Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 8

International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 2019, 14, 209-215

https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2018-0233
© 2019 Human Kinetics, Inc. ORIGINAL INVESTIGATION

Association Between the Force–Velocity Profile


and Performance Variables Obtained in Jumping and Sprinting
in Elite Female Soccer Players
Ramón Marcote-Pequeño, Amador García-Ramos, Víctor Cuadrado-Peñafiel,
Jorge M. González-Hernández, Miguel Ángel Gómez, and Pedro Jiménez-Reyes

Purpose: To quantify the magnitude of the association between the same variables of the force–velocity (FV) profile and the
performance variables (unloaded-squat-jump height and 20-m sprint time) obtained during jumping and sprinting testing and to
determine which mechanical capacity (ie, maximum force [F0], maximum velocity [V0], or maximum power [Pmax]) presents the
highest association with the performance variables. Methods: The FV profile of 19 elite female soccer players (age 23.4 [3.8] y,
height 166.4 [5.6] cm, body mass 59.7 [4.7] kg) was determined during the jumping and sprinting tasks. The F0, V0, FV slope,
Pmax, and FV imbalance (difference respect to the optimal FV profile in jumping and the decrease in the ratio of horizontal force
production in sprinting) were determined for each task. Results: Very large correlations between both tasks were observed for
Pmax (r = .75) and the performance variables (r = −.73), as well as moderate correlations for V0 (r = .49), while the F0 (r = −.14),
the FV slope (r = −.09), and the FV imbalance (r = .07) were not significantly correlated between both tasks. The Pmax obtained
during each specific task was the mechanical capacity most correlated with its performance variable (r = .84 in jumping and
r = .99 in sprinting). Conclusions: The absence of significant correlations between some of the FV relationship parameters
suggests that, for an individualized training prescription based on the FV profile, both jumping and sprinting testing procedures
should be performed with elite female soccer players.

Keywords: maximum force, maximum velocity, maximum power, jump height, sprint time

The ability to perform soccer-related tasks at high velocities is data recorded during sprint running16,17 can be used to model a
believed to be a key factor for reaching success in soccer.1–5 For linear FV relationship. The 4 main variables obtained from the
instance, the straight sprint (45%) followed by vertical jumps linear FV relationship are the theoretical maximal force (F0), the
(16%) have shown to be the 2 most frequent actions in goal theoretical maximal velocity (V0), the slope of the FV relationship
situations during professional soccer matches.3 Therefore, due to (FV slope), and the theoretical maximal power (Pmax).18 Therefore,
the undeniable importance of vertical jumps and linear sprints in F0, V0, and Pmax represent the external mechanical limits of the
soccer competitions, researchers have focused on describing the entire neuromuscular system to produce force, velocity, and power,
performance of soccer players during these actions as well as on respectively.19 However, although these 3 parameters are com-
enhancing vertical jump and sprint capabilities through training monly identified as the maximal mechanical capacities of the lower
interventions.6–9 Unfortunately, most of these investigations have limbs when obtained either from the jumping or sprinting testing
been conducted with male soccer players.2 Therefore, it would be procedures, no previous study has examined whether the magni-
of interest to conduct research with elite female soccer players to tude of these parameters are significantly correlated between both
obtain more knowledge about their performance during high- tasks. The main outcomes of the jumping and sprinting testing
velocity soccer-related tasks (eg, vertical jump and linear sprint). procedures could be used interchangeably if large positive correla-
Jump height and sprint time are the 2 performance variables tions are observed between them, while the absence of significant
most commonly used to evaluate vertical jump and linear sprint correlations would suggest that they provide distinctive informa-
capabilities, respectively.10,11 However, a new testing methodol- tion regarding the maximal capacities of lower-body muscles.
ogy based on the force–velocity (FV) relationship has recently It is important to note that the same Pmax can be achieved from
emerged with the expectation of providing more meaningful data to different combinations of F0 and V0 (Pmax = F0·V0/4).18 Interest-
implement individualized training programs.12,13 Namely, the force ingly, it has been shown that for each individual there exists an
and velocity data collected during vertical jumps performed against optimal combination of F0 and V0 (ie, FV slope) that allows to
2 or more loads14,15 and the displacement–time (or velocity–time) maximize ballistic performance for a same value of Pmax19,20 and,
consequently, specific training programs can be prescribed to
reduce the FV imbalance.13 However, it is unknown whether
Marcote-Pequeño, Cuadrado-Peñafiel, and Gómez are with the Faculty of Physical the FV slope obtained from the jumping and sprinting testing
Activity and Sport Sciences, Technical University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
procedures are significantly correlated (ie, if individuals with a
García-Ramos is with the Dept of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sport
Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain, and the Dept of Sports Sciences
force-oriented profile in jumping also tend to have a force-oriented
and Physical Conditioning, Faculty of Education, CIEDE, Catholic University of profile in sprinting). A previous study observed low correlations for
Most Holy Conception, Concepción, Chile. González-Hernández and Jiménez- the same parameters of the FV relationship between jumping and
Reyes are with the Faculty of Sport, Catholic University of San Antonio, Murcia, cycling,21 which suggests that the generalizability of the FV out-
Spain. García-Ramos (amagr@ugr.es) is corresponding author. comes between jumping and sprinting could also be limited. These
209
210 Marcote-Pequeño et al

