondartchuk, Viru, Kuznetzov, Volkov, and many others. Italy has been a great influence too with
sprint coach Carlo), and my mentor Carmelo Bosco Vittori (Pietro Mennea who has shaped a great part of my concepts. From Switzerland there is the work of Jean-Pierre Egger, famous for his work with throwers (Werner Guenthor and currently Valerie Adams). My dear friend Hakan Andersson from Sweden is a very creative, but neglected sprint coach. The East German sports system also brought forth some brilliant minds and some of them became very good colleagues, despite the difference in ideology and the fact that we were competitors. I should mention the US and Canadian coaches and their training ideas, which I carefully studied: Tom Tellez, John Smith, Bob Kersee, Gary Winckler, and Charlie Francis. Of course there are many more good colleagues that I did not mention for lack of space here.

One of the interesting things is that it is obvious that there are completely different ways that have led to success. Partially to be explained by the fact that we have different athlete populations and  different circumstances such as facilities, climate, etc. So it is hard to transfer a concept developed in another setting to one’s own situation.

JD: Monitoring the training process is something else you’re well versed in.  Who are the people who helped you travel this path and what did they teach you?

HK: Again Carmelo Bosco thought me how to monitor all of the neuromuscular parts of the training process. For the nutritional part I educated myself taking information from many sides and the endurance part is the most standardized and well-researched part of monitoring. For the mental part, I am a firm believer in psychophysiology and have been working with that concept since 1988. And of course the proper use of the Omegawave has been a great step forwards to complete the picture of readiness.

JD: Can’t wait to have you back on campus Henk, and am really excited to hear what you have to say.

HK: Working with high-level coaches on an almost daily base I am very much concerned about education of coaches. Due to improvements of information technologies the coaches’ environment has changed rapidly over the last decades. Despite the promises of progress and improved efficiency I must say that I am not overly happy with these technological developments. Being far from  technophobic, I am also not techno-euphoric. Yes, we have much more information at our fingertips, but many coaches get lost in the flood of information. We need a wave to surf not a tsunami. Experience is still the more valuable as a learning tool than reading Wikipedia. Probably more about this when I come to Richmond again, looking forward to that already.

If you’d like to read more from Henk you can check out his blog, Helping The Best To Get Better at: http://helpingthebesttogetbetter.com/

 

Introducing 2014 presenter, Rick Brunner

Today we are excited to introduce the second speaker for the 2014 Edition of The Seminar, Rick Brunner.  For the past 28 years, Rick Brunner has helped over 1,500 explosive athletes and their strength and conditioning coaches in football, baseball, hockey, basketball, track and field sprints, throws, and jumps, Olympic weightlifting, and many others achieve breakaway gains in reaction, starting power, maximal speed, striking force, and power-endurance. As a nutrition scientist and coach, Rick pulls the facts from thousands of research studies to make practical sense of their application in real-world training/nutrition plans. Rick calls upon his extensive training and collaboration with Soviet and Russian scientists since the 80′s to help deliver modern useful information that athletes in explosive sports can use right away.

JD: If you could, please give our readers a little background information about yourself, what your niche in the world of athletics is, accomplishments, how you got there, education, any products you have available,, and/or notable  publications.

RB: My formal education includes a BS in Agriculture and an MBA from Cal Poly in San Luis Obispo, CA. I then began studying sport nutrition ergogenics in Russia between 1988-1996, and continued through self-education on the topic thereafter. Athletics wise, I played football (Starting OT and DE) and threw the shot put (league champion all 4 years) and discus in high school, and threw the hammer in college (NCAA All-American at Cal Poly).

I began a career in sports nutrition in 1986. My early education was from working mostly with Soviet scientists and coaches. Through this work and these relationships I developed over 40 sport supplements for various companies including my own, Atletika, from 1989-2003.

In 1990 I co-authored a book titled “Soviet Training and Recovery Methods” with Dr. Ben Tabachnik. I have also been the sports nutrition editor for numerous publications including: Powerlifting USA, Muscle and Fitness, Flex, Ironman, Musclemag, and Natural Bodybuilding magazines 1990-2001.

Through my work I was give the honor of being awarded two medals of merit: one by Goskomsport USSR, the Soviet National Program (Moscow, Russia), and one from the All-Russian Track and Field Federation (Leningrad, Russia).

In 2004 I decided to shift my focus from sports nutrition to research on chronic health conditions, especially excess inflammation, metabolic inflexibility, and sarcopenia.

JD: Discuss with us the mistakes you see made by strength and conditioning coaches in the United States and around the world, and what you feel should be done differently/how to correct these issues.

RB: The first thing I would say is never stop learning. Recognize that as a strength and conditioning coach you hold a vital position in making ordinary athletes into champions- I believe the most important coach to impact wins is the strength and conditioning coach. They are the roots of a winning program. Get to know your athletes as individuals. Along with that, always ask tough questions (the whys) and if someone can’t give you the answer- run. Do not easily trust sport nutrition companies as they are in the business of selling anyone with a pulse something.

