Similar Strength and Power Adaptations between Two Different Velocity-Based Training Regimens in Collegiate Female Volleyball Players
This study investigated the effects of two different velocity-based training (VBT) regimens on muscular adaptations. Fifteen female college volleyball players were randomly assigned into either progressive velocity-based training (PVBT) or optimum training load (OTL). Both groups trained three times...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2018-12-01
|
| Series: | Sports |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4663/6/4/163 |
| _version_ | 1828151842332213248 |
|---|---|
| author | Jacob T. Rauch Irineu Loturco Nicholas Cheesman Justin Thiel Michael Alvarez Nicholas Miller Nathan Carpenter Christopher Barakat Gloria Velasquez Alexandria Stanjones Daniel Aube Jody C. Andersen Eduardo O. De Souza |
| author_facet | Jacob T. Rauch Irineu Loturco Nicholas Cheesman Justin Thiel Michael Alvarez Nicholas Miller Nathan Carpenter Christopher Barakat Gloria Velasquez Alexandria Stanjones Daniel Aube Jody C. Andersen Eduardo O. De Souza |
| author_sort | Jacob T. Rauch |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | This study investigated the effects of two different velocity-based training (VBT) regimens on muscular adaptations. Fifteen female college volleyball players were randomly assigned into either progressive velocity-based training (PVBT) or optimum training load (OTL). Both groups trained three times a week for seven weeks. PVBT performed a 4-week strength block (e.g., 0.55⁻0.70 m·s<sup>−1</sup>) followed by a 3-week power block (e.g., 0.85⁻1.0 m·s<sup>−1</sup>), whereas OTL performed training at ~0.85⁻0.9 m·s<sup>−1</sup>. 1RM and peak power output (PP) assessments on the back squat (BS), bench press (BP) and deadlift (DL) exercises were assessed pre and post training. There was a main time effect (<i>p</i> ≤ 0.05) for BS and BP 1RM, (PVBT: 19.6%, ES: 1.72; OTL: 18.3%, ES: 1.57) and (PVBT: 8.5%, ES: 0.58; OTL: 10.2%, ES: 0.72), respectively. OTL increased DL 1RM to a greater extent than PVBT (<i>p</i> ≤ 0.05), (OTL: 22.9%, ES: 1.49; PVBT: 10.9%, ES: 0.88). Lastly, there was a main time effect (<i>p</i> ≤ 0.05) for BS, BP and DL PP, (PVBT: 18.3%, ES: 0.86; OTL: 19.8%, ES: 0.79); (PVBT: 14.5%, ES: 0.81; OTL: 27.9%, ES: 1.68); (PVBT: 15.7%, ES: 1.32; OTL: 20.1%, ES: 1.77) respectively. Our data suggest that both VBT regimens are effective for improving muscular performance in college volleyball players during the offseason period. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T22:02:26Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-b210b32a14c84f0099bbfc0f7e7e0d09 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2075-4663 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T22:02:26Z |
| publishDate | 2018-12-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Sports |
| spelling | doaj.art-b210b32a14c84f0099bbfc0f7e7e0d092022-12-22T04:00:51ZengMDPI AGSports2075-46632018-12-016416310.3390/sports6040163sports6040163Similar Strength and Power Adaptations between Two Different Velocity-Based Training Regimens in Collegiate Female Volleyball PlayersJacob T. Rauch0Irineu Loturco1Nicholas Cheesman2Justin Thiel3Michael Alvarez4Nicholas Miller5Nathan Carpenter6Christopher Barakat7Gloria Velasquez8Alexandria Stanjones9Daniel Aube10Jody C. Andersen11Eduardo O. De Souza12Human Performance Laboratory, Health Sciences and Human Performance Department, University of Tampa Florida, Tampa, FL 33606, USANucleus of High Performance in Sport, Sāo Paulo 03187-010, BrazilHuman Performance Laboratory, Health Sciences and Human Performance Department, University of Tampa Florida, Tampa, FL 33606, USAHuman Performance Laboratory, Health Sciences and Human Performance Department, University of Tampa Florida, Tampa, FL 33606, USAHuman Performance Laboratory, Health Sciences and Human Performance Department, University of Tampa Florida, Tampa, FL 33606, USAHuman Performance Laboratory, Health Sciences and Human Performance Department, University of Tampa Florida, Tampa, FL 33606, USAHuman Performance Laboratory, Health Sciences and Human Performance Department, University of Tampa Florida, Tampa, FL 33606, USAHuman Performance Laboratory, Health Sciences and Human Performance Department, University of Tampa Florida, Tampa, FL 33606, USAHuman Performance Laboratory, Health Sciences and Human Performance Department, University of Tampa Florida, Tampa, FL 33606, USAHuman Performance Laboratory, Health Sciences and Human Performance Department, University of Tampa Florida, Tampa, FL 33606, USAHuman Performance Laboratory, Health Sciences and Human Performance Department, University of Tampa Florida, Tampa, FL 33606, USAHuman Performance Laboratory, Health Sciences and Human Performance Department, University of Tampa Florida, Tampa, FL 33606, USAHuman Performance Laboratory, Health Sciences and Human Performance Department, University of Tampa Florida, Tampa, FL 33606, USAThis study investigated the effects of two different velocity-based training (VBT) regimens on muscular adaptations. Fifteen female college volleyball players were randomly assigned into either progressive velocity-based training (PVBT) or optimum training load (OTL). Both groups trained three times a week for seven weeks. PVBT performed a 4-week strength block (e.g., 0.55⁻0.70 m·s<sup>−1</sup>) followed by a 3-week power block (e.g., 0.85⁻1.0 m·s<sup>−1</sup>), whereas OTL performed training at ~0.85⁻0.9 m·s<sup>−1</sup>. 