results could provide valuable information regarding whether the Testing Procedures
weaknesses observed in one task (eg, jumping) could be extrapo-
lated to the other task (eg, sprinting). Finally, it should be noted that All subjects performed a 10-minute warm-up consisting of 5
the magnitude of the FV relationship parameters obtained during minutes of jogging and 5 minutes of lower-limb dynamic stretch-
the jumping and sprinting testing procedures, particularly Pmax ing. As part of the specific warm-up, they performed 5 unloaded
(normalized to body mass), has been shown to be significantly SJ and 3 SJ loaded with 30 kg (before the jumping test) and 3
correlated with their performance variables (ie, unloaded jump progressive sprints of 40 m at 50%, 70%, and 90% of the subjects’
height and sprint time, respectively).20,22 However, it is also self-perceived maximal velocity (before the sprinting test).
unknown the degree to which the magnitude of the parameters Jumping Testing Procedures. To determine the individual FV
observed for one task is correlated with the performance variable of relationships, each soccer player performed maximal vertical
the other task. Due to the differences in the force vector between jumps without external loads and against 3 external loads ranging
jumping (vertical force vector) and sprinting (horizontal force from 10 to 50 kg (the heaviest external load allowed each player to
vector),23 a weak association between the biomechanical charac- jump approximately 12 cm) in a randomized order. The test was
teristics of both exercises could be expected. performed with a free-weight barbell. Before each jump, subjects
To address the existing gaps in the literature, we assessed the were instructed to stand-up straight with their hands on the hips for
maximal mechanical capacities of lower-body muscles (F0, V0, FV the unloaded condition and on the bar for loaded jumps, this hand
slope, and Pmax) as well as the performance variables (unloaded position remaining the same during the entire movement. From this
squat jump [SJ] height and 20-m sprint time) in a group of elite position, subjects initiated a downward movement until a crouch-
female soccer players during the jumping and sprinting tasks. ing position with a knee angle of about 90°, followed by a jump for
Specifically, the aims of the present study were (1) to quantify maximal height. Two valid trials were performed with each load
the magnitude of the association between the same variables with 2 minutes recovery between trials and 4 to 5 minutes between
obtained during the jumping and sprinting testing procedures loads condition. Jump height was obtained using an OptoJump
and (2) to determine which mechanical capacity (ie, F0, V0, or optical measurement system (Microgate, Bolzano, Italy). Subjects
Pmax) presents the highest association with the performance vari- were instructed to touchdown the ground with extended legs in foot
ables during both tasks. We hypothesized that (1) the magnitude of plantar flexion in order to not overestimate jump height. The trial
the correlations would be weaker for the mechanical capacities than was repeated when an incorrect landing technique was observed by
for the performance variables21,24 and (2) the Pmax obtained during a skilled investigator. It should be noted that it has been reported
each specific task would be the mechanical capacity more associ- that the reliability of jump height during the loaded SJ is compara-
ated with the performance variables.20 The results of this study are ble when obtained from the flight time and takeoff velocity of the
expected to provide a reference for the maximal capacities of center of mass.25
lower-body muscles and performance variables from a group of The mean values of force and velocity of the individual loads
elite female soccer players during the 2 most frequent actions that needed to calculate the FV profiles were obtained from the
precede goal situations in soccer matches.3 In addition, the analysis equations proposed by Samozino et al26:
of the associations between the same variables obtained during the
 