Secondly, train athletes metabolically and neurologically to match the specific demands of their position, event, or sport. Do not train an athlete with shock methods and refined technique if they do not have an optimal level of base strength for their particular sport. Likewise, do not make athletes over-strong for their sport. Take to heart that most athletes are not powerlifters, bodybuilders, or Olympic lifters. Overreach and adapt to a higher level of performance by using correct sports nutrition while restoring and adapting at a maximum rate. Allow the right nutrition ergogenics to help enhance the training plan through synergy.

JD: Discuss with us the mistakes you see made by athletes in the United States and around the world with supplementation, and what you feel should be done differently/how to correct these issues.

RB: The mistakes may be led on by misinformation or ignorance. Most athletes cannot differentiate between mass market “sports” drinks, bars, and powders from ergogenically sound sports nutrition. Most athletes are not consistent with their supplement programs- in fact, they have no program. Programming of effective sport nutrition WITH specific training in mind is essential for a superior outcome.

JD:What advice would you give a coach to improve knowledge in the lines of continuing education, i.e could you point our readers in a direction to find the scientific and practical information to improve the nutrition and supplementation they use to enhance performance?

RB: Just like athletes, coaches need to PLAN sport nutrition to work WITH the training program- to create the synergy for excellence that can be achieved. The science is available online. Look at the big picture, the science in total. What is the mechanism of action for a nutrient? What can this nutrient be combined with (other nutrients) to create synergy. Dosage? Timing? Then take the science and amplify the training result through your own experimentation in your plan.

JD: You have a new product coming out in the near future through Ultimate Athlete Concepts. Could you please touch upon what your latest work will cover?

RB: We are discussing developing effective sport nutrition specifically for explosive athletes. This focus allows us to introduce very high quality research studied ingredients that HELP amplify good training methods to build greater explosive force, faster reaction, and fine motor skills.

JD: What will our attendees expect from your presentation here on April 25th, 2013?

RB: As a coach myself I will engage them coach to coach. I will not confuse them with scientific babble but explain so things make sense, so they see the big picture and have information they can put to work immediately. They can expect me to tell them the truth about sport nutrition and wade through all the hype that the sport nutrition industry has piled on over the years. They will also learn what athletes should never consume as it can cause them to dis-adapt.

JD: Rick, thanks for taking the time out to talk with us.  We’re really excited to have you on the docket for The 2014 Seminar.  Do you have anything to leave our readers with?

RB: I’ve worked alongside some of the greatest sport science minds since 1988. Much of my early education was in Russia and then working with many athletes and strength coaches in the USA. What is more important is that all the science of performance sport nutrition- specifically natural compounds that enhance specific anabolic and neural pathways- be put to use in real-world training situations. I have a lot of experience with this to share.

I’m also very mechanism focused, meaning I look for how a specific nutrient influences gene pathways to turn them on or off, and how this influences the training result.

I’m looking forward to interacting and engaging with some very fine individuals that make a profound impact on athletic careers and lifelong memories.

Today I am excited to introduce the first speaker for The 2013 Seminar, Dr. Anadoliy Bondarchuck. Dr. Bondachuck will be discussing the long term development of athletes in conjuction to his newest work coming out through Ultimate Athlete Concepts in the coming months. We are extremely excited to have a man with Dr. Bondarchuck’s resume and accomplishments on campus here in April. So without further ado, allow me to introduce Dr. Anatoliy Bondarchuck.

JD: If you could, please give our readers a little background information about you, what your niche in the world of athletics is, accomplishments, how you got there, education, any products you have available and/or notable publications.

AB: In 1958, at the age of 18, I began to throw the discus. In September of 1964, I stopped competing in the discus with a personal best of 53 meters 86 centimeters. That same year I began throwing the hammer, which I did until 1976.

Throughout my carrier I have had many athletic achievements including: 1967- 2nd Place in the World, 1968- Member of the USSR National Team, 1969- Set 2 World Records, Became European Champion, and Set a World Record in Athens, 1970- Winner of the European Cup (number one in the world), 1971- 3rd place at European Championships (Helsinki), 1972- Olympic Champion (Munich) Set Olympic Record, and 1976- 3rd Place at the Montreal Olympics.

Over the course of my entire coaching and sporting careers, my athletes and I have earned a combined 45 medals. Which medals were earned in the following competitions: European Cups and Championships, World Cups and Championships and Olympic Games. If you include secondary competitions such as Cups and Championships of the Persian Gulf, Arabian and Asian Nations, British Commonwealth and Pan-American Games, the combined medal count goes up to 105.

As far as education goes, in 1962 I graduated from the Kaminets-Podilskiy Pedagogical Institute with a focus in specific physical preparation, anatomy, biology, and human physiology. In 1970 I began my graduate studies at the Soviet National Scientific Research Institute of Physical Culture, which I finished in 1972. In March of 1972, I defended my Graduate Dissertation, and in May of 1988 my Doctoral Dissertation.

