 |
English
|
正體中文
|
简体中文
|
全文筆數/總筆數 : 47121/50987 (92%)
造訪人次 : 13819248
線上人數 : 247
|
|
|
資料載入中.....
|
請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件:
https://irlib.pccu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/45121
|
| 題名: | 不同週期訓練模式對健力表現之影響
Comparison of Different Perodization Models in Collegiate Men on Powerlifting Performance |
| 作者: | 陳昕 |
| 貢獻者: | 體育學系運動教練碩博士班 |
| 關鍵詞: | 線性週期
共軛週期
維京係數 |
| 日期: | 2019 |
| 上傳時間: | 2019-10-24 10:02:15 (UTC+8) |
| 摘要: | 背景：健力 (Powerlifting) 是一種追求深蹲 (Squat)、硬舉 (Deadlift)、臥推 (Bench press) 最大肌力的運動；而該運動應用層面相當廣泛，舉凡運動員亦或一般健身愛好者皆能獲益。週期化訓練 (Periodization) 至今以被研究證明是一項最具效率和科學化訓練方式之一；但如何選擇最適合健力專項的週期訓練策略，仍未取得明確共識。因此，本研究希冀透過實證性的方式比較不同週期訓練模式之間的差異。目的：比較線性模式 (Linear Model, LM) 與共軛模式 (Conjugate Model, CM) 在八週介入訓練後對健力表現的影響。方法：招募 17 名具一年以上重訓經驗且健康之男性大學生為受試者，每位受試者皆分成三天，分別進行深蹲、臥舉、硬舉之三項最大肌力檢測與 10RM 的輔助動作檢測；並計算三項總合與維京係數；測驗後休息 4 至 6 天，隨機分為兩組開始正式實驗週期。完成八週訓練後，分成三天進行三項的最大肌力檢測，並計算總和與維京係數。統計方式採二因子混合設計變異數分析來呈現兩種週期訓練變化之趨勢。結果：經過八週訓練後， LM 與 CM 兩組在三項總合重量及維京係數皆有顯著進步 (F=155.574，p=.000<0.05) ；在進步幅度上， LM 在硬舉動作 (F=17.96，p=.001<0.05) 、三項總和重量 (F=4.81，p=.044<0.05) 上均顯著優於 CM ；而 CM 僅在第八週的訓練量上顯著高於 LM (F=162.305，p=.000<0.05)。就自覺疲勞程度而言，兩組皆未達顯著差異，但 CM 有較低趨勢。結論： LM 與 CM 皆能有效提升健力表現，但線性週期似乎具備更佳的效益存在。
Powerlifting is a particular sport pursuing the maximum strength in three exercises as follows Squat, Deadlift and Bench press. Currently, the Powerlifting applied in multiple facets, and athletes or the general population could benefit effectively. The concept of Periodization has been proved to be one of the most efficient and scientific training methods until now; however, there is still ambiguous on how to choose the optimal training model for the powerlifting. Hence, this study applied practical intervention to compare the difference between different periodization models. Purpose: It compared the effects of Linear Model (LM) and Conjugate Model (CM) on Powerlifting performance in eight-week training. Method: Seventeen healthy male students with more than one-year strength training experiences were recruited as subjects. The training program was assigned into three days individually; meanwhile, each subject accepted the maximal strength test in three core exercises and the 10 RM test in assisted exercises before and after 8-week training. The statistical method adopted two-way ANOVA, mixed design to investigate the trends in two different training models. Result: Both groups showed a significant improvement after training (F=155.574, p=.000). In the aspect of progress, the LM in deadlift (F=17.96, p=.001<0.05) and the total volume (F=4.81, p=.044<0.05) were significantly better than the CM. Moreover, the training volume was significantly higher in the CM than LM in the eighth week (F=162.305, p=.000<0.05). There was no significant difference between two groups in the degree of exhaustion, but the CM showed minor tendency. Conclusion: Both periodization models may improve the Powerlifting performance, but the LM seems to be more beneficial for primary and intermediate level powerlifters. |
| 顯示於類別: | [運動教練研究所] 博碩士論文
|
文件中的檔案:
| 檔案 |
描述 |
大小 | 格式 | 瀏覽次數 |
|---|
| index.html | | 0Kb | HTML | 252 | 檢視/開啟 |
|
在CCUR中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.
|