jumping and sprinting tasks could help to decide about the neces- h
sity of including or not including both tasks during the routine Force = mg þ1
hPO
assessment of elite female soccer players.
rffiffiffiffiffi
gh
Method Velocity =
2
Subjects where m is the total mass (sum of body mass and additional load, in
Nineteen elite female soccer players (age: 23.4 [3.8] y, height: kilograms), g is the gravitational acceleration (9.81 m·s−2), hPO is
166.4 [5.6] cm, body mass: 59.7 [4.7] kg) gave their written the push-off distance (in meters) which was determined as the
informed consent to participate in this study, which was approved difference between the extended lower-limb length, measured from
by the local ethical committee in agreement with the Declaration of the great trochanter to toes with maximal foot plantar flexion, and
Helsinki. All subjects were players of the current champion team of the vertical distance between the great trochanter and ground in the
the Spanish Professional League and second place in the Queen’s standardized starting position (ie, 90° knee flexion), and h is the
Cup of Spain, and also about 40% of players were members of the jump height (in meters).13 The force and velocity data (normalized
Absolute Spanish’s soccer team. per kilogram of body mass) of the individual loads were modeled
by a linear regression to determine the FV relationship parameters:
Study Design F½V = F 0 − aV, where F0 represents the maximum force (ie, force
intercept), V0 is the maximum velocity (ie, velocity intercept), and
A cross-sectional study was designed to describe and examine the a is the relationship slope (F0/V0). As a consequence of the FV
relationship of the FV profile (F0, V0, FV slope, Pmax, and FV relationship being highly linear,18 the maximum power (Pmax) was
imbalance) obtained during the jumping and sprinting testing calculated as: Pmax = F0·V0/4. From Pmax and the push-off distance,
procedures in elite female soccer players. The jumping and sprint- the theoretical optimal FV profile maximizing unloaded jumping
ing testing procedures were carried out the same day in random performance was computed for each subject using the equations
order. Soccer players were evaluated during their competitive proposed by Samozino et al.19 Finally, the FV deficit was
period (second round of the national league championship). No calculated as the percent difference between the optimal and
familiarization session was included in the present study because the measured FV slope. A high reliability and validity of the
all players were previously familiarized with both the jumping and Samozino’s method for estimating force and velocity values has
sprinting testing procedures as part of their routine testing. been reported elsewhere.26–28
IJSPP Vol. 14, No. 2, 2019
Force–Velocity Profile in Female Soccer Players 211

