Building The Beast: Weight Room Example And Justification

0

Last semester I had the privilege of writing a paper on the justification of a long jump programming. Here is a portion of the paper that justifies the rational for my weight room set ups. I firmly believe that this is the best way to set up weight room, and if done correctly, can yield great improvements in strength and power. Enjoy! If you have questions, feel free to email me.

For more information on weight room, here is a post on progressing squats throughout the season:

Maximizing Squats

Mesocycle 3, Specific Preparation II, Micro 9-12 Weights

Mesocycle 3, Specific Preparation II, Micro 9-12

Week 1 Week 2
Monday Exercise Intensity Sets Reps Monday Exercise Intensity Sets Reps
Power Clean 80-90% 6 2 Power Clean 85-90% 7 2
Eccentric Squat 75% 6 3 Eccentric Squat 80% 6 2 or 3
TRDL 60 lbs. 3 10 TRDL 65 lbs. 3 8
Russian Twist 45 lbs. 2 8 Russian Twist 50 lbs. 2 8
Wednesday Speed Power Snatch 45% 6 2 Wednesday Speed Power Snatch 50% 6 2
Step Ups 40 lbs DBs. 3 6 ea Step Ups 45 lbs. DBs 3 5 ea
Back Hypers BW 3 15 Back Hypers BW 3 15
Bent Over Rows 145 lbs. 4 6 Bent Over Rows 150 lbs. 4 5
Hanging Abb Series BW 2 10 Hanging Abb Series BW 3 10
Friday CM Hang Clean 65-70% 5 2 Friday CM Hang Clean 70% 6 2
Speed Squat 55% 5 4 Speed Squat 50% 6 3
Good Morning 55lbs. 3 10 Good Morning 60lbs. 3 8
Speed Bench 140 lbs. 5 4 Speed Bench 135 lbs. 5 4
GHR BW 2 10 GHR BW 3 10
Band Anti-Rotation Green Band 2 5 Band Anti-Rotation Green Band 2 5
Week 3 TEST
Monday Exercise Intensity Sets Reps Monday Exercise Intensity Sets Reps
Power Clean 90-95% 8 1 Power Clean 90 5 3
Eccentric Squat 85% 7 2 SQUAT TEST 1 RM
TRDL 70 lbs. 4 6
Russian Twist 50 lbs. 2 8 Russian Twist 45 lbs. 2 8
Wednesday Speed Power Snatch 55% 6 2 Wednesday CLEAN TEST 1 RM
Step Ups 50 lbs. DBs 3 4 ea BENCH TEST 1 RM
Back Hypers BW 3 15
Bent Over Rows 155 lbs. 4 4
Hanging Abb Series BW 2 10 Hanging Abb Series BW 2 10
Friday CM Hang Clean 75% 7 2 Friday CM Hang Clean 65-70% 5 1
Speed Squat 45% 7 3 Speed Squat 50% 4 3
Good Morning 65lbs. 3 7 Good Morning 55lbs. 3 10
Speed Bench 125 lbs. 5 4 Speed Bench 135 lbs. 3 4
GHR BW 3 12 GHR BW 2 10
Band Anti-Rotation Green Band 2 5 Band Anti-Rotation Green Band 2 5

 

Specific Prep II, Micro 9

Monday: Speed Development/ Power (ECC Emphasis)/ Max Strength / Inertial

  1. SHWU B
  2. Dynamic Flexibility: Cole x 10 ea.
  3. Sprint Develophggment: Pai Mei 2×30
  4. Speed Development: 3x3x30m w/ 2 per rep and 3-4’ rest per set
  5. Multi-Jump Circuit: Tony x2

Weightlifting

  1. Power Clean: 6×2 Last 3 @ 80-90%
  2. Eccentric Squat: 6×3 w/ 3 second down Last 3 @ 75%
  3. TRDL: 3×10 ea. @ 60lbs. DB
  4. Russian Twist: 2×8 @ 45lb plate
  5. Jog 50, Skip 50: 500m

