Slide 1

Despite the snow storm the college was a great success . We were very fortunate that the snow storm came in after the attendees arrived and was finished by the time the conference ended. We lost one speaker in the storm, Greg Werner but John Graham and John Taylor filled in admirably for Greg. Greg made it home safely after an 11 hour journey and an unsuccessful attempt to join us at the college.

We wish to thank all the speakers and attendees for their support and hope to see them all back next year.

EFFECTIVE DATE: Fall 2010

PURPOSE (Goals and Objectives): This doctoral program is designed to produce leaders in sport science research and research-driven coach education. Specific objectives for the program are to:

• Produce transformational sport science research and coach education/research;
• Produce pioneering research applied to coaching;
• Provide a background of knowledge of sport physiology that translates into quality coaching;
• Advocate for using a scientific approach to address issues surrounding athletics performance;
• Emphasize that a coach’s primary responsibilities are for an athlete’s well-being and achievement—becoming the best that he or she can be;
• Reorganize perceptions to understand that research is a part of coaching; and
• Elevate the academic status of coaches in the educated community.

IMPACT: This proposed PhD program will be ground-breaking and distinctive in the US and will impact education and research for two professions: sport scientists and coaches. ETSU expects that this program will contribute to national interest and awareness of the need to academically educate sport scientists and coaches and to target athletic performance rather than participation. This single refocus is expected to lower the incident of sport injuries and increase levels of performance achievement for athletes, thereby supporting sport through research and education.

The doctoral program is integrated with the ETSU Center of Excellence for Sport Science and Coach Education (CESSCE). The students will have the opportunity to be involved in clinics for coaches, continuing education programs, and activities that permeate the sport community, from the elite athlete to the grade-school child who participates in school or recreational sports. Objectives of the CESSCE include improvement of athlete performance as well as how to better understand the role of sport and sport performance in the health and well being of the nation as a whole and the impact of disability, injury and disease on sport participation and performance. The specialized research possibilities could easily yield findings that would impact quality of life of athletes and the general public.

CURRICULUM: The proposed Ph.D. requires a minimum of 72 semester hours distributed as follows:

Concentrations(s) and Associated Electives: There are two concentrations for the proposed degree: Sport Physiology and Sport Performance.

• The Sport Physiology concentration has 15 required semester credit hours and a minimum of 9 credit hours of guided electives.
• The Sport Performance concentration has 15 required semester credit hours and a minimum of 9 credit hours of guided electives.

Sport physiology is concerned primarily with how underlying mechanisms can be manipulated by variations in training to produce specific performance enhancements. For example, testosterone (an anabolic hormone) and cortisol (a catabolic hormone) are known to impact physiological variables such as lean body mass and body composition, strength, explosiveness, and psychological variables such as arousal. A student may investigate the effects of manipulating training variables (e.g., volume of work and intensity of work) so that the T:C ratio is maximized at appropriate time, such as a conference or national championship.

Sport performance is concerned primarily with ways in which individuals and teams can enhance competitive performance that may include nutrition, technique analysis, sport psychology, strength and conditioning training, and long-term athlete monitoring. For example, a student in the Sport Performance concentration might investigate the acute and chronic effects of whole body vibration on the flexibility and competitive performance of elite gymnasts.

All Students are required to take these Core courses.

The following tables identify the required courses and potential guided electives for each concentration.

15 hours for Dissertation

The focus of a dissertation for the Ph.D. in Sport Physiology and Performance depends on the concentration: Sport Physiology or Sport Performance. Students in both concentrations use knowledge of physiology and research to better understand and enhance sport performance. However, students in the Sport Physiology concentration focus on translational research concerning how alterations in physiology impact sport performance, whereas the students in the Sport Performance concentration studies primarily how to maximally enhance performance using a research-based approach.

Admission Requirements

Applicants, including international students, seeking admission to the Ph.D. in Sport Physiology and Performance degree program must fulfill all the requirements for admission to the ETSU School of Graduate Studies and adhere to other school processes, procedures, and requirements as delineated in the catalog. Presented in the Table PS1 are the School of Graduate Studies admission requirements and the additional requirements for the Ph.D. in Sport Physiology and Performance program.