Sprinting Testing Procedures. Subjects performed 2 maximal Results


effort 30-m sprints, with 4-minute rest between trials, on an
artificial grass. Players started from a crouching position (staggered The F0 and Pmax were significantly higher for jumping, while V0
stance). Mechanical sprint variables were collected via a Stalker was significantly higher for sprinting (P < .001). The magnitude
Acceleration Testing System (ATS) II radar device (Model: Stalker of the correlations between the same variables obtained from the
ATS II; Applied Concepts, Dallas, TX). The radar device was jumping and sprinting testing procedures ranged from very large
attached to a tripod 10 m from the starting line at a height of 1 m for Pmax (r = .75) and the performance variables (r = −.73) to trivial
corresponding approximately to the height of subjects’ center of for the FV slope (r = −.09) and the FV imbalance (r = .07) (Table 1;
mass. The radar device sampled velocity–time data at 46.9 Hz. The Figure 1).
velocity–time data were used to determine the variables of interest The performance variables (SJ height and sprint time to 20 m)
of the FV profile (ie, F0, V0, FV slope, Pmax, and decrease in the were significantly correlated with the maximal mechanical capaci-
ratio of horizontal force [DRF]) as well as the 20-m sprint time ties (ie, F0, V0, and Pmax) with the only exception being the F0
according to Samozino’s method.16 Soccer players reached top obtained from the jumping testing procedure (Figure 2). The Pmax
speed before 30 m in all sprints, which was identified as a plateau at obtained during each specific task was the mechanical capacity
top speed in the velocity–time curves. The high reliability and most correlated with the SJ height (r = .84) and the time to 20 m
validity of the Samozino’s method16 to determine the FV profile (r = .99).
in sprinting has been reported elsewhere. The FV imbalance was
referred to the difference respect to the optimal FV profile in
jumping, and the DRF in sprinting. Discussion
This study was designed to explore the relationship of the FV
profile obtained during the jumping and sprinting testing proce-
Statistical Analyses
dures as well as to determine which mechanical capacity (ie, F0, V0,
Data are presented as mean (SD). Normal distribution for all or Pmax) is more correlated with the performance variables (ie, SJ
variables was confirmed by the Shapiro–Wilk test (P > .05). Paired height and linear sprint time). Our main findings revealed strong
samples t tests and the Cohen d effect size were used to compare the and moderate correlations for Pmax and V0 between the jumping
magnitude of the same FV relationship parameters (F0, V0, FV and sprinting tasks, respectively. However, the remaining variables
slope, and Pmax) obtained from the jumping and sprinting testing derived from the FV testing procedure (F0, FV slope, and FV
procedures. The scale used for interpretation the magnitude of the imbalance) were not significantly correlated between both tasks. It
effect size was specific to training research: negligible (<0.2), small should also be noted that while most of the maximal mechanical
(0.2–0.5), moderate (0.5–0.8), and large (≥0.8).29 Correlations capacities obtained from the FV profile were significantly corre-
between the different variables collected during the jumping and lated with the performance variables (ie, with a larger jump height
sprinting testing procedures were quantified through the Pearson and a shorter sprint time), the Pmax achieved during the specific task
linear correlation coefficient (r). Qualitative interpretations of the was the mechanical capacity most correlated with its performance
r coefficients as defined by Hopkins30 (.00–.09, trivial; .10–.29, variable. The significant associations observed between the muscle
small; .30–.49, moderate; .50–.69, large; .70–.89, very large; .90–.99, mechanical capacities and the performance variables support the
nearly perfect; and 1.0, perfect) were provided for all significant testing procedure based on the FV relationship in elite female
correlations. Significance was set at an alpha level of P < .05. All soccer players. However, the absence of significant correlations for
statistical analyses were performed using Statistical Package for the the FV slope between the jumping and sprinting testing procedures
Social Sciences (version 20.0; SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL). also suggests that both tasks should be included during the routine

Table 1 Comparison of the Same Force–Velocity Relationship Parameters and Performance Variables Between
the Jumping and Sprinting Testing Procedures
Variable Task Mean (SD) P ES r
F0, N·kg−1 Jumping 33.52 (3.61) <.001 13.5 −.14
Sprinting 6.30 (0.42)
V0, m·s−1 Jumping 3.35 (0.59) <.001 −9.3 .49*
Sprinting 8.12 (0.44)
Force–velocity slope, N·s·m−1·kg−1 Jumping 10.40 (2.66) <.001 −10.7 −.09
Sprinting 46.35 (4.09)
Pmax, W·kg−1 Jumping 27.77 (3.79) <.001 6.0 .75**
Sprinting 12.72 (1.21)
Force–velocity deficit, % Jumping 64.5 (16.3) NA NA .07
DRF, % Sprinting −7.16 (0.54)
Jump height, cm Jumping 32.91 (3.32) NA NA −.73**
Time to 20 m, s Sprinting 3.72 (0.12)
Abbreviations: DRF, decrease in the ratio of horizontal force; ES, effect size ([SJ mean − sprint mean]/SD both); F0, theoretical maximal force; force–velocity deficit,
percentage difference with respect to the optimal force–velocity profile; Pmax, theoretical maximal power; r, Pearson correlation coefficient; V0, theoretical maximal
velocity. Note: Significant correlations: *P < .05, **P < .01.

IJSPP Vol. 14, No. 2, 2019


212 Marcote-Pequeño et al

Figure 1 — Association between the same FV relationship parameters obtained from the jumping and sprinting testing procedures. FV indicates force–
velocity; r, Pearson correlation coefficient. Significant correlations: *P < .05, **P < .01.