I have authored 18 books and 256 articles. A few of the books include, “Transfer of Training”, Periodization or Sport Training”, Strength Preparation”, and “Light Athletics for Throwers.” I have coached 40 elite athletes and in my entire coaching career, trained more than 500 athletes on all skill levels. My athletes and I have set a combined 9 world records for adults, and 3 for youth. I have been awarded 4 ‘Order of the Soviet Union’ Awards, and served as Master of Sport of the USSR, Coach for the USSR, Ukraine, and Tadjikistaniy United Republic. I also had the honor of serving as the Director of Physical Culture of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. Through this I was given the following awards: Certificates of Honor: High Council of the USSR and Ukraine. I also worked 11 years in Kuwait, 8 years in Canada, and 1 year in Portugal.

JD: Discuss with us the mistakes you see made by strength and conditioning coaches in the United States and around the world, and what you feel should be done differently/how to correct these issues.

AB: One of the most common mistakes made by athletes in speed-power sports and in athletics lies in the idea that maximum strength promotes the development of maximal speed.

This is one of the most egregious misconceptions in the theory and method of physical development. In the process of developing maximal strength, the athlete develops the slow twitch muscle fibers. Conversely, in the process of developing maximal speed, the athlete is developing the fast twitch muscle fibers. So we see that slow twitch muscle fiber cannot assist (useful transfer of training) the development of fast twitch muscle fibers. In real time it is critical to decrease the volume of training loads 50-70 percent, which solves the problem of developing maximal strength. When you increase training loads, you are working on maximal speed.

JD: What advice would you give a coach to improve knowledge in the lines of continuing education, meaning could you point our readers in a direction to find the scientific and practical information to improve the methods they use to improve performance?

AB: To improve the Qualifications of a coach it is critical to:

1) Read and analyze literature from a variety of sources (articles, books, monographs)
2) Attend a variety of training and scientific conferences and seminars. Experiment with your own athletes.
3) Examine critically the use of theories and methods of physical development, which have been proposed in the last 50-70 years.
4) Give credence only to those recommendations that are founded on documented experimentation on athletes, not thought up in “quiet” classrooms.

JD: You have a new product coming out in the near future through Ultimate Athlete Concepts. Could you please touch upon what your latest work will cover?

AB: In the book “ Long-Term Training in Sports”, the following items are examined:

1. General presentation of LTAD.
2. Biological specifics for growing boys – from seven years to 18-20.
3.Explanation of patterns of growth basics for the development of athletes. Using 10 new methods of developing strength.
4. Explains different was of splitting up volume and intensity of training loads over the course of weeks, months, bi-annual and yearly cycles of training.
5. 16 ways to help in construction of training periods.
6. Includes a sample construction of 20 programs for the development of max speed and strength, in as much as these exercises develop strength.

The premise of the book “A long-term system of athlete preparation in many aspects of sport” is that over the course of each sequential preparatory period, it is critical to use new, more effective ways of implement training complexes and loads. It is accepted that this is the only way to improve sporting results over the course of many years of competition.

Outlines the structure of given training complexes and intensities over the course of 20 preparatory periods. The effectiveness of the process of sport improvement largely depends on the regular transfer of training and the periodization of sport preparation. There is more written on these topics in the following books.

А.Bondarchuk, 2007. Transfer of training in sports.
www.Ultimateathletecincepts.com

A.Bondarchuk, 2010. Transfer of training in Sports (2 volume).
www.Ultimateathleteconcepts.com

Bondarchuk A. Periodization of training in sports (volume 1, 2, 3).
Www.newtrainingconcepts.com

JD: Thank you for your time Dr. Bondarchuck.  We are really excited to have you on campus in April and cannot wait to see what you have in store for our attendees.

 

 

 

In today’s post, Dr. Natalia Verkhoshansky gives us a preview of one of her presentations at The 2013 Seminar “Drop Jump vs. Depth Jump.”

In sport training literature, the terms “Depth Jump” and “Drop Jump” are usually understood as synonyms and both of them are used to name the same exercise: a jump executed by droping from a height with vertical rebound.   It is well known that this exercise was invented by Verkhoshansky at the end of the 1950’s for Track & Field jumpers and sprinters, and was also successfully used in many other Olympic sports.  These coaches recognized it as the most powerful training means for increasing explosive strength.

Near the end of the 1960’s, this “secret weapon” of Soviet athletes became known in the United States under the name Depth Jump thanks to the English translation of some of Verkhoshansky’s articles (M.Yessis, 1968, 1969). In 1978, Fred Wilt, who was a pen friend of Verkhoshansky sense from the 60s, presented the Depth Jump as one of the exercises, which were termed as Plyometrics[1]:

The way drop jumping has become popular is typical of how training methods evolve.  It is rumored that the Russian athlete who won the 100 and 200m  dash in the 1972 Olympics, Valery Borzov, utilized plyometric drills as part of his training (Wilt, 1978). Coaches of rival athletes became interested and began to search for more information. They found a description of drop jumping in a translated Russian paper by Verkhoshansky (1966), and adopted the idea and developed their own modifications. These modifications are now incorporated in widespread athletic programs” (Bobbert, 1990)[2]

Unfortunately, in these programs the rules proposed by Verkhoshansky in applying Depth Jumps in the training process were often not taken into consideration. The rules were associated with Verkhoshansky’s methodology of Special Strength Training and were not well known in the West because his books were not officially translated into English. Near the end of 1970, the ways to apply this exercise in training practice was strongly influenced by the researches of Paavo Komi and his collaborators.