School of Graduate Studies Admission Requirements and Additional Requirements for the Ph.D. in Sport Physiology and Performance

Program Admission Requirements

Admission to the Ph.D. degree program in Sport Physiology and Performance is competitive and based on scholarship, letters of recommendation, and evidence of potential success. Students seeking admission to the program must meet the general admission requirements of the Graduate School. In addition, the following specific admissions criteria apply:

1. Vita or resume

2. Personal essay detailing career and educational goals and potential area of interest for the dissertation.

3. Official GRE scores taken within the past 5 years, except for those with a prior doctoral degree from an accredited institution within the United States. Preferred scores are above the 50% percentile for verbal and quantitative sections.

4. Four letters of recommendation from individuals who can address the applicant’s academic and professional achievements. At least two recommendations must be from former college instructors.

5. Master’s degree (thesis preferred) or bachelor’s degree (strong research component) in Biology, Exercise Science, or related discipline from an accredited university with an overall GPA of 3.4 for applicants with a master’s degree or 3.0 for applicants with a bachelor’s degree on a 4.0 scale. It is recommended that entering students have an undergraduate background in statistics, general chemistry, general biology, human anatomy and physiology. Students admitted with a B.S. or M.S. degree are expected to meet all doctoral requirements, including course prerequisites or equivalencies.* Thus, the program of study for a student entering with a B.S. degree will exceed the 72 credit hour minimum and extend the program of study.

6. A personal or phone interview with members of the admission committee. Factors to be considered in the interview include academic success, evidence of leadership skills, writing skills, computer skills, and oral communication skills.

*Course prerequisites or equivalencies needed for the Ph.D. in Sport Physiology and Performance are: PEXS 3610 Exercise Physiology I, PEXS 4620 Exercise Physiology II, PEXS 5655 Sports Nutrition and Ergogenic Aids, and PEXS 5670 Research Design and Analysis.

Once all pertinent application materials are complete, the School of Graduate Studies forwards the application package to the program. Applications are not evaluated until all materials have been received. The program admissions committee reviews the materials, interviews the student, and completes an overall evaluation of the applicant’s ability to complete advanced study. Recommendations regarding admissions to the program are made to the Dean of the School of Graduate Studies who makes final decisions on admissions. The program can recommend conditional admission to promising applicants not meeting minimum requirements for GPA and prerequisites.

For students seeking a funded doctoral fellowship, completed applications should be submitted by February 15 for competitive review. The program decisions for financial support are usually made in March or April. Students not seeking funding need to apply by June 1 for admission for the fall semester. Applications can be made electronically via the Web at http://goldlink.etsu.edu.

Information concerning residency, retention and graduation requirements can be found through the Kinesiology, Leisure and Sport Science or ETSU websites.

Registration is now closed.

The ETSU Center of Excellence for Sport Science and Coach Education is proud to invite you to the 4th Annual Coaches & Sport Science College on December 18-20, 2009!

• Schedule for the 4th Annual Coaches & Sport Science College
• Keynote Speakers
• Applying for the UK Strength and Conditioning Accreditation
• Call for Papers
• Conference Location and Johnson City, TN Information