Figure 2 — Correlations between the performance variables (jump height and time to 20 m) and the force–velocity relationship parameters during the
squat jump and sprint tasks. F0 indicates theoretical maximal force; V0, theoretical maximal velocity; Pmax, theoretical maximal power. Significant
correlations: *P < .05, **P < .01.

testing procedures of elite female soccer players to design training [4.0] W·kg−1) as well as a higher SJ height (32.9 [3.3] cm vs 31.0
programs based on the players’ specific needs in each task. [4.4] cm). The differences in Pmax were caused by the higher V0 of
The popularity of women’s soccer competitions has consider- female soccer players (3.35 [0.59] m·s−1 vs 3.12 [0.64] m·s−1),
ably increased over the last years.31 However, there is still very while F0 was higher for semiprofessional male soccer and rugby
little research conducted on elite female soccer players exploring players (33.5 [3.6] N·kg−1 vs 34.6 [5.7] N·kg−1). Both groups
the anaerobic fitness variables that are believed to impact on-field presented a force deficit but of higher magnitude for female players
soccer performance.32 For instance, to the best of our knowledge, (64.5% [16.3%] vs 15.6% [22.8%]). On the other hand, in sprint-
this is the first study that has reported the FV profile of female ing, Nagahara et al33 reported for top team university soccer players
soccer players during the jumping and sprinting tasks. In compari- higher values of F0 (7.6 [0.4] N·kg−1 vs 6.3 [0.4] N·kg−1), V0 (9.2
son with the data collected in jumping by Jiménez-Reyes et al13 [0.4] m·s−1 vs 8.1 [0.4] m·s−1), and Pmax (17.5 [0.8] W·kg−1 vs 12.7
with semiprofessional male soccer and rugby players, elite female [1.2] W·kg−1) and a shorter 20-m time (3.34 [0.05] s vs 3.72
soccer players displayed a higher Pmax (27.8 [3.8] W·kg−1 vs 25.5 [0.12] s) compared with the elite female soccer players analyzed in
IJSPP Vol. 14, No. 2, 2019
Force–Velocity Profile in Female Soccer Players 213