Tuesday: Technical/ Work Capacity/ General Strength

  1. SHWUA
  2. Dynamic Flexibility: Cole x 10 ea.
  3. Hurdle Mobility: Dynamic 2×6
  4. Sprint Development: Bride 2x30m
  5. Long Jump: 6-8 x 6 Lefts
  6. General strength – Ringo 25 secs, Marsellus x 10 ea.
  7. MB circuit: Pip x 8
  8. Body Building Circuits- AD x 10ea. LIGHT
  9. Cool Down: 5’ Air Dyne and Soft tissue work

Wednesday: Speed Development/ Unilateral/ Speed-Strength

  1. SHWUB
  2. Dynamic Flexibility: Merrill x10 ea.
  3. Sprint Development: Bride 1x30m
  4. Speed Development: 5-8x50m w/ 5’ rest

Weight lifting

  1. Speed Power Snatch: 6×2 @ 45%
  2. Step Ups: 3×6 ea @ 40lb. DB’s
  3. Back Hypers: 3×15 @ BW
  4. Bent Over Row: 4×6 @ 145lb.
  5. Hanging Abs – 2×10
  6. Jog 50, skip 50: 500m

Thursday: REGEN

  1. Long Warm Up
  2. Static Flexibility: A
  3. Dynamic Flexibility: Graham
  4. MB Circuit: Pip x 10
  5. General Strength: Vincent x 10ea.
  6. Cool down: Roll out, Static flex, cycle 10’

Friday: Technical/ Elasticity/ Max Power/ Speed-Strength

  1. SHWUB
  2. Dynamic Flexibility: Cole x 10ea
  3. Sprint Development: Pai Mei 2×20
  4. Long Jump:
    1. Pop ups to tolerance
    2. 6-8x Full Approach Pop Up
  5. Multiple Jump: Baby Bounds Vinny 2x20m

Weight Room

  1. CM Hang Clean: 5×2 @ 65-70%
  2. Superset:
    1. Speed Squat: 5×4 @55%
    2. Depth drop 24”: MB Throws x 5-10 total
  3. Good Morning or Reverse Hypers: 3x 10 @ 55 lbs.
  4. Speed Bench: 5x 4 reps @ 140 lbs.
  5. GHR: 2×10
  6. Band anti-rotation: 2×5 ea.
  7. Cool down: 5’ air dyne

Saturday: Speed Endurance

  1. SHWUBB
  2. Dynamic Flexibility: Graham x 10ea.
  3. Sprint Development: Bride 1x40m
  4. Speed Endurance: 3x 120m w/ 5-8’ rest
  5. General Strength: Animal x 10m, Pillar x 10ea.
  6. Cool Down: Soft Tissue Manipulation

Weekly Overview

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
Goal Power Jump Speed Regen Jump/Accel Spd End
Track Intensity High High High Low High Low
Track Volume Low Low Low Low Low Moderate
WR Intensity High Low High Low High Low
WR Volume Low Low Low Moderate Low Moderate
Load Moderate Moderate Moderate Low Moderate Moderate

Intervention Prescription

The goal of this training cycle is to begin to develop the specific qualities necessary to long jump far. Biomechanically, the athlete needs to be able to achieve a high horizontal velocity, amortize very quickly, and produce sufficient vertical velocity at takeoff (Alexander, 1990; Bridgett & Linthorne, 2006; Campos et al., 2013; Graham-Smith & Lees, 2005b; Hatze, 1981; Hay, Miller, & Canterna, 1986). This set up allows the athlete to sustain quality work over the course of the season, decrease the risk of injury, maximize recovery, and increase speed.

Justification and Detail of Mesocycle and Microcycle

From one subsequent microcycle to the next, the intensity increases, volume decreases, and load stays relatively the same (B. H. DeWeese, Hornsby, Stone, & Stone, 2015). The fourth week of each mesocyle is a deload week where the athlete is able to dissipate fatigue and ensure that the risk of overtraining is minimized (B. H. DeWeese et al., 2015).