Program Schedule

Friday December 18th, 2009
7:30-8:00 am– Registration
8:00 – 8:15 – Welcome – Meg Stone and others (Dean, AD, VP, Pres. etc.)
8:15 – 8:50 – An Introduction to Periodization – a superior method of training – Mike Stone
8:50 – 10:50 – Periodization as applied to strength/power training – What are the real models and how well do they work (linear, non-linear, undulating, daily undulating ??) – Greg Haff
10:50 – 11:00 – Break
11:00 – 12:15 – Tapering : The ups and downs – Inigo Mujika|
12:15 – 1:15 – Lunch
1:15 – 2:30 – Boy, am I tired: Recovery and Restoration Methods, Which ones might work – Bill Sands
2:30 – 3:15—Sports Performance Enhancement Groups, Monitoring , Demonstrations/video – some easily performed field tests of strength, power and endurance. – Mike Ramsey
3:15– 3:45 – Conditioning for Games Players (warm-up, running, agility, flexibility, etc.) – Part 1- Protocol Rationale – Clive Brewer
3:45 – 4:00 – Break
4:00– 4:30 – Conditioning for Games Players (warm-up, running, agility, flexibility, etc.) – Part 2- Demonstration – practical application and keys to teaching good technique – Clive Brewer
4:30 – 5:30 – Landing mechanics, bounding, depth jumps and just plain jumping – Mike Favre
6:00– 8:00 – Banquet – Travis Triplett, Master of Ceremony – The ETSU Center of Excellence for Sport Science and Coach Education – Meg Stone (6:30 – 7:00)- So, you want to work with athletes – the ins and outs of working with elite athletes. – Inigo Mujika (7 – 7:30)

Saturday December 19th, 2009
7:45– 8:15 – Registration
8:15 – 8:30 – Welcome – Meg Stone et al.
8:30 – 9:30 – Weight-room management and organization – conflict resolution, scheduling and more – Mike Gentry
9:30 –11:00– Machines and Free weights – what is the difference? – Greg Haff
11:00 – 11:15 – Break
11:15 – 12:30 – Everything you wanted to know about the squat(s) and deadlift(s): Demonstration/video- practical application and keys to teaching good technique – Dan Wathen
12:30 – 1:30 – Lunch
1:30 – 2:45 – Everything you wanted to know about weightlifting movements: Demonstration/video- practical application and keys to teaching good technique – Mike Stone
2:45 – 3:45 – Oh say can you see? – Vision and vision training for athletes – Jeff Falkel
3:45 – 4:00 –Break
4:00- 5:15 – Coach, how much weight should I lift? – How to set the load, (Failure/RM’s, heavy and light, daily, weekly etc.) : Importance of calculating volume load and intensity etc. – Mike Stone and Greg Haff
5:15 – 6:15 – Round Table – All

2009 Keynote Speakers

Meg Stone – Two–time Olympian and distinguished strength and conditioning coach. Director of the Center of Excellence for Sport Science and Coach Education.
Dr. Mike Stone – Director of the Exercise and Sport Sciences  Laboratory at ETSU. Previous Head of Physiology for the USOC.
Dr. Greg Haff – Assistant Professor in Exercise Physiology at West Virginia University School of Medicine.
Dr. Inigo Mujika- Outstanding and highly recognized Sport Scientist/physiologist and coach at the Araba Sports Clinic in the Basque country, Spain.
Dr. Bill Sands – Formerly the Head of Biomechanics and Director of the Recovery Center for the United State Olympic Committee. Now Head of the Sport Performance Lab at Mesa State University in Colorado.
Dr. Mike Ramsey – Associate Professor at ETSU, emphasis in Cardiovascular Physiology.
Clive Brewer – Head of Human Performance for English Rugby League and the contracted strength and conditioning specialist at Wimbledon Tennis Championships.
Mike Favre – Formerly the Strength and Conditioning Coach for the United States Olympic Committee, now the Head Strength and Conditioning Coach of Olympic Sports at the University of Michigan.
Mike Gentry – Well-recognized Strength and Conditioning Coach, Head of Olympic Sports at Virginia Tech.
Dan Wathen – Former Head Athletic Trainer and Strength and Conditioning Coordinator at Youngstown State University.
Dr. Jeff Falkel – Well-respected Physical Therapist and Strength and Conditioning Coach with his area of expertise in vision training.

Human Kinetics will be available to discuss their publishing program with any attendees interested.

Back to top

Become an Accredited Strength & Conditioning Coach (ASCC) December 20th, 2009

For More Information about the UKSCA and the Accredited Strength & Conditioning Coach Process please visit www.uksca.org.uk.