the present study. Although these results could suggest that, when sprints, etc). It should also be noted that in the present study we
compared with men, the horizontal force production of women used the field methods proposed by Samozino et al16,26 to deter-
could be more compromised than vertical force capacity, more mine the FV relationship in jumping and sprinting since they have
studies are needed to accurately describe and compare the FV shown a high validity when compared with the force plate method
profile between men and women soccer players. (gold-standard). However, it is plausible that a force platform could
In line with our first hypothesis, the magnitude of the correla- have provided more accurate data (eg, the OptoJump does not
tions between the jumping and sprinting testing procedures was detect slight countermovements that may be present during the SJ
generally weaker for the mechanical variables derived from the FV and that may influence jump height). Therefore, the results of this
profile than for the performance variables. Similarly, Zivkovic study need to be confirmed when the FV relationships are assessed
et al21 did not report significant correlations between the jumping from the data provided by force platforms. However, the results of
and cycling testing procedures for F0 (r = .39) and V0 (r = .25), this study present practical interest because the Samozino’s meth-
while they only observed a moderate correlation for Pmax (r = .64). ods can be implemented in practice by many physical coaches,
Interestingly, in the present study, we also observed the highest while the use of force plates could be limited to laboratory
correlation between the jumping and sprinting testing procedures conditions.
for Pmax (r = .75). Therefore, while Pmax capacity could be some-
how generalizable for different lower-body exercises (eg, jumping,
sprinting, and cycling), their determinants (ie, F0 and V0) seem to Practical Applications
be mostly unrelated.
The lack of association in the FV slope between the jumping and
Of great importance for training purposes is that the FV slope
sprinting testing procedures suggests that both tasks should be
and the FV deficit (ie, difference with respect to the optimal FV
considered for a comprehensive evaluation of the mechanical
profile in jumping and effectiveness of force application in sprint- capacities of lower-body muscles. The training program should
ing [ie, DRF]) were not significantly correlated (r < .1). This be individualized according to the deficits identified in each
implies that one athlete that presents a force- or velocity-oriented specific task. For example, one athlete may have a force-oriented
profile in one task (eg, jumping) does not necessarily have to profile in one task (eg, jumping) and, at the same time, a velocity-
present the same orientation of the FV profile in another task oriented profile in another task (eg, sprinting). In this regard, for
(eg, sprinting). These results are in line with previous studies this hypothetical athlete, it could be recommended to include
suggesting that vertical jumping and linear sprinting are indepen- exercises to develop the maximal vertical force production (eg,
dent skills and that different neuromuscular factors seem to under- squat at 85–95% of 1-repetition maximum), and other exercises to
pin performance during both tasks.34 Therefore, the results of this develop the maximal horizontal velocity capability (eg, assisted
study reinforce that a variety of tests should be performed to obtain sprints). The assessment of the FV profile is valuable to prescribe
a comprehensive evaluation of high-velocity tasks in elite female individualized resistance training programs, and it could be used to
soccer players.35 Specifically, when training programs are based on organize training groups composed by soccer players that present
the FV approach, physical coaches are encouraged to evaluate both the same characteristics in their FV profile.
the jumping and sprinting FV profiles for an individualized pre-
scription of the exercises and the training loads.
Our second hypothesis was also confirmed supporting that Conclusions
Pmax is the mechanical capacity most associated with unloaded
ballistic performance.20 As expected, the Pmax obtained in jumping Very large correlations between the jumping and sprinting tasks
was the variable most correlated with SJ height, while the Pmax were observed for Pmax and the performance variables (unloaded SJ
obtained in sprinting was the variable most correlated with sprint height and 20-m sprint time), moderate correlations were observed
time. Therefore, the physical training program of female soccer for V0, and nonsignificant correlations were observed for F0, the
players should focus on enhancing maximal power production. In FV slope, and the effectiveness in force application (ie, FV deficit
addition, since ballistic performance is also determined by the in jumping and DRF in sprinting). The Pmax obtained during each
individual FV mechanical profile, the training program should also specific task was the mechanical capacity that presented the largest
try to reduce the deficits identified through the FV profile measured correlation with their performance variables. Taken together, these
during the specific testing procedures. The results of this study results support the use of testing procedures based on the FV
emphasize that a specific deficit in the FV profile identified from the relationship in elite female soccer players, and confirm that Pmax
jumping testing procedure should not be used to individualize the is the most determinant mechanical capacity of unloaded ballistic
training aimed to enhance sprint performance. performance.
A limitation of the present study is that only female soccer
players were analyzed and, therefore, it remains to be elucidated
whether similar results could be obtained for male soccer players. Acknowledgments
However, it should be highlighted that our study sample was The authors would like to thank Atlético de Madrid, Iván Infantes, and
composed by elite female soccer players that in the year of the Álvaro Sayabera for their collaboration in this project, as well as all the
study achieved the first position in the Spanish women’s soccer soccer players who selflessly participated in the study.
league. Therefore, this study provides reference values of the FV
mechanical profile and performance variables for female soccer
players during their competitive period of the season for 2 of the References
most important physical actions during soccer competitions. Future
studies should analyze the relationship and changes of different 1. Silva J, Nassis G, Rebelo A. Strength training in soccer with a specific
variables of the FV profile in other frequent actions with profes- focus on highly trained players. Sports Med Open. 2015;1(1):17.
sional women’s soccer players (eg, repeated sprint ability, loaded PubMed ID: 26284158 doi:10.1186/s40798-015-0006-z