The volume and intensity fluctuate between high and low periods each day (B. DeWeese, Hornsby, Stone, & Stone, 2015). The individual training day has a theme that each training stimuli is meant to facilitate (Magill & Hall, 1990). This daily undulation allows certain qualities to recover, while others are stressed (Painter et al., 2012). From one subsequent microcycle to the next, intensity increases by approximately 5% of 1 RM on core lifts, and between 5 and 10 lbs on less specific movements such as upper body push and pulls. This is according to the training principles of progressive overload and specificity (B. H. DeWeese et al., 2015). If intensity did not increase by increasing load, the athlete could potentially overload the training stimulus by increasing the velocity at which the repetitions were performed at (Padulo, Mignogna, Mignardi, Tonni, & D’ottavio, 2012). In these cases, specifically speed squat and speed bench, reductions in resistance could potentially yield increases in bar speed and peak power, thus increasing intensity (Ramírez, Núñez, Lancho, Poblador, & Lancho, 2015). The volumes of the associated lifts trend downwards unless the previous week exercise had a relatively low load. The reps per set decrease while the number of sets may increase to allow intensity within each set (Plisk & Stone, 2003; Zatsiorsky & Kraemer, 2006).

After the warm up, the athlete will perform sprints, plyometrics, and technical jump work. The most important portion of the session, the athlete must strive to achieve maximum effort and technical proficiency to promote adaptation (Banister, 1979). If the athlete does not perform quality work, they will likely not meet the threshold for adaptation (Zatsiorsky & Kraemer, 2006). After performing speed work on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, the athlete will perform weight room exercises. Each weight room session starts with the most specific and intense exercises, followed by relatively less specific and less intense exercises. Additionally, each weight training session utilizes an Olympic lift or regression of the lift, a squat variation, a push or pull, a posterior chain exercise, and an intense core exercise. Through this formatting, the athlete is able to address the entire body with an emphasis on the lower body prime movers. This set up addresses the entire range of motion of the joints, different portions of the force-velocity curve, power production, injury prevention, and max strength (Burke, 1986; McCaulley et al., 2009; Sale, 1988; Zatsiorsky & Kraemer, 2006). On Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday, the athlete will perform general strength, medicine ball circuits, and light body building circuits. These serve several roles, such as: increasing work capacity, increasing circulating testosterone and human growth hormone, strengthening important core and stability muscles, reducing risk of injury, progressively lowering the nervous system to a resting state, improving intramuscular and intermuscular coordination, and building general strength through large ranges of motion(B. DeWeese et al., 2015; Matveev & Zdornyj, 1981; Zatsiorsky & Kraemer, 2006).

Evaluation:

Depending on the day, the warm-up consists: 1200-1600 meters of locomotion addressing all planes of movement, general to specific static or dynamic flexibility, sprint development drills, and hurdle mobility. The warm up progresses from general to more specific exercises, mobilizes tissue, primes the nervous system, and is a low-level work capacity stimulus. On Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, the warm up progressively shifts towards more sprint specific movements at higher intensities. By doing so, the athlete decreases the risk of any sports related injuries.

The athletes starts with 1200m-1600m of skipping, jogging, running. Because the athlete does not stop moving for the duration of the warm up, there is a small aerobic training stimulus. At first this may be perceived as a small workout, but over time the athlete should adapt, and the associated aerobic adaptation should assist in recovery after sessions (Schumann et al., 2014). As a second purpose, the warm up addresses general coordination due to the different rhythms, arm movements, skipping patterns, and changes of direction performed during the exercises (Burke, 1986; Magill & Hall, 1990; Wulf & McNevin, 2003).

After performing the warm up, the athlete will perform flexibility exercises. These can be either dynamic, static, or PNF. All types of flexibility have been shown to increase range of motion, however PNF and static stretching may cause acute decrements in speed and power that should be avoided (McMillian, Moore, Hatler, & Taylor, 2006; Power et al., 2004). It may be appropriate to perform long holds is when the athlete is unable to put themselves in key positions that result in long jump success, specifically, a high knee position and an appropriate amount of thigh deflection of the toe off leg. If these are not major concerns, the athlete should perform dynamic flexibility that addresses the entire body through joint ranges of motion that will be observed during the training sessions (McMillian et al., 2006). The athlete should perform 10 repetitions of each dynamic flexibility exercise. If the athlete is performing static or PNF stretching, the athlete should stretch for 30 seconds for each stretch, or to tolerance, to achieve a desired range of motion (Behm, Bambury, Cahill, & Power, 2004).