Why become an Accredited Strength & Conditioning Coach?
Becoming an Accredited Strength & Conditioning Coach (ASCC) with the UK Strength & Conditioning Association involves a competency-based assessment, and only those coaches who can prove they are knowledgeable in both training theory and practical coaching skills can become accredited. It is for this reason that this professional standard is fast becoming valued around the world.

In recognition of this, a number of key US coaches across a variety of sports have travelled to the UK in the last several years to attend an assessment day and become accredited.

Second Ever Assessment Day in the United States
We are pleased to announce that for the second time, an assessment day will be hosted in the US (Johnson City, TN) on December 20, 2009, offering the opportunity for a limited number of coaches to gain this highly respected accreditation.

Aims of the UKSCA

• To establish and maintain high professional standards for strength and conditioning practitioners.
• The promotion and dissemination of good practice, knowledge and research appropriate to strength and conditioning practitioners.
• To facilitate communication among UKSCA members.

How to Apply
Those interested in applying for the December 20, 2009 assessment day should:

1. Go to http://www.uksca.org.uk/uksca/common/memberships.asp?txtID=forms or download all of the forms using the links below.
2. Download a copy of the UKSCA Competency Document. This is the ‘definition’ of the skills and competencies you will be required to demonstrate in order to become accredited and you can use this to ‘self-assess’ and determine areas you may need extra work in.
3. Download a copy of the Assessment Day Guide. This outlines how these competencies are assessed on the day and provides you with information on how to prepare for the day.
4. Download and complete the application pack for the UKSCA well in advance of the assessment day (December 20th, 2009).
5. You can pay your registration fee right here on sportscienceed.com.

What occurs on the Assessment Day
The assessment day is divided into four parts:

• Multiple choice exam
• Presentation of case study outlining the strength and conditioning program for an athlete or a team and questioning by assessors
• Plyometric, speed, and agility practical assessment
• Weight lifting coaching and practical assessment

Assessment Fees
Candidates will be charged $375 for the assessment process. This includes the first year’s membership in the UKSCA as an accredited member.

Back to top

Call for Papers

The Center for Excellence in Sports Science and Coach Education (CESSCE) will be hosting posters for its fourth annual Coaches College. The subject matter must deal directly or indirectly with the enhancement of competitive athletes.  Posters can deal with advances in coaching, coaching methods, biomechanical, psychological, physiological or sports medicine aspects.

Posters will be accepted on the basis of study summaries submitted by e-mail. The deadline for acceptance is November 15th 2009 (no exceptions).  Summaries should be concise, and contain sections dealing with: purpose/introduction, methods, results and discussion Summaries should be limited to 2-3 pages (12 pt font).  An example is provided below.  Incomplete studies without data will not be accepted.  The summaries will be published here at sportscienceed.com.

Awards will be given in the following categories

Coaching/Coach Education

1st place – $150

2nd place – $75

Sports Science

1st place – $150

2nd place – $75

Outstanding student Poster- $150

Posters must be up by Friday morning at December 18th at 8:00 am – judging will take place during all breaks – primary authors are expected to stand with their posters during all breaks.

Posters should fit a standard size display: approximately 4 ft x 4 ft. (122 cm x 122 cm)

Judges for the competition

Coaches Education

• Chris Ayres – Physical Education ETSU/ Director of ETSU IRB, former Executive  Director of TAHPERD, Head KLSS Department, ETSU
• Dr. Andy Dotterweich– Assistant Professor, KLSS, ETSU
• Dan Wathen – Head Trainer (Emeritus) – Youngstown State University

Sports Science

• Dr. Inigo Mujika- Associate Professor of Physiology, University of the Basque Country.
• Dr. Bill Sands –Professor, Director of Exercise and sport Science at Mesa State University, Grand Junction, CO
• Clive Brewer – UKSCA, Coaches education development, SportScotland, Scotland, UK
• Travis Triplett – Master (or is it mistress) of Ceremonies at Banquet.

