NATURAL MOVEMENTS PRODUCE GREATEST GAINS IN AUXILIARY EXERCISE TRAINING
Padua, D. A., DiStefano, M. J., & Clark, M. A. (2010). Comparison of isolated and integrated training on functional performance measures. Presentation 800 at the 2010 Annual Meeting of the American College of Sports Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; June 2-5.
This study compared the effects of isolated strength training to integrated training on functional performance measures. Isolated training (N = 15) involved traditional progressive resistance exercises to improve upper and lower body strength. Integrated training (N = 15) involved core stability, power, agility, and strength training exercises. Each group trained twice per week for eight weeks. Factors assessed were: abdominal (number of sit ups in 60 seconds) and upper body (number of push ups in 60 seconds) strength/endurance, power (vertical jump height), speed/agility (T test), flexibility (sit and reach), and motion control (landing error scoring system).
Significant training-treatment by test interactions were revealed for upper body and abdominal strength/endurance, speed/agility, and motion control. Post-hoc analyses demonstrated greater improvements in the integrated group for upper body and abdominal strength/endurance, speed/agility, and motion control. Significant overall training effects were revealed for power and flexibility.
Implication. Both integrated and isolated training improved power and flexibility. Integrated training was more effective at improving abdominal and upper body strength/endurance, speed/agility, and motion control. The tendency of altered-movement exercises to change stretch-shortening mechanics (slow movements; slow down explosive up, etc.) do not produce as much effectiveness as do natural explosive movements. Thus, training devices and exercises that restrict or alter movements will not produce as much gain as is possible with natural movements.
Return to Table of Contents for this issue.