After performing the associated flexibility, the athlete will perform sprint drills. Aside from increasing core warmth and addressing relevant musculature, these drills can also be used to improve hip flexor strength, postural stability, and support leg balance (Matveev & Zdornyj, 1981; Zatsiorsky & Kraemer, 2006). Anecdotally, most athletes feel these drills adequately warm them up after two sets of 20-30 meters.

Following sprint development, the athlete must begin to perform elastic, high speed, high force muscular contractions to prepare the athlete for the intense sprinting they are about to perform (Yoshimoto, Takai, & Kanehisa, 2016). To do so, the athlete may perform hurdle mobility that focuses on rhythmic, fast, elastic leg movements and ground contacts. Traditionally, athletes perform between two sets of 6 to 10 repetitions of 3-4 exercises. The second purpose of these drills is to develop lumbo-pelvic rhythm, balance, hip flexor strength, and specific flexibility. More research needs to be done on this topic to further assess the efficacy of this intervention.

Speed is incredibly important when long jumping and prioritized year round. With this in mind, the long jump athlete will be performing sprint work Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday. By performing speed work every other day, the athlete can avoid overtraining (Issurin, 2008). On Tuesday and Fridays, the athlete addresses their event specific work. The athlete should jump on Tuesday, as they likely feel better after moving on Monday due to a hypothesized potentiation and activation effect from the high intensity movements on Monday (Yoshimoto et al., 2016). As long as the athlete has the appropriate volume on Monday, the jumping session should be relatively successful. It is important to note that some athletes have difficulty jumping after major weight room sessions, and athletes may benefit from either switching the Monday and Tuesday weight room, or totally removing the Monday weight room. This is athlete specific, and follows the principle of individuality (B. H. DeWeese et al., 2015). Following each track session, the athlete heads directly to the weight room. By doing so, the athlete can avoid performing a second warm up.

Excluding the jump session and speed work, Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday serve as general days that offset the very specific work occurring throughout the week. Tuesday and Saturday are descending workouts, because the intensity progressively decreased following the jump and sprint sessions. The athlete will perform general strength circuits, medicine ball circuits, and body building circuits. These general strength circuits add non-specific volume to the training load. This is synonymous to slower runs that distance runners might use in their training. By performing these general strength circuits, the athlete is avoiding the interference effect that would occur from performing long slow runs, and increase the athlete’s ability to manage work load (Matveev & Zdornyj, 1981). The specific training adaptations depend on which circuit is used, but some of the potential goals include: increasing postural strength, addressing small musculature in a more specific manner, assist in collagen remodeling, increase circulating hormones to promote recovery, improve tissue tolerance, decrease body fat percentage, increase lean muscle tissue, improve intramuscular and intermuscular coordination, and facilitate the recovery response through progressively lowering the global stress response to previous training days (Bloomquist et al., 2013; B. H. DeWeese et al., 2015; B. DeWeese et al., 2015; Harries, Lubans, & Callister, 2015; Kubo, Kanehisa, & Fukunaga, 2001; Lieberman, 2001; McCaulley et al., 2009; Sale, 1988). Without these days, the athlete would not be able to handle the more specific training days without injury. Further, when progressing from one cycle to the next, the coach is able to lower the less specific, general volume, and increase the more specific volume with minimal risk (Mujika, Padilla, Pyne, & Busso, 2004).

On Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, the athlete performs a variation of an Olympic lift. Olympic lifts allow the athlete to improve maximum strength, rate of force development, contraction-relaxation rates, and prime mover firing patterns (Comfort, Allen, & Graham-Smith, 2011; Cormie, McGuigan, & Newton, 2010; Souza et al., 2002). A heavy power clean from the floor performed on Monday pairs well with the theme of acceleration. Classified as strength-speed, the load is high and speed maximized. In contrast, Wednesday utilizes the power snatch to address speed-strength through a lighter resistance and higher bar speed. This pairs well with the maximum speed work performed on the track. On Friday, the athlete performs a counter movement clean to address the stretch shortening cycle. This pairs well with the goal of elasticity and power, as the athlete jumps on this day. By performing variations of the lift, the athlete avoids monotony, and relative specificity may increase. All of these movements are under three repetitions per set, and between 5-8 sets per session. This ensures that the body predominantly relies on the ATP-PCR energy pathway and quality of movement in maximized (B. DeWeese et al., 2015). Traditionally, athletes take between 3-5 minutes rest between each set of Olympic lift.

After Olympic lifts, the athlete will perform a close chain, multi-joint exercise that addresses the triple extensors (Hansen & Cronin, 2009). These exercises should balance load placed on the knee and hip. Because these prime movers, specifically the gluteal muscles, hamstring muscles, quadriceps muscles, gastrocnemius, and soleus, are responsible for locomotion and jumping performance, addressing these musculature is very important to increase max strength, max power, and reduce injury (Hansen & Cronin, 2009; Maulder & Cronin, 2005; McBride et al., 2009; Seitz, Reyes, Tran, Villarreal, & Haff, 2014). This is achieved through the use of a heavy squat movement on Monday when the athlete is fresh, a unilateral movement on Wednesday to address sprint and jump specificity, and a lighter squat movement on Friday to decrease total load and increase perceived recovery(Painter et al., 2012). Although the load is light on Friday, the speed squat may be more intense if the speed is very high at relatively low resistances. By addressing max strength and power, the athlete is addressing rate of force development, maximum force generation, and intermuscular and intramuscular coordination(Cormie et al., 2010). It is also important to note that these exercises are typically loaded axially to improve trunk stability during ground based force application. There is a component of greater specificity through the addition of an eccentric squat, where the athlete performs the down phase of the squat over a three count(Brughelli, Cronin, & Chaouachi, 2011; Weyand, Sternlight, Bellizzi, & Wright, 2000). The benefit of performing the exercise in this manner, is that it stresses eccentric force generating capacity, which is very important during sprinting and jumping(Weyand et al., 2000). The sets and intensity for each of these exercises are very high (between 4-6 sets), while reps stay relatively low (reps ≤ 6). By doing so, the athlete is able to use high resistances that develop maximal strength qualities. As stated above, if the resistance is low, the bar speed may increase, which could increase total intensity. The coach may measure bar speed with the use of a velocity based training instrument. Unilateral work has three sets each leg, totaling six sets.

Olympic lifting and the ground based triple extension exercise are the highest intensity exercise, and therefore require the greatest attention to detail. Following these exercises, the athlete will perform a posterior chain movement. These exercises are traditionally a lower intensity (≤70%), higher repetition (between 6-15), as the athlete is likely fatigued at this point in the session. By performing additional posterior chain exercises, the athlete may improve horizontal force production and decrease their risk of hamstring injury (Jonhagen, Nemeth, & Eriksson, 1994; Seitz et al., 2014; West et al., 2013).

The last portion of the session may involve a high intensity core exercise, and an upper body push or pull. The core serves to stabilize the body during movement, thus more time developing it is necessary. The athlete may utilize trunk rotation, spinal flexion and extension, and isometric anti-rotations. By performing a variety of exercises for 2-3 sets each, the athlete may expose themselves to ranges of motions and loads that may mimic forces observed during sprinting and jumping (Brughelli et al., 2011). Lastly, the athlete may perform the upper body push or pull to further address the neural and hormonal chemistries associated with multi joint, high intensity exercises(Popov et al., 2006). These exercises can promote recovery, improve posture, increase max strength, and develop coordination (Cardinale, Cook, Crewther, Lowe, & Weatherby, 2011; Rønnestad, Nygaard, & Raastad, 2011). The guidelines for these exercises are similar to the lower body strength and power exercises listed above.