Example

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ISOMETRIC FORCE CHARACTERISTICS AND THE DIFFERENCE IN UN-WEIGHTED AND WEIGHTED VERTICAL JUMP HEIGHT

Jenna M. Kraska, Michael W. Ramsey, G. Gregory Haff, Nate Fethke, Ann M. Kinser, William A. Sands, Keith Painter, Margaret E. Stone and Michael H. Stone

Sports Performance Enhancement Consortium

East Tennessee State University

Johnson City, TN, USA, 37614

Introduction: Weighted and unweighted jumps may provide insights into both mechanistic and practical aspects of explosive performance. So, for strength and conditioning professionals, the monitoring of vertical jump height and jump height responses under various loading conditions is easy to perform and may be a practical assessment tool that is specific to the characteristics observed in sport. Therefore, the purpose of the current investigation was to examine the relationships between isometric force time-curve characteristics and markers of unloaded and loaded vertical jump performance. A primary purpose was to examine the relationships of maximal strength to these characteristics.

Methods: Forty-one female and twenty-two male USA Collegiate Division I athletes (n = 63) active in track and field, tennis, softball, soccer, and volleyball participated in the study. Athletes read and signed written informed consent documents pertaining to the long-term athlete monitoring program and all testing procedures in accordance with the guidelines of East Tennessee State University’s Institutional Review Board.

Athlete height was measured using a stadiometer and recorded to the nearest 0.1 cm. Body mass was determined using an electronic scale and body composition was determined with, air displacement plethsmography (BodPod, Life Measurement Incorporated, Concord, CA). Vertical jump height was derived from flight time using a force plate. Maximum strength characteristics were measured by an isometric mid-thigh pull.  Isometric peak force (IPF), force at 50, 90 250 ms and rate of force development (IRFD) were measured by force-time curve analyses using customized signal processing software (LabView, National Instruments, Austin, TX). Reliabilities for these measures were excellent (ICCα ≥ 0.88 – 0.99)

Relationships between variables were assessed using a Pearson correlation procedure. Additionally a subgroup (n = 6) of the strongest five percent of males and females (3 males + 3 females) were compared to a subgroup (n = 6) of the weakest five percent males and females (3 males + 3 females). Athletes were placed into weak or strong groups according to their allometrically scaled isometric peak force values (IPFa). Independent samples t-Tests were used to assess differences between means (strong group IPFa = 232.4 ± 28.4 N/kg 0.67, weak IPFa = 123.18 ± 18.87 N/kg 0.67, (p ≤ 0.05). Due to the large number of pair-wise comparisons between groups, the Holm’s Sequential Bonferroni method was used to control for type I errors. Cohen’s effect sizes (d) were also calculated. The experimental design is shown in Figure 1:

Results:  Athletes (n = 63) were 19.9 ± 1.3 yrs.; 172.8 ± 7.7 cm in height and their body mass was 72.9 ±19.6 kg.  There was a very strong correlation between IPF and IRFD (r = 0.88, p ≤ 0.05) agreeing with previous literature (1, 2). IPF showed moderate to strong correlations with F50 (r = 0.85), F90 (r = 0.42) and F250 (r = 0.93). Correlations of IPF and percent decrements in jump height ranged from moderate to strong negative correlations indicating stronger athletes lost less height. Compared to weak athletes, strong athletes had greater values for all force measures and for IRFD (p < 0.5). Differences between strong and weak groups showed that stronger athletes jumped higher (SJ 0kg = 30.8 ± 9.7 vs 23.7 ± 4.9 cm, p ≤ 0.5, d = 0.92; CMJ 0 kg = 33.5 ± 10.8 vs 28.3 ± 6.3 p ≤ 0.05, d = 0.60; SJ 20 kg = 25.4 ± 8.3 vs 16.7± 4.8 cm, p ≤ 0.05, d = 1.28; CMJ 20kg = 27.6 ± 8.6 vs 18.7 ± 5.3, p ≤, d = 1.24). The strong group had smaller decrements (SJ = 17.8 ± 3.4 vs30.4 ± 7.8 %, p ≤ 0.5, d = 2.10; CMJ =17.4 % ± 4.8 vs 34.5 ± 7.8 %, p < 0.05, d = 2.65).