Komi introduced a new understanding of Plyometrics as exercises which involve the Stretch-Shortening Cycle. The exercise, which was termed Drop Jump, was used as the model of the SSC and adapted to study its mechanics and energetics in standardized conditions. These studies analyzed how the changes in these conditions influence the activity of physiological mechanisms which were hypothesized to be responsible for the enhancement of performance during the final phase of reversing in landing-take-off movements. In the longitudinal experiments the training effect of this exercise was evaluated based on the level of the subject’s improvement. Subsequently, a certain technique of the Drop Jump was developed which allowed emphasizing these physiological mechanisms.  This technique was standardized in the Drop Jump test, which was proposed by Carmelo Bosco to be the control in evaluating the level of athlete’s jumping
abilities.

Since the terms “drop jump” and “depth jump” were considered to be synonyms, Drop Jump and Depth Jump were considered to be the same exercise. In consequence, coaches began to apply Bosco’s Drop Jump in the athletes training believing it was the same training means as the Depth Jump developed by Verkhoshansky.

However, for those who are familiar with the works of Verkhoshansky, the execution technique of Drop Jump may seem to be very different from the technique proposed earlier for the Depth Jump.  The first difference is in regards to the athlete using an arm swing. Even if the coach allows arm swings in training with the Drop Jump, the arm swing is not allowed in the Drop Jump Test, so in evaluating the SSC the evaluating movement would be different than the training exercise. The same characteristic appears in the early research on the Drop Jump. The exercise was always applied as the jump with the hands on hips. In regards to the Depth Jump, we don’t find such constraints. In fact, the athlete should use the arm to reach (touch) the overhead goal.

The second difference is in the technique of landing. Drop jumps should be executed with a hard landing keeping the leg muscles stiff, in attempt to minimize the leg’s flexion during the landing. This is a fundamental condition for the elastic energy recoil. On the contrary, in Depth Jump the athlete should not land with rigid, extended legs.  The landing should be resilient and elastic, with the optimal depth of knee flexion at the end of the amortization phase.

Also in the rules of applying these exercises we find differences as well.  The first difference regards the goal of the exercise. Drop Jumps should be performed trying to obtain the maximal height of rebound with minimal ground contact time. The short ground contact time is considered to be the fundamental condition for the elastic energy recoil. Whereas the Depth Jump should be performed trying to obtain the highest height of vertical rebound using the overhead goal. The ground contact time should be short, but it should be the optimal time to allow the athlete express the maximal explosive effort in take-off phase.

The third difference regards the drop height. Depth Jump should be performed from the drop height of  75 cm (or even 1.10 m when this exercise is used to increase maximum strength), while the Drop Jump should be from 20 to 60 cm. For the Drop jump, the distance of dropping higher than 60 cm is considered to be dangerous for the leg joints of athletes and inappropriate for reaching the goal.  Increasing the height above .6 M leads to an increase in ground contact time and to decreasing the height of rebound, which is the exact opposite of the goal of utilizing this exercise (decreasing ground contact time and increasing rebound height by increasing the ability to utilize the SCC).

How, with all these differences, could the confusion be explained through point of view of modern research?

In fact, Verkhoshansky’s Depth Jump could be seen as a Drop Jump executed wrong: with inappropriate drop height and with inappropriate technique (without the close control of the ground contact time and the level of leg flexion at the end of landing phase). With this confusion we could only wonder why Depth Jump was considered by several generations of Soviet coaches and athletes as the most effective jumping exercise.  The reason is because they are two different training means for two different purposes.  Many advanced coaches who tried to keep abreast of modern scientific research had noted these differences and had decided to modernize the execution technique of this exercise. Their thinking was that it’s effect would improve.

On the other hand, a great part of trainers/practitioners did not attach great importance to these differences in the execution of these exercises.  They only heard of this exercise that was a powerful training means discovered by Verkhoshansky, but they did not read his works. As consequence, they accepted the results of research on Drop Jumps as the rules for correct execution of technique of the Depth Jump. We often find such confusion in the popular texts about Plyometrics where Verkhoshansky’s Depth Jump is described as the Drop Jump.   All indications for this application is that the information was taken from the articles about Drop Jump and misinterpreted.  In both cases, the use of the Drop jump as the original exercise, or an advanced form of the Depth Jump, led to an misinterpretation of the methodical guidelines elaborated by Verkhoshansky.

