Abstract
The aim of this study was to identify the changes in movement variability and movement velocity during a six-week training period using a resistance horizontal forward–backward task without (NOBALL) or with (BALL) the constraint of catching and throwing a rugby ball in the forward phase. Eleven elite male rugby union players (mean ± SD: age 25.5 ± 2.0 years, height 1.83 ± 0.06 m, body mass 95 ± 18 kg, rugby practice 14 ± 3 years) performed eight repetitions of NOBALL and BALL conditions once a week in a rotational flywheel device. Velocity was recorded by an attached rotary encoder while acceleration data were used to calculate sample entropy (SampEn), multiscale entropy, and the complexity index. SampEn showed no significant decrease for NOBALL (ES = -0.64 ± 1.02) and significant decrease for BALL (ES = -1.71 ± 1.16; p < 0.007) conditions. Additionally, movement velocity showed a significant increase for NOBALL (ES = 1.02 ± 1.05; p < 0.047) and significant increase for BALL (ES = 1.25 ± 1.08; p < 0.025) between weeks 1 and 6. The complexity index showed higher levels of complexity in the BALL condition, specifically in the first three weeks. Movement velocity and complex dynamics were adapted to the constraints of the task after a four-week training period. Entropy measures seem a promising processing signal technique to identify when these exercise tasks should be changed.
Highlights
Resistance training is a key determinant of the physical conditioning process in elite rugby (Inness et al, 2016)
It has been suggested that traditional resistance training tasks are too static and contradictory to the natural complex open system of team sports, which demands the self-organization of the large amount of degrees of freedom involved in the interaction between the Movement Variability and Resistance Training environment and the dynamics of players’ decisions and actions (Travassos et al, 2011)
When sample entropy (SampEn) was compared between the baseline and the subsequent weeks in the ball in the forward phase (BALL) condition, there were no significant changes, but there were moderate effects in the first four weeks, significant changes in the fifth week (p = 0.015) with moderate effects, and significant changes in the last week (p = 0.007) with a large effect (Figure 3A)
Summary
Resistance training is a key determinant of the physical conditioning process in elite rugby (Inness et al, 2016). It has been suggested that traditional resistance training tasks are too static and contradictory to the natural complex open system of team sports, which demands the self-organization of the large amount of degrees of freedom involved in the interaction between the Movement Variability and Resistance Training environment and the dynamics of players’ decisions and actions (Travassos et al, 2011). One of the most important variables to consider when designing an optimal resistance training program is the movement velocity (Bautista et al, 2016), so the training can be transferable to the tasks that require a developed capacity of body acceleration. Recent research identified motor variability as a key factor to describe the coordination features from the sensorimotor system operations and from the learning processes (Dhawale et al, 2017)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