Discussion: Three important findings were associated with the current investigation: First, strong relationships were observed between maximum strength (IPF), IRFD and F50, F90, F250. It is unclear exactly why increased maximum strength is associated with increased RFD, but it may be related to alterations in the H-reflex. Second was the association of maximum strength characteristics (e.g. IPF, IRFD) with jump capabilities. Additionally, assuming that the isometric measures are indicative of striking, sprinting and jumping (i.e. force at 50, 90, and 250 ms) then stronger athletes measured in this manner can produce superior results in these activities.  The third important finding was the observation that stronger athletes have smaller decrements in vertical jump heights associated with weighted jumps compared to weaker athletes. There are several potential underlying reasons for these observations. Training studies have shown increases in neural drive (IRFD) associated adaptations in contractile strength of skeletal muscle (2). Furthermore, athletes that are found to be more explosive, which may be strongly related to their nervous system capabilities, are often found to possess high levels of strength. Thus maximum strength appears to be an important underlying mechanism that influences both un-weighted and weighted jumping and by extrapolation, explosive exercises.

References:

1. Aagaard P, Simonsen EB, Andersen JL, Magnusson P, Dyhre-Poulsen P. Increased rate of force development and neural drive of human skeletal muscle following resistance training. J Appl Physiol 2002 October: 93(4):1318-26.

2.. Stone MH, Sanborn K, O’Bryant HS et al. Maximum strength-power-performance relationships in collegiate throwers. J Strength Cond Res 2003 November: 17(4):739-45.

Back to top

Johnson City, TN Information

Conference Location
Millenium Center – www.millctr.com

Airports
Tri-Cities Airport (20-minute drive)
McGhee-Tyson Airport (Knoxville, TN 2-hour drive)
Asheville Regional Airport (Asheville, NC 1-hour drive).

Nearby Hotels
Carnegie Hotel: www.carnegiehotel.com
Phone: (423) 979-6400 (Mention ETSU Coaches College)
Sleep Inn: Phone (423)915-0081
Hampton Inn: Phone (423)-929-8000

For other area information and list of hotels, please email Liz Schoen: Schoen@etsu.edu.

Back to top

December 18-20, 2009 – Millennium Center, ETSU, Johnson City, Tennessee

The Center for Excellence in Sports Science and Coach Education (CESSCE) will be hosting posters for its fourth annual Coaches College. The subject matter must deal directly or indirectly with the enhancement of competitive athletes.  Posters can deal with advances in coaching, coaching methods, biomechanical, psychological, physiological or sports medicine aspects.

Posters will be accepted on the basis of study summaries submitted by e-mail. The deadline for acceptance is November 15th 2009 (no exceptions).  Summaries should be concise, and contain sections dealing with: purpose/introduction, methods, results and discussion Summaries should be limited to 2-3 pages (12 pt font).  An example is provided below.  Incomplete studies without data will not be accepted.  The summaries will be published on on sportscienceed.com.

Awards will be given in the following categories:

Coaching/Coach Education

1st place – $150

2nd place – $75

Sports Science

1st place – $150

2nd place – $75

Outstanding student Poster- $150

Posters must be up by Friday morning at December 18th at 8:00 am – judging will take place during all breaks – primary authors are expected to stand with their posters during all breaks.

Posters should fit a standard size display: approximately 4 ft x 4 ft. (122 cm x 122 cm)

Judges for the competition

Coaches Education

• Chris Ayres – Physical Education ETSU/ Director of ETSU IRB, former Executive  Director of TAHPERD, Head KLSS Department, ETSU
• Dr. Andy Dotterweich– Assistant Professor, KLSS, ETSU
• Dan Wathen – Head Trainer (Emeritus) – Youngstown State University

Sports Science

• Dr. Inigo Mujika- Associate Professor of Physiology, University of the Basque Country.
• Dr. Bill Sands –Professor, Director of Exercise and sport Science at Mesa State University, Grand Junction, CO
• Clive Brewer – UKSCA, Coaches education development, SportScotland, Scotland, UK
• Travis Triplett – Master (or is it mistress) of Ceremonies at Banquet.