IJSPP Vol. 14, No. 2, 2019


214 Marcote-Pequeño et al

2. García-Ramos A, Haff GG, Feriche B, Jaric S. Effects of different sprint running. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2016;26(6):648–658.
conditioning programmes on the performance of high-velocity PubMed ID: 25996964 doi:10.1111/sms.12490
soccer-related tasks: systematic review and meta-analysis of con- 17. Romero-Franco N, Jiménez-Reyes P, Castaño-Zambudio A, et al.
trolled trials. Int J Sports Sci Coach. 2018;13(1):129–151. doi:10. Sprint performance and mechanical outputs computed with an iPhone
1177/1747954117711096 app: comparison with existing reference methods. Eur J Sport Sci.
3. Faude O, Koch T, Meyer T. Straight sprinting is the most frequent 2017;17(4):386–392. PubMed ID: 27806673 doi:10.1080/17461391.
action in goal situations in professional football. J Sports Sci. 2012; 2016.1249031
30(7):625–631. PubMed ID: 22394328 doi:10.1080/02640414.2012. 18. Jaric S. Force–velocity relationship of muscles performing multi-joint
665940 maximum performance tasks. Int J Sports Med. 2015;36(9):699–704.
4. Stølen T, Chamari K, Castagna C, Wisløff U. Physiology of soccer: PubMed ID: 25806588 doi:10.1055/s-0035-1547283
an update. Sports Med. 2005;35(6):501–536. PubMed ID: 15974635 19. Samozino P, Rejc E, Di Prampero P, Belli A, Morin J. Optimal force–
doi:10.2165/00007256-200535060-00004 velocity profile in ballistic movements—altius: citius or fortius? Med
5. Vescovi JD. Sprint speed characteristics of high-level American Sci Sports Exerc. 2012;44(2):313–322. PubMed ID: 21775909 doi:
female soccer players: Female Athletes in Motion (FAiM) study. 10.1249/MSS.0b013e31822d757a
J Sci Med Sport. 2012;15(5):474–478. PubMed ID: 22516691 doi:10. 20. Samozino P, Edouard P, Sangnier S, Brughelli M, Gimenez P, Morin
1016/j.jsams.2012.03.006 J. Force–velocity profile: imbalance determination and effect on
6. Ramírez-Campillo R, Vergara-Pedreros M, Henríquez-Olguín C, lower limb ballistic performance. Int J Sports Med. 2014;35(6):
et al. Effects of plyometric training on maximal-intensity exercise 505–510. PubMed ID: 24227123 doi:10.1055/s-0033-1354382
and endurance in male and female soccer players. J Sports Sci. 2016; 21. Zivkovic MZ, Djuric S, Cuk I, Suzovic D, Jaric S. Muscle force–velocity
34(8):687–693. PubMed ID: 26197721 doi:10.1080/02640414.2015. relationships observed in four different functional tests. J Hum Kinet.
1068439 2017;56:39–49. PubMed ID: 28469742 doi:10.1515/hukin-2017-0021
7. Chelly MS, Fathloun M, Cherif N, Ben Amar M, Tabka Z, Van 22. Morin JB, Bourdin M, Edouard P, Peyrot N, Samozino P, Lacour JR.
Praagh E. Effects of a back squat training program on leg power, Mechanical determinants of 100-m sprint running performance. Eur J
jump, and sprint performances in junior soccer players. J Strength Appl Physiol. 2012;112(11):3921–3930. PubMed ID: 22422028 doi:
Cond Res. 2009;23(8):2241–2249. PubMed ID: 19826302 doi:10. 10.1007/s00421-012-2379-8
1519/JSC.0b013e3181b86c40 23. Contreras B, Vigotsky AD, Schoenfeld BJ, et al. Effects of a six-week
8. de Hoyo M, Pozzo M, Sanudo B, et al. Effects of a 10-week in-season hip thrust vs. front squat resistance training program on performance
eccentric-overload training program on muscle injury prevention and in adolescent males: a randomized controlled trial. J Strength Cond
performance in junior elite soccer players. Int J Sports Physiol Res. 2017;31(4):999–1008. PubMed ID: 27253835 doi:10.1519/JSC.
Perform. 2015;10(1):46–52. PubMed ID: 24910951 doi:10.1123/ 0000000000001510
ijspp.2013-0547 24. Wisløff U, Castagna C, Helgerud J, Jones R, Hoff J. Strong correla-
9. Styles WJ, Matthews MJ, Comfort P. Effects of strength training on tion of maximal squat strength with sprint performance and vertical
squat and sprint performance in soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. jump height in elite soccer players. Br J Sports Med. 2004;38(3):285–
2016;30(6):1534–1539. PubMed ID: 26473518 doi:10.1519/JSC. 288. PubMed ID: 15155427 doi:10.1136/bjsm.2002.002071
0000000000001243 25. Perez-Castilla A, McMahon JJ, Comfort P, Garcia-Ramos A. Assess-
10. Markovic G, Dizdar D, Jukic I, Cardinale M. Reliability and factorial ment of loaded squat jump height with a free-weight barbell and Smith
