Journals / Türk Spor ve Egzersiz Dergisi / 2014 / Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 2

Muscular activation differences between professional and amateur soccer players during countermovement jump

Pages
51–58
Publication Date
2014-08-28
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It could be concluded that pre-activation and post landing phase are important for the jumping performance for both groups; however; the high activation of gastrocnemious muscle could be one of the important determinant for the superior jump performance

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of this study was to compare the muscular activation strategies of professional and amateur soccer players during countermovement jump.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Twenty male soccer players, consisting of 10 amateurs (age: 22.9±3.1 year, training status: 12.2±3.1 year) and 10 professionals (age: 22.2±2.5year, training status: 13.7±2.7year) volunteered to participate in the study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It could be concluded that pre-activation and post landing phase are important for the jumping performance for both groups; however; the high activation of gastrocnemious muscle could be one of the important determinant for the superior jump performance
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Professional · Amateur · Electromyography

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the muscular activation strategies of professional and amateur soccer players during countermovement jump. Twenty male soccer players, consisting of 10 amateurs (age: 22.9±3.1 year, training status: 12.2±3.1 year) and 10 professionals (age: 22.2±2.5year, training status: 13.7±2.7year) volunteered to participate in the study. Dominant leg surface electromyography activities of five muscles were recorded during countermovement jump. In addition, isokinetic strength of knee flexor and extensors, peak and average power were calculated. According to our results, the average countermovement jump heights were calculated for amateurs (37.1±3.12 cm) and professionals (41.3±2.58 cm). Furthermore, gastrocnemius muscle activation occurred significantly higher in professional soccer players than that of the amateur soccer players during propulsion (between -150ms and -120ms) and flight phase (between 150ms and 270ms) (p<0,05). Rectus femoris, vastus lateralis, vastus medialis and biceps femoris muscles contraction values were almost similar in both amateur and professional soccer players which their age, training year and muscle strengths are similar. It could be concluded that pre-activation and post landing phase are important for the jumping performance for both groups; however; the high activation of gastrocnemious muscle could be one of the important determinant for the superior jump performance

🔖

Cite This Article

CERRAH, A., GUNGOR, E. O., SOYLU, A., ERTAN, H. (2014). Muscular activation differences between professional and amateur soccer players during countermovement jump. Türk Spor ve Egzersiz Dergisi, Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 2, 51–58. https://ajindex.com/articles/206208

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Aagaard P, Simonsen EB, Andersen JL, Magnusson P, Dyhre- Poulsen P. Increased rate of force development and neural drive of human skeletal muscle following resistance training. Journal of Applied Phycology, 2002; 93:1318-1326.
  2. Babic J, Lenaric J. Vertical Jump: Biomechanical Analysis and Simulation Study Humanoid Robots. Slovenia: Publisher I- Tech Education and Publishing, 2007; 552-565.
  3. Baratta R, Solomonow M, Zhou BH, Letson D, Chuinard R, D’Am- brosia R. Muscular coactivation: the role of the antagonist muscula- ture in maintaining knee stability. The American Journal of Sports Medicine, 1988; 16: 113-22.
  4. Bobbert MF, Gerritsen KG, Litjens MC, Van Soest AJ. Why is countermovement jump height greater than squat jump height? Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 1996; 28(11): 1402-1412.
  5. Bosco C, Viitasalo JT. Potentiation of myoelectrical activity of human muscles in vertical jumps. Electromyography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 1982; 22: 549-562.
  6. Canavan PK, Vescovi JD. Evaluation of power prediction equations: peak vertical jumping power in women. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 2004; 36(9): 1589-1593.
  7. Carlock JM, Smith SL, Hartman MJ, Morris RT, Ciroslan DA, Pierce KC, Newton RU, Harman EA, Sands WA, Stone MH. The relationship between vertical jump power estimates and weightlifting ability: a field-test approach. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 2004; 18(3): 534-539.
  8. Cerrah AO, Onarici Gungor E, Soylu AR, Ertan H, Lees A, Bayrak C. Muscular Activation patterns during the Soccer In- Step Kick. Isokinetics and Exercise Science, 2011; 19: 181-190.
  9. Cometti G, Maffiuletti NA, Pousson M, Chatard JC, Maffulli N. Isokinetic strength and anaerobic power of elite, subelite and amateur French soccer players. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 2001; 22(1): 45-51.
  10. Cormie P, McGuigan MR, Newton RU. Adaptations in athletic performance after ballistic power versus strength training. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 2010; 42: 1582-1598.
  11. Edwards S, Steele JR, Cook JL, Purdam CR, McGhee DE. Lower limb movement symmetry cannot be assumed when investigating the stop-jump landing. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 2012; 44(6): 1123-1130.
  12. Fukashiro S, Komi PV. Joint moment and mechanical flow of the lower limb during vertical jump. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 1987; 8: 15-21.
  13. Gerodimos V, Zafeiridis A, Perkos S, Dipla K, Manou V, Kellis S. The contribution of stretch-shortening cycle and arm- swing to vertical ju