Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Chapter 2-Fleck Fitness vs. performance Strength across ROM and velocities What does training accomplish? How fast is it accomplished? Comparison to other types? What types of humans? Trained vs. untrained? Factors Volume Intensity Outcomes of different types Concentric vs. eccentric Isotonic (DCER), isometric, isokinetic, variable (cams) No movement Gains are for static strength but quick Submax also results in gains Time x intensity Longer time per rep is advisable Rule of 10’s Valsalva 3-5 frequency Hypertrophy related to program design Joint angle specificity carryover 5-25 degs Static not dynamic adaptations Motor performance is dynamic Very little velocity change Sticking point training Muscle force varies but weight does not Dynamic Constant External Resistance Optimum design? Truth? Berger 3x6 DeLorme and Watkins 3x10 O’Shea 5x3, 3x7, 2-3x7-12 Fitness vs. strength and performance Dose response? Max lifts in design Muscle activation? Frequency inverse to intensity Muscle group specificity Training age specificity Periodization allows change Motor performance dynamic gains! Multiple muscles trained Increase of 10% to 150%? Lever arms, cams or pulleys Strength curve changes Nautilus Curves are individual Design is similar to DCER Increases are similar Motor performance is less Constant velocity (load range) Less specificity Concentric and eccentric Velocity spectrum (0-500 d/s) Strength changes are similar to other types Design is similar to other types Velocity specificity Velocity carryover (180 d/s)? Rehab and lab tool Lengthening actions 120% of concentric Important component Specificity DOMS Carryover to concentric limited Less ATP and EMG Injury relationship Most beneficial? Equate volume or intensity Kelly work (con vs. ecc) Isometric limited carryover Isokinetic greater than isometric motor Eccentric greater for dynamic than isometric Free weights greater motor carryover Concentric greatest overall carryover Specificity Velocity Muscle action Direction Muscle group Angle Optimal design Frequency Volume Intensity Chapter 3 Fleck