validity of squat and countermovement jump tests. J Strength Cond machine: comparison of the take-off velocity and flight time proce-
Res. 2004;18(3):551–555. PubMed ID: 15320660 doi:10.1519/1533- dures [published online ahead of print July 31, 2017]. J Strength Cond
4287(2004)18<551:RAFVOS>2.0.CO;2 Res. PubMed ID: 28777251 doi:10.1519/JSC.0000000000002166
11. Kumagai K, Abe T, Brechue WF, Ryushi T, Takano S, Mizuno M. 26. Samozino P, Morin JB, Hintzy F, Belli A. A simple method for
Sprint performance is related to muscle fascicle length in male measuring force, velocity and power output during squat jump.
100-m sprinters. J Appl Physiol. 2000;88(3):811–816. PubMed ID: J Biomech. 2008;41(14):2940–2945. PubMed ID: 18789803 doi:
10710372 doi:10.1152/jappl.2000.88.3.811 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2008.07.028
12. Morin JB, Samozino P. Interpreting power–force–velocity profiles 27. Giroux C, Rabita G, Chollet D, Guilhem G. What is the best method
for individualized and specific training. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. for assessing lower limb force–velocity relationship? Int J Sports
2016;11(2):267–272. PubMed ID: 26694658 doi:10.1123/ijspp. Med. 2015;36(2):143–149. PubMed ID: 25259590 doi:10.1055/s-
2015-0638 0034-1385886
13. Jiménez-Reyes P, Samozino P, Brughelli M, Morin JB. Effectiveness 28. Jimenez-Reyes P, Samozino P, Pareja-Blanco F, et al. Validity of a
of an individualized training based on force–velocity profiling during simple method for measuring force–velocity–power profile in coun-
jumping. Front Physiol. 2017;7:677. PubMed ID: 28119624 doi:10. termovement jump. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2017;12(1):36–43.
3389/fphys.2016.00677 doi:10.1123/IJSPP.2015-0484
14. García-Ramos A, Feriche B, Pérez-Castilla A, Padial P, Jaric S. 29. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd
Assessment of leg muscles mechanical capacities: which jump, ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1988.
loading, and variable type provide the most reliable outcomes? 30. Hopkins WG, Marshall SW, Batterham AM, Hanin J. Progressive
Eur J Sport Sci. 2017;17(6):690–698. PubMed ID: 28338423 doi: statistics for studies in sports medicine and exercise science. Med Sci
10.1080/17461391.2017.1304999 Sports Exerc. 2009;41(1):3–13. PubMed ID: 19092709 doi:10.1249/
15. Jiménez-Reyes P, Samozino P, Cuadrado-Peñafiel V, Conceição F, MSS.0b013e31818cb278
González-Badillo JJ, Morin JB. Effect of countermovement on 31. Kunz M. Big count: 265 million playing football. FIFA Mag. 2007;
power–force–velocity profile. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2014;114(11): (July):10–15. http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/fifafacts/bcoff-
2281–2288. PubMed ID: 25048073 doi:10.1007/s00421-014-2947-1 surv/emaga_9384_10704.pdf. Accessed June 20, 2018.
16. Samozino P, Rabita G, Dorel S, et al. A simple method for measuring 32. Emmonds S, Nicholson G, Beggs C, Jones B, Bissas A. Importance of
power, force, velocity properties, and mechanical effectiveness in physical qualities for speed and change of direction ability in elite

IJSPP Vol. 14, No. 2, 2019


Force–Velocity Profile in Female Soccer Players 215

female soccer players [published online ahead of print July 17, 34. Murtagh C, Nulty C, Vanrenterghem J, et al. The neuromuscular
2017]. J Strength Cond Res. PubMed ID: 28723816 doi:10.1519/ determinants of unilateral jump performance in soccer players are
JSC.0000000000002114 direction-specific. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2018;13(5):604–611.
33. Nagahara R, Morin JB, Koido M. Impairment of sprint mechanical PubMed ID: 29283696 doi:10.1123/ijspp.2017-0589
properties in an actual soccer match: a pilot study. Int J Sports Physiol 35. Vescovi JD, McGuigan MR. Relationships between sprinting, agility,
Perform. 2016;11(7):893–898. PubMed ID: 26791405 doi:10.1123/ and jump ability in female athletes. J Sports Sci. 2008;26(1):97–107.
ijspp.2015-0567 PubMed ID: 17852692 doi:10.1080/02640410701348644

IJSPP Vol. 14, No. 2, 2019


Copyright of International Journal of Sports Physiology & Performance is the property of
Human Kinetics Publishers, Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple
sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

Вам также может понравиться