Search

This study aimed to compare the effects of two 8-week in-season strength-training programs on handball players' physical and technical parameters. Thirty-six male athletes were randomly separated into three groups: a control group ( n = 12), a plyometric training group (PG, n = 12), and an eccentric-overload training group (EG, n = 12). The PG and EG performed upper- and lower-limb plyometric or eccentric-overload exercises, respectively, three times per week. Control groups performed regular handball training. The athletes were assessed for counter movement jump (CMJ) and Abalakov vertical jump (ABK) height, 15 m linear sprint time, handball-throwing speed (i.e., penalty throw; 3-step running throw; jump throw), and cardiorespiratory endurance through the 20 m shuttle-run test. Heart rate and blood lactate were measured at the end of the endurance test. No baseline differences were noted for dependent variables between groups. The session rating of perceived exertion was similar between the intervention groups (PG = 361 ± 12.2 AU; EG = 370 ± 13.3 AU). The ANOVA revealed significant ( p < 0.05; Δ = 5-9%; effect size (ES) = 0.45-1.96). Similar improvements for experimental groups compared to the control group for CMJ, ABK jump, penalty throw, 3-step running throw, and jump throw. However, interventions did not affect 15 m, cardiorespiratory endurance, nor heart rate or blood lactate after the endurance test. In conclusion, an 8-week handball intervention by performing plyometric or eccentric-overload training in-season improves the physical and technical parameters of male players when compared to regular handball practice.

The purpose of this study was to analyse the raw lifting speed collected during four different resistance training exercises to assess the optimal sampling frequency. Eight physically active participants performed sets of Squat Jumps, Countermovement Jumps, Squats and Bench Presses at a maximal lifting speed. A linear encoder was used to measure the instantaneous speed at a 200 Hz sampling rate. Subsequently, the power spectrum of the signal was computed by evaluating its Discrete Fourier Transform. The sampling frequency needed to reconstruct the signals with an error of less than 0.1% was f 99.9  = 11.615 ± 2.680 Hz for the exercise exhibiting the largest bandwidth, with the absolute highest individual value being 17.467 Hz. There was no difference between sets in any of the exercises. Using the closest integer sampling frequency value (25 Hz) yielded a reconstruction of the signal up to 99.975 ± 0.025% of its total in the worst case. In conclusion, a sampling rate of 25 Hz or above is more than adequate to record raw speed data and compute power during resistance training exercises, even under the most extreme circumstances during explosive exercises. Higher sampling frequencies provide no increase in the recording precision and may instead have adverse effects on the overall data quality.