Post Flywheel Squat Potentiation of Vertical and Horizontal Ground Reaction Force Parameters during Jumps and Changes of Direction

Acute Effects of Low vs. High Inertia During Flywheel Deadlifts with Equal Force Impulse on Vertical Jump Performance

BACKGROUND

Flywheel resistance training has gained popularity due to its ability to induce eccentric overload and improve strength and power. This study examined the acute effects of low- (0.025 kg·m2) versus high-inertia (0.10 kg·m2) flywheel deadlifts, matched for force impulse, on the countermovement jump (CMJ) performance, reactive strength index (RSI) during drop jumps (DJs), and rating of perceived exertion (RPE).

METHODS

Sixteen trained participants (twelve men, and four women) performed three conditions in a randomized, counterbalanced order: low-inertia (LOW), high-inertia (HIGH), and control (CTRL). In the LOW and HIGH conditions, we used force plates to measure and equalize the force impulse in the two conditions (HIGH: 20182 ± 2275 N∙s vs. LOW: 20076 ± 2526 N∙s; p > 0.05), by calculating the number of deadlift repetitions required to achieve it (HIGH: 5 repetitions and LOW: 9.8 ± 0.4 repetitions). The RSI and CMJ performance were measured pre-exercise, immediately post-exercise, and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 min post-exercise.

RESULTS

Both the RSI and CMJ performance improved equally after LOW and HIGH flywheel deadlifts compared to baseline and CTRL (p < 0.01). Specifically, the RSI increased from baseline at 3 to 12 min in both conditions (LOW: 12.8 ± 14.9% to 15.4 ± 14.8%, HIGH: 12.1 ± 17.0% to 12.2 ± 11.7%, p < 0.01), while the CMJ increased from 3 to 9 min in LOW (4.3 ± 3.2% to 4.6 ± 4.7%, p < 0.01) and from 6 to 9 min in HIGH (3.8 ± 4.2% to 4.2 ± 4.9%, p < 0.05). No significant differences were observed between LOW and HIGH conditions (p > 0.05), suggesting similar effectiveness of both inertial loads for enhancing performance. The RPE increased similarly after both conditions from baseline to immediately post-conditioning (LOW: from 2.2 ± 1.2 to 5.8 ± 1.4, HIGH: from 1.5 ± 1.0 to 6.1 ± 1.5, p < 0.01) and decreased by the end of the session, although values remained higher than baseline (LOW: 4.1 ± 1.4, p < 0.01, HIGH: 4.5 ± 2.0, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings highlight the potential of flywheel deadlift exercise as an effective method to potentiate explosive performance of the lower limbs, regardless of inertia, provided that the total force impulse is equal.

Heavier loads in flywheel exercise induce greater post-activation performance enhancement in countermovement jumps compared to heavy Smith machine squats in males

We evaluated the effects of post-activation performance enhancement through flywheel exercise with varying inertial loads compared to traditional resistance exercise on countermovement jump performance and muscle recruitment. In a randomized crossover design, 13 trained men completed four main experimental trials after three familiarization sessions. These conditions included a traditional trial consisting of 5 sets of 1 repetition using the Smith machine (SM) squat at 90% 1RM, and three flywheel ergometer trials. Each flywheel protocol consisted of 3 sets of 8 repetitions with 3-minute rest intervals between sets, utilizing one of three inertial loads (0.0465, 0.0784, and 0.1568 kg · m2 for light, moderate, and heavy, respectively). Participants performed countermovement jumps before (baseline), immediately after (0 minute), and at the fourth (+4 minutes), eighth (+8 minutes), and twelfth (+12 minutes) minute following exercise. Compared to baseline, jump height was higher at +4 minutes for SM squats (p = 0.009). All flywheel conditions exhibited higher jump heights at +4 minutes (p < 0.05), +8 minutes (p < 0.001), and +12 minutes (p < 0.001) compared to baseline. Additionally, moderate and heavy loads resulted in higher jump heights at 0 minute (both p < 0.001). Integrated electromyographic activity values, a proxy for muscle recruitment, were significantly higher for the gluteus maximus muscle at both +8 minutes and +12 minutes for moderate (both p = 0.004) and heavy loads (p ≤ 0.002) compared to SM squats. Overall, flywheel protocols produce greater post-activation performance enhancement, extend the time window for improvement, and recruit more active musculature compared to heavy-load SM squats, particularly with heavier loads acting as a stronger preload stimulus.

Flywheel eccentric overload exercises versus barbell half squats for basketball players: Which is better for induction of post-activation performance enhancement?

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the post-activation performance enhancement (PAPE) effects of a flywheel eccentric overload (FEOL) exercise and barbell half squats (BHS) on countermovement jump (CMJ) and 30 m sprint performance.