Thus, the results of one Italian researcher showed disagreement with the opinion of Verkhoshansky, and that his famous exercise may be successfully used only by low level athletes. In this research, the experimental group of low-level athletes carried out this exercise during a certain period and obtained a greater increase in the maximal height of the countermovement vertical jump than a control group of same level athletes who used only ordinary jumping exercises. The problem is that the experimental group carried out not Depth Jumps, but Drop Jumps executed according to the technique proposed by C. Bosco.  In fact, Verkhoshansky considered Depth Jump as a Shock Method exercise.  These powerful training means for development of explosive strength should be used only by the high level athletes.  This is not because it is ineffective for the low-level athlete, but because the ordinary jumping exercises could give them the same results.  Nevertheless, we do not always find the same opinions about the training effect of the Drop Jump and we often find discussions about the ways of applying them in the training of low-level athletes, adolescents and even children.

May Depth Jumps and Drop Jumps be considered as the same exercise?

If the answer is “yes”, what technique of this exercise is more correct? In other words, who was wrong: Verkhoshansky of Bosco? If the answer is “no”, what exercise is more effective?

To answer these questions, Depth Jumps and Drop Jumps were analyzed beginning with their origins. To clarify the similarities and the differences between them, the results of the recent research was analyzed in which the physiological mechanisms involved in these exercises were investigated as were the results of applying these exercises in training practice.  The results of this analysis showed that Y. Verkhoshansky and C. Bosco were both correct.  They not only used different terms, but also different exercises which should be used for different purposes, and should be applied according different rules.

Coaches should be advised to distinguish between these two exercises that are so often confused.  The main purpose of using Drop Jumps in training process is, mostly, the improvement of the athlete’s capacity to utilize the elastic energy recoil during the reversal phase of SSC movements. Whereas, the main purpose of using Depth Jumps is, mostly, increasing the explosive strength and improvement of the athlete’s ability to express the highest explosive strength effort in specific take-off movements.  This could be performed not only in the reversal SSC regime, but also in isolated concentric regime.   Another feature of this training means is that it allows the athlete to increase maximal strength through the improvement of their neural mechanisms.  More exactly, the exercises increase the level of motor unit synchronization, the level of motor unit recruitment, and firing rate at the beginning of maximal strength effort. Depth Jumps performed with a high drop height (1.10 m) allows the stimulation of muscles in similar way as the Barbell Squat executed according to Maximal Effort Method, but not by the same means.  The depth jump does not use a high level of
opposition (barbell weight) to the bring about a maximal voluntary strength effort, but utilizes the forcible muscle activation brought on by the impact with the ground.

The recent research[3] indicates that this forcible activation of muscles starts not at the beginning of touchdown phase, but before ground contact and that it is provoked by the increased descending drive from the motor cortex. This pre-landing muscle activation serves to protect the athlete’s feet from the impact.  It is determined by the perceived distance of falling by the athlete when he/she stands on the raised platform before the drop down. As consequence, the stretch reflex mechanisms are likely to contribute to, but not control, the post-landing muscle activity during the downward movement after touchdown and mediated not by stretch receptors, but by higher order CNS structures. As a result, during the push off phase these structures work in concert with simple reflexes to reach a given goal; to achieve a maximal height of rebound or to achieve a maximal height with minimal ground contact time.  This explains why the obtaining a shortest ground contact time is not as important in the Depth Jump as in the Drop Jump, and therefore a higher height of dropping is allowed.

The muscle activity prior to foot contact is timed to the expected instant of touch down and is modulated as a function of drop height. More than this, the pre- and post-landing EMG activity amplitude, which determines the level of muscles activation before the active take-off movement, is scaled to drop height in an approximately linear fashion. So a high drop height used in Depth Jump, which is inappropriate for increasing of the elastic energy recoil, allows obtaining an extremely high level of muscles activation during the take-off movement. However, such a high level of training stimuli is needed only for  high-level athletes and its applying requires  careful considerations.

The rules of the preliminary preparation to the use of Depth Jump will be analyzed in the second presentation: “Progressing the Jumping Exercises: Practical Application for Coaches”.


[1] Fred Wilt. “Plyometrics – What is it and how it works”, Modern athlete and coach, 1978, n.16, pp.9-12.

[2] M. F. Bobbert. Drop Jumping as a Training Method for Jumping Ability. Sports Medicine 9(1):7-22, 1990. (Page 8).

[3] Marco Santello. Review of motor control mechanisms underlying impact absorption from falls Gait and Posture 21 (2005) 85–94. Taube W, Leukel C, Gollhofer A.  How neurons make us jump: the neural control of stretch-shortening cycle movements. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2012 Apr; 40(2):106-15.

Today’s post is a preview of Dr. Natalia Verkhoshansky’s presentation “Progressing the Jumping Exercises: Practical Application for Coaches”, which is the first of her two presentations at The 2013 Seminar.

The aim of this presentation is to introduce Strength & Conditioning coaches to the methodology of applying jumping exercises.

How should this preliminary preparation be accomplished?

Sport training literature usually suggests that to be ready for jump training it is necessary only to strengthen the leg’s muscles and improve the flexibility of the athlete. If this were enough, how could we explain that, very often, athletes with very high levels of strength obtained by weight training have difficulty in executing jump exercises?  The problem is that the “jumping skill” depends not only on the strength of the legs but also on the individual’s coordination to efficiently apply the strength during execution. Improving jumping ability requires not only physical preparation, but also technical preparation by applying appropriate methods of motor teaching.