At the conclusion of each session, the athlete will perform an appropriate cool down. There are several cool down protocols, but each lasts 2-5 minutes in duration, with the potential to include soft tissue work through foam rolling, soft tissue massage, and static stretching. By doing so, the athlete brings their core warmth down in a systematic manner to begin the recovery process. This also ensures that the athlete’s joints are moving well, musculature tonicity is reduced, and the parasympathetic nervous system is activated (B. DeWeese et al., 2015).

References:
Alexander, R. M. (1990). Optimum Take-Off Techniques for High and Long Jumps. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 329(1252), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.1990.0144
Banister, E. W. (1979). The perception of effort: an inductive approach. European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology, 41(2), 141–150.
Behm, D. G., Bambury, A., Cahill, F., & Power, K. (2004). Effect of acute static stretching on force, balance, reaction time, and movement time. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 36, 1397–1402.
Bloomquist, K., Langberg, H., Karlsen, S., Madsgaard, S., Boesen, M., & Raastad, T. (2013). Effect of range of motion in heavy load squatting on muscle and tendon adaptations. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 113(8), 2133–2142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-013-2642-7
Bridgett, L. A., & Linthorne, N. P. (2006). Changes in long jump take-off technique with increasingrun-up speed. Journal of Sports Sciences, 24(8), 889–897. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640410500298040
Brughelli, M., Cronin, J., & Chaouachi, A. (2011). Effects of running velocity on running kinetics and kinematics. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 25(4), 933–939.
Burke, R. E. (1986). The control of muscle force: Motor unit recruitment and firing patterns. Human Muscle Power, 97–106.
Campos, J., Gàmez, J., Encarnación, A., Gutiérrez-Dávila, M., Rojas, J., & Wallace, E. S. (2013). Three-Dimensional Kinematics during the Take-Off Phase in Competitive Long Jumping. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 8(2), 395–406. https://doi.org/10.1260/1747-9541.8.2.395
Cardinale, M., Cook, C., Crewther, B. T., Lowe, and T., & Weatherby, R. P. (2011). Two emerging concepts for elite athletes: the short-term effects of testosterone and cortisol on the neuromuscular system and the dose-response training role of these endogenous hormones. Sports Medicine, 41(2), 103–109.
Comfort, P., Allen, M., & Graham-Smith, P. (2011). Kinetic Comparisons During Variations of the Power Clean: Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 25(12), 3269–3273. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182184dea
Cormie, P., McGuigan, M. R., & Newton, R. U. (2010). Influence of strength on magnitude and mechanisms of adaptation to power training. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 42(8), 1566–81.
DeWeese, B. H., Hornsby, G., Stone, M., & Stone, M. H. (2015). The training process: Planning for strength–power training in track and field. Part 1: Theoretical aspects. Journal of Sport and Health Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jshs.2015.07.003
DeWeese, B., Hornsby, G., Stone, M., & Stone, M. H. (2015). The training process: Planning for strength–power training in track and field. Part 2: Practical and applied aspects. Journal of Sport and Health Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jshs.2015.07.002
Graham-Smith, P., & Lees, A. (2005a). A three-dimensional kinematic analysis of the long jump take-off. Journal of Sports Sciences, 23(9), 891–903. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640410400022169
Graham-Smith, P., & Lees, A. (2005b). A three-dimensional kinematic analysis of the long jump take-off. Journal of Sports Sciences, 23(9), 891–903. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640410400022169
Hansen, K., & Cronin, J. (2009). Training Loads for the Development of Lower Body Muscular Power During Squatting Movements: Strength and Conditioning Journal, 31(3), 17–33. https://doi.org/10.1519/SSC.0b013e3181957065