1RM and peak power output (PP) assessments on the back squat (BS), bench press (BP) and deadlift (DL) exercises were assessed pre and post training. There was a main time effect (<i>p</i> ≤ 0.05) for BS and BP 1RM, (PVBT: 19.6%, ES: 1.72; OTL: 18.3%, ES: 1.57) and (PVBT: 8.5%, ES: 0.58; OTL: 10.2%, ES: 0.72), respectively. OTL increased DL 1RM to a greater extent than PVBT (<i>p</i> ≤ 0.05), (OTL: 22.9%, ES: 1.49; PVBT: 10.9%, ES: 0.88). Lastly, there was a main time effect (<i>p</i> ≤ 0.05) for BS, BP and DL PP, (PVBT: 18.3%, ES: 0.86; OTL: 19.8%, ES: 0.79); (PVBT: 14.5%, ES: 0.81; OTL: 27.9%, ES: 1.68); (PVBT: 15.7%, ES: 1.32; OTL: 20.1%, ES: 1.77) respectively. Our data suggest that both VBT regimens are effective for improving muscular performance in college volleyball players during the offseason period.https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4663/6/4/163female athletespower trainingvelocity-based trainingoptimum training loadbody composition |
| spellingShingle | Jacob T. Rauch Irineu Loturco Nicholas Cheesman Justin Thiel Michael Alvarez Nicholas Miller Nathan Carpenter Christopher Barakat Gloria Velasquez Alexandria Stanjones Daniel Aube Jody C. Andersen Eduardo O. De Souza Similar Strength and Power Adaptations between Two Different Velocity-Based Training Regimens in Collegiate Female Volleyball Players Sports female athletes power training velocity-based training optimum training load body composition |
| title | Similar Strength and Power Adaptations between Two Different Velocity-Based Training Regimens in Collegiate Female Volleyball Players |
| title_full | Similar Strength and Power Adaptations between Two Different Velocity-Based Training Regimens in Collegiate Female Volleyball Players |
| title_fullStr | Similar Strength and Power Adaptations between Two Different Velocity-Based Training Regimens in Collegiate Female Volleyball Players |
| title_full_unstemmed | Similar Strength and Power Adaptations between Two Different Velocity-Based Training Regimens in Collegiate Female Volleyball Players |
| title_short | Similar Strength and Power Adaptations between Two Different Velocity-Based Training Regimens in Collegiate Female Volleyball Players |
| title_sort | similar strength and power adaptations between two different velocity based training regimens in collegiate female volleyball players |
| topic | female athletes power training velocity-based training optimum training load body composition |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4663/6/4/163 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT jacobtrauch similarstrengthandpoweradaptationsbetweentwodifferentvelocitybasedtrainingregimensincollegiatefemalevolleyballplayers AT irineuloturco similarstrengthandpoweradaptationsbetweentwodifferentvelocitybasedtrainingregimensincollegiatefemalevolleyballplayers AT nicholascheesman similarstrengthandpoweradaptationsbetweentwodifferentvelocitybasedtrainingregimensincollegiatefemalevolleyballplayers AT justinthiel similarstrengthandpoweradaptationsbetweentwodifferentvelocitybasedtrainingregimensincollegiatefemalevolleyballplayers AT michaelalvarez similarstrengthandpoweradaptationsbetweentwodifferentvelocitybasedtrainingregimensincollegiatefemalevolleyballplayers AT nicholasmiller similarstrengthandpoweradaptationsbetweentwodifferentvelocitybasedtrainingregimensincollegiatefemalevolleyballplayers AT nathancarpenter similarstrengthandpoweradaptationsbetweentwodifferentvelocitybasedtrainingregimensincollegiatefemalevolleyballplayers AT christopherbarakat similarstrengthandpoweradaptationsbetweentwodifferentvelocitybasedtrainingregimensincollegiatefemalevolleyballplayers AT gloriavelasquez similarstrengthandpoweradaptationsbetweentwodifferentvelocitybasedtrainingregimensincollegiatefemalevolleyballplayers AT alexandriastanjones similarstrengthandpoweradaptationsbetweentwodifferentvelocitybasedtrainingregimensincollegiatefemalevolleyballplayers AT danielaube similarstrengthandpoweradaptationsbetweentwodifferentvelocitybasedtrainingregimensincollegiatefemalevolleyballplayers AT jodycandersen similarstrengthandpoweradaptationsbetweentwodifferentvelocitybasedtrainingregimensincollegiatefemalevolleyballplayers AT eduardoodesouza similarstrengthandpoweradaptationsbetweentwodifferentvelocitybasedtrainingregimensincollegiatefemalevolleyballplayers |