What are these methods and how do we better apply them in jump training?

The second problem that arises in applying jumping exercises is related to their variety, which makes it difficult to find the appropriate selection for a given athlete.  Among jump exercises many examples could be individualized, and used for different specific purposes (increasing Explosive Strength, Reactive Ability, Local Muscular Endurance etc.).  The exercises can be calibrated in relation to the level of intensity of their training stimuli. According to this criterion, jump exercises may be placed in a hierarchical sequence with the following progression when applied to the training process:

  1. Jumps without weights (standing jumps and bounds)

  2. Jumps with weights (consecutive Barbell Jumps, Kettlebell Squat Jumps and Vertical Jumps with Barbell)

  3. Depth jump

How do you apply this progression in the training of a given athlete? How does a coach know that the athlete is ready to progress with either intensity of the load, or intensity of the means selected?

To answer these questions, the following issues should be examined:

  1. Fitness and skill components of training process and their compatibility.

  2. Basic methodological approach for increasing the motor potential and for improving the ability to apply the motor potential in specific exercise.

  3. Jumping skill: what it is and how it may be improved.

  4. The general scheme of the jump exercise progression in the training process.

  5. First step of the jump exercises progression: Short- and Long-coupling time jumping exercises and “ankling” runs.

  6. Progressing the methods of jump training: from Extensive to Intensive.

  7. Second step of the jump exercises progression: jumps with weights.

  8. Consecutive Barbell jumps and Kettlebell Squat jumps: the differences between them.

  9. Vertical Jumps with barbell (Countermovement Barbell Jump) and Consecutive Barbell Jumps: the differences between them.

  10. How to evaluate the jumping ability improvement at every step of jump exercise’s progression?

  11. Should Drop Landings be used as preliminary exercise for Depth Jumps?

  12. Three main principles for successful coaching of jump training.

To better outline the practical aspects in the presentation I will be showing sample workouts for every step of the jump exercise progression and video clips of the exercise’s execution with athletes of different jump training experience.

 

Dr. Natalia Verkhoshansky gives us a look into one of her presentations at The 2013 Seminar “Progressing The Jumping Exercises”.

The aim of this presentation is to introduce Strength & Conditioning coaches to the methodology of applying jumping exercises.

In most sports, jumping exercises are essential elements of special physical preparation because they increase the mechanical efficiency of landing-take-off (Stretch-Shortening Cycle) movements, which are key-elements in most competition exercises.  Jumping exercises improve both sprinting and jumping abilities, which are very important in team sports. However, Strength & Conditioning coaches who usually work with team sport athletes often are not familiar with the methodology of applying these exercises.  This may be due to the fact that, although the exercises were well elaborated, it was mainly for track & field jumpers and sprinters.  This unfamiliarity brings on certain issues. Inappropriately sequenced jumping exercises may cause leg injuries if the athlete has never used this kind of exercise before.  Jumping exercises, therefore, need to be prepared for in advance.

How should this preliminary preparation be accomplished?

Sport training literature usually suggests that to be ready for jump training it is necessary only to enforce the leg’s muscles and improve the flexibility of the athlete. If this were enough, how could we explain that, very often, athletes with very high levels of strength obtained by weight training have difficulty in executing jump exercises?  The problem is that the “jumping skill” depends not only on the strength of the legs but also on the individual’s coordination to efficiently apply the strength during execution. Improving jumping ability requires not only physical preparation, but also technical preparation by applying appropriate methods of motor teaching.

What are these methods and how do we better apply them in the jump training?

The second problem that arises in applying jumping exercises is related to their variety, which makes it difficult to find the appropriate selection for a given athlete.  Among jump exercises many types could be individualized, and can be used for different specific purpose (increasing Explosive Strength, Reactive Ability, Local Muscular Endurance etc.).  The exercises can be calibrated in relation to the level of intensity of their training stimuli.  According to this criterion, jump exercises may be placed in a hierarchical sequence with the following progression when applied to the training process:

1. Jumps without weights (standing jumps and bounds)

2. Jumps with weights (consecutive Barbell Jumps, Kettlebell Squat Jumps and Vertical Jumps with Barbell)

3. Depth jump

How do you apply this progression in the training of a given athlete? How does a coach know that the athlete is ready to progress with either intensity of the load, or intensity of the means selected?

To answer these questions, the following issues should be examined:

1. Fitness and skill components of training process and their compatibility.

2. Basic methodological approach for increasing the motor potential and for improving the ability to apply the motor potential in specific exercise.

3. Jumping skill: what it is and how it may be improved.

4. The general scheme of the jump exercise progression in the training process.

5. First step of the jump exercises progression: Short- and Long-coupling time jumping exercises and “ankling” runs.

6. Progressing the methods of jump training: from Extensive to Intensive.

7. Second step of the jump exercises progression: jumps with weights.

8. Consecutive Barbell jumps and Kettlebell Squat jumps: the differences between them.

9. Vertical Jumps with barbell (Countermovement Barbell Jump) and Consecutive Barbell Jumps: the differences between them.