Example

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ISOMETRIC FORCE CHARACTERISTICS AND THE DIFFERENCE IN UN-WEIGHTED AND WEIGHTED VERTICAL JUMP HEIGHT

Jenna M. Kraska, Michael W. Ramsey, G. Gregory Haff, Nate Fethke, Ann M. Kinser, William A. Sands, Keith Painter, Margaret E. Stone and Michael H. Stone

Sports Performance Enhancement Consortium

East Tennessee State University

Johnson City, TN, USA, 37614

Introduction: Weighted and unweighted jumps may provide insights into both mechanistic and practical aspects of explosive performance. So, for strength and conditioning professionals, the monitoring of vertical jump height and jump height responses under various loading conditions is easy to perform and may be a practical assessment tool that is specific to the characteristics observed in sport. Therefore, the purpose of the current investigation was to examine the relationships between isometric force time-curve characteristics and markers of unloaded and loaded vertical jump performance. A primary purpose was to examine the relationships of maximal strength to these characteristics.

Methods: Forty-one female and twenty-two male USA Collegiate Division I athletes (n = 63) active in track and field, tennis, softball, soccer, and volleyball participated in the study. Athletes read and signed written informed consent documents pertaining to the long-term athlete monitoring program and all testing procedures in accordance with the guidelines of East Tennessee State University’s Institutional Review Board.

Athlete height was measured using a stadiometer and recorded to the nearest 0.1 cm. Body mass was determined using an electronic scale and body composition was determined with, air displacement plethsmography (BodPod, Life Measurement Incorporated, Concord, CA). Vertical jump height was derived from flight time using a force plate. Maximum strength characteristics were measured by an isometric mid-thigh pull.  Isometric peak force (IPF), force at 50, 90 250 ms and rate of force development (IRFD) were measured by force-time curve analyses using customized signal processing software (LabView, National Instruments, Austin, TX). Reliabilities for these measures were excellent (ICCα ≥ 0.88 – 0.99)

Relationships between variables were assessed using a Pearson correlation procedure. Additionally a subgroup (n = 6) of the strongest five percent of males and females (3 males + 3 females) were compared to a subgroup (n = 6) of the weakest five percent males and females (3 males + 3 females). Athletes were placed into weak or strong groups according to their allometrically scaled isometric peak force values (IPFa). Independent samples t-Tests were used to assess differences between means (strong group IPFa = 232.4 ± 28.4 N/kg 0.67, weak IPFa = 123.18 ± 18.87 N/kg 0.67, (p ≤ 0.05). Due to the large number of pair-wise comparisons between groups, the Holm’s Sequential Bonferroni method was used to control for type I errors. Cohen’s effect sizes (d) were also calculated. The experimental design is shown in Figure 1:

Results:  Athletes (n = 63) were 19.9 ± 1.3 yrs.; 172.8 ± 7.7 cm in height and their body mass was 72.9 ±19.6 kg.  There was a very strong correlation between IPF and IRFD (r = 0.88, p ≤ 0.05) agreeing with previous literature (1, 2). IPF showed moderate to strong correlations with F50 (r = 0.85), F90 (r = 0.42) and F250 (r = 0.93). Correlations of IPF and percent decrements in jump height ranged from moderate to strong negative correlations indicating stronger athletes lost less height. Compared to weak athletes, strong athletes had greater values for all force measures and for IRFD (p < 0.5). Differences between strong and weak groups showed that stronger athletes jumped higher (SJ 0kg = 30.8 ± 9.7 vs 23.7 ± 4.9 cm, p ≤ 0.5, d = 0.92; CMJ 0 kg = 33.5 ± 10.8 vs 28.3 ± 6.3 p ≤ 0.05, d = 0.60; SJ 20 kg = 25.4 ± 8.3 vs 16.7± 4.8 cm, p ≤ 0.05, d = 1.28; CMJ 20kg = 27.6 ± 8.6 vs 18.7 ± 5.3, p ≤, d = 1.24). The strong group had smaller decrements (SJ = 17.8 ± 3.4 vs30.4 ± 7.8 %, p ≤ 0.5, d = 2.10; CMJ =17.4 % ± 4.8 vs 34.5 ± 7.8 %, p < 0.05, d = 2.65).

