Muscle Adaptations to Plyometric vs. Resistance Training in Untrained Young Men

• Autores: Kristian Vissing, Mads Brink, Simon Lonbro, Henrik Sorensen, Kristian Overgaard, Kasper Danborg, Jesper Mortensen, Ole Elstrom, Nikolaj Rosenhoj, Steffen Ringgaard, Jasper L. Andersen, Per Aagaard
• Localización: Journal of strength and conditioning research: the research journal of the NSCA, ISSN 1064-8011, Vol. 22, Nº. 6, 2008, págs. 1799-1810
• Idioma: inglés
• Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
• Dialnet Métricas: 3 Citas
• Resumen

  • Vissing, K, Brink, M, Lonbro, S, Sorensen, H, Overgaard, K, Danborg, K, Mortensen, J, Elstrom, O, Rosenhoj, N, Ringgaard, S, Andersen, JL, and Aagaard, P. Muscle adaptations to plyometric vs. resistance training in untrained young men. J Strength Cond Res 22(6): 1799-1810, 2008-The purpose of this study was to compare changes in muscle strength, power, and morphology induced by conventional strength training vs. plyometric training of equal time and effort requirements. Young, untrained men performed 12 weeks of progressive conventional resistance training (CRT, n = 8) or plyometric training (PT, n = 7). Tests before and after training included one-repetition maximum (1 RM) incline leg press, 3 RM knee extension, and 1 RM knee flexion, countermovement jumping (CMJ), and ballistic incline leg press. Also, before and after training, magnetic resonance imaging scanning was performed for the thigh, and a muscle biopsy was sampled from the vastus lateralis muscle. Muscle strength increased by approximately 20-30% (1-3 RM tests) (p < 0.001), with CRT showing 50% greater improvement in hamstring strength than PT (p < 0.01). Plyometric training increased maximum CMJ height (10%) and maximal power (Pmax; 9%) during CMJ (p < 0.01) and Pmax in ballistic leg press (17%) (p < 0.001). This was far greater than for CRT (p < 0.01), which only increased Pmax during the ballistic leg press (4%) (p < 0.05). Quadriceps, hamstring, and adductor whole-muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) increased equally (7-10%) with CRT and PT (p < 0.001). For fiber CSA analysis, some of the biopsies had to be omitted. Type I and IIa fiber CSA increased in CRT (n = 4) by 32 and 49%, respectively (p < 0.05), whereas no significant changes occurred for PT (n = 5). Myosin heavy-chain IIX content decreased from 11 to 6%, with no difference between CRT and PT. In conclusion, gross muscle size increased both by PT and CRT, whereas only CRT seemed to increase muscle fiber CSA. Gains in maximal muscle strength were essentially similar between groups, whereas muscle power increased almost exclusively with PT training.