10.  How to evaluate the jumping ability improvement at every step of jump exercise’s progression?

11.  Should Drop Landings be used as preliminary exercise for Depth Jumps?

12.  Three main principles for successful coaching of jump training.

To better outline the practical aspects in the presentation I will be showing sample workouts for every step of the jump exercise progression and video clips of the exercise’s execution with athletes of different jump training experience.

 

Plyometrics are a commonly used means in many physical preparation programs. The true value in plyometrics and rationale for their use is in the name; the term is not, contrary to common practice, synonymous with jump training exercises. In 1978, plyometrics were defined by Fred Wilt as:
“Training drills designed to bring the gap between sheer strength and the power (rate of work or force x velocity) required in producing the explosive reactive movements so necessary to excellence in jumping, throwing and sprinting. ”
He continued with:
“To the best of my knowledge, there has been no previous reference made to plyometric exercises in American sports literature. This word has been used for a number of years by European coaches, especially those from Germany and Russia. The word plyometric is apparently derived from the Greek word plethyein, which means to increase and isometric. My present interpretation of plyometric is that it means the exercises or training drills used in producing an overload of isometric type muscle action which invokes the stretch reflex in muscles. I am not particularly happy with this interpretation, and it may alter when a precise definition evolves.”

The Greek word “plethyein” has a different meaning: “be or become full”. This Greek root is used, for example, in the English words “plethora” and “plenty”. The meaning of “Increase” or greater in size, extent, has another Greek root: “plio-”. In fact, the Russian, German, and other European coaches used and continue to use another term for Plyomentrics: “pliometric exercises”. To understand why they began to use this term, we need to take a quick trip to the early 20th century.

The term “pliometric” was introduced in 1938 by Hubbard and Stetson who “recognized that muscles underwent contractions during three different “conditions”: when they are shortening, are keeping the same length, or are lengthening. The three conditions were termed “miometric,” “isometric,” and “pliometric,” by coupling the Greek prefixes “mio” (shorter), “iso” (same), and “plio” (longer) to the noun “metric,” defined as “pertaining to measures or measurement, to differentiate among the three conditions under which the muscles ‘contracted’.”

The pliometric muscular action occurs when the external load actively extends (stretch) the muscles while the contraction is in progress. In Russian sport training literature it is usually termed as the yielding regime of muscular work. From a biomechanics point of view, during such “lengthening contraction”, the muscles do not produce any external positive work (i.e., mechanical work, equal to force generated x distance moved); all of the energy has been used to exert tension on the load.
The feature of such “negative” work was outlined in 1892 by A. Fick , who demonstrated that a muscle can exert greater force when stretched by an external force while contracting; the heat produced by actively stretched muscle was less than that measured during the active shortening. Using the terms introduced in 1938 by Hubbard and Stetson, it was shown, that the pliometric and miometric muscular contractions (with the same velocity) produce different forces and consume different amounts of energy. Pliometric muscular actions:
1) Produce a greater force
2) Consume less energy than miometric muscular actions
This phenomenon was confirmed and extended in 1923 by W. Fenn in his study on the quantitative relation between the heat production of muscles and the work that they perform . Fenn showed that “The work done in stretching the muscle does not therefore add itself to the ‘physiological’ heat but . . . replaced energy which would have been liberated by the muscle if it had not been stretched.”

Fenn’s study was performed in the laboratory of Archibald V. Hill, who termed the results as “Fenn’s Effect”. He summarized this effect in the following words: “ …Shortening during contraction, lengthening during relaxation, appears to require excess liberation of energy. Lengthening during contraction, shortening during relaxation, appear to cause an excess “absorption” of energy, i.e. to lead to a total energy liberation less than that of the isometric twitch…. If it be held fast and allowed to shorten only during relaxation, then again it will give out less heat. ” .

Numerous studies were carried out to discover the basic mechanisms of this phenomenon. In 1938 Hill theorized that Fenn’s effect could be related to a decrease in the rate of chemical transformation in the muscle. However, in 1950, Hill had also hypothesized that the mechanical energy produced by an external force, which causes a contracting muscle to stretch, could be stored in the series elastic components of muscle and reutilized in the subsequent shortening phase of movement: “An important factor of mechanical behavior of muscle is the passive elastic component in series with the active contractile one…. This acts as a buffer when a muscle passes abruptly from the resting to the active state, and it accumulates mechanical energy as the tension of the muscle rises. If a muscle is opposed, as in most ordinary movements, by the inertia of a limb or an external mass, this mechanical energy can be used in producing a final velocity greater than that at which the contractile component itself can shorten. This is important in such movements as jumping or throwing.”