Discussion: Three important findings were associated with the current investigation: First, strong relationships were observed between maximum strength (IPF), IRFD and F50, F90, F250. It is unclear exactly why increased maximum strength is associated with increased RFD, but it may be related to alterations in the H-reflex. Second was the association of maximum strength characteristics (e.g. IPF, IRFD) with jump capabilities. Additionally, assuming that the isometric measures are indicative of striking, sprinting and jumping (i.e. force at 50, 90, and 250 ms) then stronger athletes measured in this manner can produce superior results in these activities.  The third important finding was the observation that stronger athletes have smaller decrements in vertical jump heights associated with weighted jumps compared to weaker athletes. There are several potential underlying reasons for these observations. Training studies have shown increases in neural drive (IRFD) associated adaptations in contractile strength of skeletal muscle (2). Furthermore, athletes that are found to be more explosive, which may be strongly related to their nervous system capabilities, are often found to possess high levels of strength. Thus maximum strength appears to be an important underlying mechanism that influences both un-weighted and weighted jumping and by extrapolation, explosive exercises.

References:

1. Aagaard P, Simonsen EB, Andersen JL, Magnusson P, Dyhre-Poulsen P. Increased rate of force development and neural drive of human skeletal muscle following resistance training. J Appl Physiol 2002 October: 93(4):1318-26.

2.. Stone MH, Sanborn K, O’Bryant HS et al. Maximum strength-power-performance relationships in collegiate throwers. J Strength Cond Res 2003 November: 17(4):739-45.

Annual Weightlifting Meet

Saturday, September 19th, 2009

Class: ________ (choose only one class, any changes in weight class must be made

prior to the scheduled weigh-in time)

Sex: _________ Age:________ Date of Birth: ___/___/_____

Name:______________________________________

Address:_____________________________________

____________________________________________

City:_____________________________ State:______ Zip:_________

Telephone Number: (___)_____-_________

E-mail Address:____________________________________

Team Competing For:________________________________

USAW Number _________________________ Expiration Date ________________

(If you are not yet a member of USA Weightlifting, you must purchase a membership

card at the meet and a number will be assigned to you.)

Fee – $10.00 – make checks payable to ETSU-SPEC

I do not hold SPEC or East Tennessee State University liable for damages, injuries, or

losses suffered by me in this meet.

____________________________________________

Meet Schedule:

Women’s 48 – 69 kg: lift at 10:00 am – weigh-in begins at 8:00 am

Men’s 56 – 85 kg: lift at 10:00 am – weigh-in begins at 8:00 am

Women’s 75–75+ kg: lift at 11:00 am – weigh-in begins at 9:00 am

Men’s 94 – SH lift at 11:00 am – weigh-in begins at 9:00 am

Cheap Awards for 1st – 3rd place for each class

Master’s Awards – based on formula 1st – 3rd

Cathy Sellers, Assoc. Director, High Performance -Paralympic Track and Field, USOC.
Eric Rouse, Health Initiatives Manager, Holston Medical Group.
Jerry Robertson, Director of Sports Medicine and Industrial Relations, Watauga Orthopaedics.
Jim Holmes, President, Carter County Bank.
Fred Warren, Head Golf Coach, ETSU
Louise Nuttle, Assistant Vice President Research and Sponsored Programs, ETSU.
Dr Charles Stuart, Quillin College of Medicine, ETSU
Ray Flynn, Flynn Sports Management
Brad Yewer, Flynn Sports Management
JT Kearney, High Performance Director,USOC.
Clive Brewer, Director of Sports Performance, England Rugby League.
Dragomir Cirosalan, International Relations, USOC.

We thank the members of the Advisory Board for their support of the Center and our next meeting of the Board will be 17th December 2009. This is immediately prior to the 2009 Coaches College, December 18th and 19th 2009.