Harries, S. K., Lubans, D. R., & Callister, R. (2015). Systematic review and meta-analysis of linear and undulating periodized resistance training programs on muscular strength. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 29(4), 1113–1125.
Hatze, H. (1981). A comprehensive model for human motion simulation and its application to the take-off phase of the long jump. Journal of Biomechanics, 14(3), 135–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9290(81)90019-1
Hay, J. G. (1993). Citius, altius, longius (faster, higher, longer): The biomechanics of jumping for distance. Journal of Biomechanics, 26, 7–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9290(93)90076-Q
Hay, J. G., Miller, J. A., & Canterna, R. W. (1986). The techniques of elite male long jumpers. Journal of Biomechanics, 19(10), 855–866. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9290(86)90136-3
Issurin, V. (2008). Block periodization versus traditional training theory: a review. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 48(1), 65.
Jonhagen, S., Nemeth, G., & Eriksson, E. (1994). Hamstring Injuries in Sprinters The Role of Concentric and Eccentric Hamstring Muscle Strength and Flexibility. The American Journal of Sports Medicine, 22(2), 262–266. https://doi.org/10.1177/036354659402200218
Kubo, K., Kanehisa, H., & Fukunaga, T. (2001). Effects of different duration isometric contractions on tendon elasticity in human quadriceps muscles. The Journal of Physiology, 536(Pt 2), 649–655. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7793.2001.0649c.xd
Lees, A., Graham-Smith, P., & Fowler, N. (1994). A Biomechanical Analysis of the Last Stride, Touchdown, and Takeoff Characteristics of the Men’s Long Jump. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 10(1). Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&profile=ehost&scope=site&authtype=crawler&jrnl=10658483&AN=20725450&h=2O8HcqCaghUSSkCdlIVBGwqHxHADHuuPEFF3DVbZmKCD6JcbTVyqg4xhIftaSd6hRkYBf32CFeqXlQOqzLPLQw%3D%3D&crl=c
Lieberman, E. S. (2001). Causal Inference in Historical Institutional Analysis A Specification of Periodization Strategies. Comparative Political Studies, 34(9), 1011–1035.
Linthorne, N. P. (2008). Biomechanics of the long jump. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=1-MV1dHAHXQC&oi=fnd&pg=PA340&ots=r9oAp0rDV-&sig=wVV9egHgrgrrRw7_ywkZq0_QIBg
Magill, R. A., & Hall, K. G. (1990). A review of the contextual interference effect in motor skill acquisition. Human Movement Science, 9(3), 241–289.
Matveev, L. P., & Zdornyj, A. P. (1981). Fundamentals of sports training. Progress.
Maulder, P., & Cronin, J. (2005). Horizontal and vertical jump assessment: reliability, symmetry, discriminative and predictive ability. Physical Therapy in Sport, 6(2), 74–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ptsp.2005.01.001
McBride, J. M., Blow, D., Kirby, T. J., Haines, T. L., Dayne, A. M., & Triplett, N. T. (2009). Relationship Between Maximal Squat Strength and Five, Ten, and Forty Yard Sprint Times: Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 23(6), 1633–1636. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181b2b8aa
McCaulley, G. O., McBride, J. M., Cormie, P., Hudson, M. B., Nuzzo, J. L., Quindry, J. C., & Triplett, N. T. (2009). Acute hormonal and neuromuscular responses to hypertrophy, strength and power type resistance exercise. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 105(5), 695–704.
McMillian, D. J., Moore, J. H., Hatler, B. S., & Taylor, D. C. (2006). Dynamic vs. static-stretching warm up: the effect on power and agility performance. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 20(3), 492–499.
Mujika, I., Padilla, S., Pyne, D., & Busso, T. (2004). Physiological changes associated with the pre-event taper in athletes. Sports Medicine, 34(13), 891–927.
Padulo, J., Mignogna, P., Mignardi, S., Tonni, F., & D’ottavio, S. (2012). Effect of different pushing speeds on bench press. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 33(5), 376–380.
Painter, K., Haff, G., Ramsey, M., McBride, J., Triplett, T., Sands, W., … Stone, M. (2012). Strength gains: block versus daily undulating periodization weight training among track and field athletes. Retrieved from http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ecuworks2012/497/
Plisk, S. S., & Stone, M. H. (2003). Periodization Strategies. Strength & Conditioning Journal, 25(6), 19–37.