In 1968, the research of G. Cavana, B. Dusman, and R. Margaria showed, in isolated frog muscle and in the muscle of working humans, that the work done by muscle shortening at a given velocity was greater if the shortening was preceded by a stretch during stimulation. This effect, they concluded, was partly due to an increase in the force of contraction of the contractile component. The force developed by contractile component, when the muscle shortens after being stretched, is greater than the force developed when the muscle shortens, at the same speed and length, but starting from a state of isometric contraction.
During the following two decades it was established that pliometric contraction:
− can maximize the force exerted and the work performed by muscle
− is associated with a greater mechanical efficiency
− can attenuate the mechanical effects of impact forces.
So, it was natural to suppose that the pliometric muscular action during the landing and take-off phases typical of jumping exercises stretches the activated muscles during the downward movement after touchdown, causing an increase in the force produced in the following take-off movement. In other words, the performance of the jump is enhanced.

This was likely the reason why high power jumps that involve repeated, rapid, and forceful shortening and lengthening actions during almost maximum activation of large muscle groups (as does similar forms of throwing) where the pliometric regime is emphasized, were termed “pliometric” exercises. This term was then converted to “plyometric” probably because both terms are pronounced similarly, though no one saw the written word. We know this because in 1953 E. Asmussen introduced another term for pliometric muscular actions: “eccentric”, which is also defined as whimsical as well as excentric , meaning to move away from the center of the muscle. In 1959, in Karpovich’s textbook “Physiology of Muscular Activity” , miometric actions were named “concentric” and pliometric were named “eccentric”.
“Presently, lengthening, miometric and pliometric, and concentric and eccentric are all in use in the physiological, biomechanics, sports medicine, and sports science literature. Despite their inappropriateness, the most commonly used expressions in the conditioning and sports exercise papers are concentric and eccentric contractions (Knuttgen HG and Kraemer WJ. Terminology and measurement in exercise performance. J Appl Sport Sci Res 1: 1–10,1987.)”
In the sport training literature the term “pliometric” became obsolete and was gradually replaced by the term “eccentric”, also thanks to the growth of popularity in “eccentric training”, which consists in using only the lowering phase of resistance exercise.

The term “pliometric” gradually lost its primary meaning and continued be used in Europe synonymously with plyometric. By the end of the 1980s, the new term came to be considered more appropriated for plyometrics: exercises that emphasize the Stretch-Shortening Cycle (SSC). However, the term Plyometrics is still more popular between the coaches, athletes and sport scientists. According to M. Siff, Plyometrics “consist of stimulating the muscles by means of a sudden stretch preceding any voluntary effort”.

Now, we know that under a sudden stretch, in this definition, the pliometric muscular action is implied, which increases the power output of the subsequent movement. We may thus apply a more suitable interpretation of the term Plyometrics: exercises in which the pliometric muscular action is applied as a means of intensifying the muscular activity. Essentially, in simplest terms, Plyometrics means “to apply pliometric”

[1] Fred Wilt. “Plyometrics – What is it and how it works”, Modern athlete and coach, 1978, n.16, pp.9-12.

[2] Hubbard A.W. and Stetson R,H. An experimental analysis of human locomotion. J Physiol 124: 300–313, 1938.

[3] Faulkner, John A. Terminology for contractions of muscles during shortening, while isometric, and during lengthening. J Appl Physiol, 95: 455–459, 2003

[4] Fick A. Neue Beiträge zur Kenntniss von der Wärme-Entwicklung im Muskel. Pflügers Arch 51: 541–569, 1892.

[5] Wallace Osgood Fenn, A Quantitative Comparison between the Energy Liberated and the Work Performed by the Isolated Sartorius Muscle of the Frog, Journal of Physiology, 58(1924): 175.

[6] Fenn WO. The relationship between the work performed and the energy liberated in muscular contraction. J Physiol 58: 373–395, 1924.

[7] Archibald V. Hill. The Mechanism of  Muscular Contraction.  Nobel Lecture, December 12, 1923.

[8] Hill AV. Heat of shortening and the dynamic constants of muscle. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 126: 136–195, 1938.

[9] Hill, A.V. (1950) The series elastic component of muscle. Proceedings of the Royal Society London Series B 137, 273–280.

[10] G.Cavana, B.Dusman, R.Margaria. Positive work done by a previously stretched muscle . J Appl Physiol January 1, 1968.

[11] “In 1962, during a discussion on muscle performance chaired by D. B. Dill (Rodahl K, Horvath SM, and Risch MPS. Muscle as a Tissue. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1962.) , Erling Asmussen used the terms concentric and eccentric and B. J. Ralston made the perceptive comment that these terms led to confusion and should be eliminated from the literature. Asmussen conceded that the terms miometric and pliometric might be better..” (Faulkner, John A. Terminology for contractions of muscles during shortening, while isometric, and during lengthening. J Appl Physiol, 95: 455–459, 2003).

[12]Karpovich PV. Physiology of Muscular Activity. Philadelphia,PA: Saunders, 1959.

[13] Faulkner, John A. Terminology for contractions of muscles during shortening, while isometric, and during lengthening. J Appl Physiol, 95: 455–459, 2003.

[14] Komi PV. Physiological and biomechanical correlates of muscle function: effects of muscle structure and stretch-shortening cycle on force and speed. In: Exercise and Sport Science Reviews, edited by Terjung RL. Lexington, MA: Collamore, 1984, p. 81–121.

 

 

 Page 1 of 9  1  2  3  4  5 » ...  Last »