METHODS

Twelve male collegiate competitive basketball players were enrolled in this study and they implemented two training protocols: barbell half squat (BHS) and flywheel eccentric overload (FEOL) training. The BHS protocol included three intensities of load: low (40% 1RM), medium (60% 1RM), and high (80% 1RM), with each intensity consisting of 5 sets of 3 repetitions. The FEOL protocol included three inertia intensities: low (0. 015 kg∙m2), medium (0.035 kg∙m2), and high (0.075 kg∙m2), with each intensity consisting of 3 sets of 6 repetitions. The measurement time points were before training (baseline) and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 minutes after training. A two-stage (stage-I and stage-II) randomized crossover design was used to determine the acute effects of both protocols on CMJ and sprint performance.

RESULTS

At each training intensity, the jump height, jump peak power output (PPO), jump impulse and 30m sprint speed at 3, 6, 9, and 12 minutes after BHS and FEOL training did not change significantly compared to the baseline. A 2-way ANOVA analysis indicated significant main effects of rest intervals on jump height, jump PPO, and jump impulse, as well as 30m sprint speed. The interaction of the Time × protocol showed a significant effect on jump height between BHS and FEOL groups at high intensity in stage-I (F = 3.809, p = 0.016, df = 4) and stage-II (F = 3.044, p = 0.037, df = 4). And in high training intensity, the jump height at 3 (7.78 ± 9.90% increase, ES = 0.561), 6 (8.96 ± 12.15% increase, ES = 0.579), and 9 min (8.78 ± 11.23% increase, ES = 0.608) were enhanced in I-FEOL group compared with I-BHS group (F = 3.044, p = 0.037, df = 4). In stage-II, the impulse and sprint speed of the FEOL group were significantly higher than those of the BHS group at 6, 9, and 12 min under low (FEOL = 0.015kg∙m2, BHS = 40%1RM), medium(FEOL = 0.035kg∙m2, BHS = 60%1RM), and high (FEOL = 0.075kg∙m2, BHS = 80%1RM) intensities. Furthermore, the sprint speed of the two training protocols did not change at different time points. The interaction of Time × training intensity showed lower sprint speeds in the II-BHS group at a high intensity (BHS = 80%1RM) compared to low (BHS = 40%1RM) and medium (BHS = 60%1RM) training intensities, especially at 9 min and 12 min rest intervals.

CONCLUSION

Although barbell half squat training and flywheel eccentric overload training did not provide a significant PAPE effect on explosive power (CMJ and sprint) in male basketball players, FEOL training showed a better potential effect on enhanced CMJ jump performance at the high training intensity.

Post-Isometric Back Squat Performance Enhancement of Squat and Countermovement Jump

The effectiveness of isometric conditioning activity (CA) is not well described in terms of the level of performance enhancement and the presence of a stretch and shortening cycle in subsequent explosive tasks. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a maximum isometric squat as the CA and a subsequent squat jump (SJ) and countermovement jump (CMJ) height. A total of 31 semi-professional handball and soccer players were randomly assigned to two different conditions: (i) 3 sets of 3 repetitions (each lasting 3 s) of maximum isometric back squats (EXP), and (ii) no CA (CTRL). The jump height measurements were performed 5 min before the CA and approximately at the 4th and 8th minute following the completion of the CA. Due to the high inter-individual variability in the potentiation responses, the best value obtained post-CA was also analyzed. The SJ height significantly increased from baseline to the 8th minute post-CA (p = 0.004; ES = 0.31; Δ = +3.1 ± 5.0%) in the EXP condition. On the other hand, the CMJ height was significantly higher in the 4th (p = 0.001; ES = 0.23; Δ = +2.7 ± 3.7%) and 8th minute post-CA (p = 0.005; ES = 0.32; Δ = +3.6 ± 5.7%) in comparison to baseline during the EXP condition. Furthermore, SJ height significantly increased from baseline to the best time-point during the EXP (p < 0.001; ES = 0.47; Δ = +4.9 ± 4.9%) and CTRL (p = 0.038; ES = 0.21; Δ = +2.5 ± 5.8%) condition. Moreover, the CMJ height was significantly higher at the best time-points than at the baseline during EXP (p < 0.001; ES = 0.53; Δ = +5.6 ± 4.7%) and CTRL (p = 0.002; ES = 0.38; Δ = +3.1 ± 5.2%) condition. The findings from this study indicate that a maximum isometric squat, used as a CA, effectively improved SJ and CMJ height. This suggests that the presence or absence of a stretch and shortening cycle in both CA and post-CA tasks does not significantly impact the post-activation performance enhancement response.