Popov, D. V., Swirkun, D. V., Netreba, A. I., Tarasova, O. S., Prostova, A. B., Larina, I. M., … Vinogradova, O. L. (2006). Hormonal adaptation determines the increase in muscle mass and strength during low-intensity strength training without relaxation. Human Physiology, 32(5), 609–614. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0362119706050161
Power, K., Behm, D., Cahill, F., Carroll, M., Young, W., & others. (2004). An acute bout of static stretching: effects on force and jumping performance. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 36, 1389–1396.
Ramírez, J. M., Núñez, V. M., Lancho, C., Poblador, M. S., & Lancho, J. L. (2015). Velocity-Based Training of Lower Limb to Improve Absolute and Relative Power Outputs in Concentric Phase of Half-Squat in Soccer Players. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 29(11), 3084–3088.
Rønnestad, B. R., Nygaard, H., & Raastad, T. (2011). Physiological elevation of endogenous hormones results in superior strength training adaptation. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 111(9), 2249–2259. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-011-1860-0
Sale, D. G. (1988). Neural adaptation to resistance training. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 20(5 Suppl), S135–45.
Schumann, M., Walker, S., Izquierdo, M., Newton, R. U., Kraemer, W. J., & Häkkinen, K. (2014). The order effect of combined endurance and strength loadings on force and hormone responses: effects of prolonged training. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 114(4), 867–880. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-013-2813-6
Seitz, L. B., Reyes, A., Tran, T. T., Villarreal, E. S. de, & Haff, G. G. (2014). Increases in lower-body strength transfer positively to sprint performance: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Sports Medicine, 44(12), 1693–1702. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-014-0227-1
Souza, A. L., Shimada, S. D., & Koontz, A. (2002). Ground reaction forces during the power clean. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 16(3), 423–427.
Stone, M. H., O’Bryant, H. S., Williams, F. E., Johnson, R. L., & Pierce, K. C. (1998). Analysis of Bar Paths During the Snatch in Elite Male Weightlifters. Strength & Conditioning Journal, 20(4), 30–38.
West, D. J., Cunningham, D. J., Bracken, R. M., Bevan, H. R., Crewther, B. T., Cook, C. J., & Kilduff, L. P. (2013). Effects of resisted sprint training on acceleration in professional rugby union players: Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 27(4), 1014–1018. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182606cff
Weyand, P. G., Sternlight, D. B., Bellizzi, M. J., & Wright, S. (2000). Faster top running speeds are achieved with greater ground forces not more rapid leg movements. Journal of Applied Physiology, 89(5), 1991–1999.
Wu, W.-L., Wu, J.-H., Lin, H.-T., & Wang, G.-J. (2003). Biomechanical analysis of the standing long jump. Biomedical Engineering: Applications, Basis and Communications, 15(5), 186–192. https://doi.org/10.4015/S1016237203000286
Wulf, G., & McNevin, N. (2003). Simply distracting learners is not enough: More evidence for the learning benefits of an external focus of attention. European Journal of Sport Science, 3(5), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/17461390300073501
Yoshimoto, T., Takai, Y., & Kanehisa, H. (2016). Acute effects of different conditioning activities on running performance of sprinters. SpringerPlus, 5(1), 1203.
Zatsiorsky, V. M., & Kraemer, W. J. (2006). Science and practice of strength training. Human Kinetics. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=QWSn4iKgNo8C&oi=fnd&pg=PR8&dq=science+and+practice+of+strength+training&ots=v4e4TkNCzr&sig=MMhiZgXWCZL-q2FUHaijSh_BA4s

 

 

John Evans

John Evans

John has a BS in Exercise Science from Slippery Rock University, and is currently pursuing his MS in Sport Science from Northern Michigan University. He is an assistant combined events/jumps coach for NMU women's track and field team, and USATF/USAW level 1 certified. Previously, John interned at Athletic Lab for two summers under owner/director, Mike Young.
John Evans

@JohnEvans6265

I love building relationships through coaching
Share.

Comments are closed.