Dr. Cuevas-Aburto, Jesualdo

El estudio tiene como propósito analizar la fiabilidad de la prueba de 8 lanzamientos de 3 diferentes variantes de lanzamientos de balonmano en estudiantado universitario. 33 varones, 20 ±1,9 años peso 72,39±8,9 kg altura 176,75 ±6,07 cm IMC 23,14±2,3. Los sujetos participantes fueron evaluados en 2 sesiones separadas entre sí por un lapso de una semana. Ejecutaron lanzamientos hasta quedar registrados 8 mediciones en cada una de las pruebas, lanzamientos inespecíficos, en apoyo y en carrera con 3 pasos, se registró la velocidad de lanzamiento con un radar posterior a la portería. La fiabilidad del promedio de las puntuaciones del test de 8 medidas entre la primera sesión y la segunda con una prueba test-retest, se obtuvieron los siguientes resultados: en el lanzamiento inespecífico se obtuvo un ICC= (0,86) entre el 95% de confianza, un de CV= (7,43%) y un ES= (0,08). Para el lanzamiento con apoyo se obtuvo un ICC= (0,94) al 95 % de confianza, un de CV= (4,71 %) y un ES= (-0,09). Para el lanzamiento con carrera se obtuvo un ICC= (0,96) al 95 % de confianza, un de CV= (4,00 %) y un ES= (0,05). Este estudio ha demostrado que la prueba de 8 lanzamientos y las 3 variantes es una medida de rendimiento confiable y estable para estudiantes de nivel universitario sin experiencia en el balonmano, en relación con las variables del lanzamiento, las 3 fueron fiables, solo la variable inespecífica fue menor en comparación al lanzamiento con apoyo y con carrera.

This study aimed to compare the acute effect of traditional (TR), cluster (CL), and rest redistribution (RR) set configurations on neuromuscular and perceptual measures of fatigue. Thirty-one resistance-trained men randomly performed a Control session and 3 experimental sessions consisting of the squat (SQ) and bench press (BP) exercises performed against the 10 repetition maximum load using TR (3 sets of 6 repetitions; 3 minutes of interset rest), CL (3 sets of 6 repetitions; 30 seconds of intraset rest every 2 repetitions; 3 minutes of interset rest), and RR (9 sets of 2 repetitions; 45 seconds of interset rest) set configurations. A significant effect of “set configuration” (p = 0.002) was observed for barbell velocity. The average velocity of the training session was lower for TR compared with CL (% difference = 5.09% in SQ and 5.68% in BP) and RR (% difference = 5.92% in SQ and 2.71% in BP). The 3 set configurations induced comparable decrements in countermovement jump height (% difference from −6.0% to −8.1%) and throwing velocity (% difference from −0.6% to −1.2%). Ratings of perceived exertion (RPE-10) values collected after the sets were higher for TR (SQ: 6.9 ± 0.7 a.u.; BP: 6.8 ± 0.8 a.u.) compared with CL (SQ: 6.2 ± 0.8 a.u.; BP: 6.4 ± 0.7 a.u.) and RR (SQ: 6.2 ± 0.8 a.u.; BP: 6.6 ± 0.9 a.u.), while the session RPE did not differ between the set configurations (p = 0.595). CL and RR set configurations allow for higher velocities and lower RPE values during resistance training sessions not performed to failure in comparison with a TR set configuration.

Background: This study aimed to compare the effect of two upper-body resistance training programs (strength-oriented vs. ballistic) on bench press (BP) performance and handball throwing velocity (HTV). Methods: Thirty resistance-trained males were randomly assigned to a strength-oriented training group (STG) or a ballistic training group (BTG). The study consisted of 11 sessions: 2 pre-tests (week 1), 8 training sessions (weeks 2-5), and 1 post-test (week 6). The STG performed the BP at the 70-90% of the one-repetition maximum (1RM), and the BTG the BP throw at the 40% of 1RM. BP performance (BP 1RM and maximum velocity achieved against 20 kg [BP20]) and HTV were assessed before and after training. Results: The STG enhanced BP 1RM (effect size [ES]=0.24) but not BP20 (ES=0.21) or HTV (ES=0.10). The BTG enhanced BP20 (ES=0.63) but not BP1RM (ES=0.27) or HTV (ES=0.02). HTV was not significantly correlated with the BP 1RM (r≤0.181) or BP20 (r≤0.220). Conclusions: These results indicate that a short-term RT program based exclusively on the BP exercise performed against either heavy (strength-oriented) or light loads (ballistic) is not effective to increase HTV in resistance-trained men with little handball experience.