Momentum-Based Load Prescriptions: Applications to Jump Squat Training

Kinetics and Kinematics of the Push Press, Push Jerk, and Split Jerk

Soriano, MA, Jiménez-Ormeño, E, Lake, JP, McMahon, JJ, Gallo-Salazar, C, Mundy, P, and Comfort, P. Kinetics and kinematics of the push press, push jerk, and split jerk. J Strength Cond Res 38(8): 1359–1365, 2024—The aim of this study was to explore the kinetics and kinematics across incremental loads with the push press (PP), push jerk (PJ), and split jerk (SJ). Eighteen resistance-trained men performed the 1 repetition maximum (1RM) tests (visit 1) 3–7 days before an incremental loading protocol (60, 75, and 90% 1RM) of the 3 exercises (visit 2). Kinetics and kinematics were derived from force-time data and compared using a repeated-measures analysis of variance with load and exercise as within-subject factors. Dependent variables for the biomechanics assessment were categorized as output (power and impulse), driver (force and work), and strategy (displacement and duration) metrics. The interrepetition reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient and coefficient of variation. The PP, PJ, and SJ 1RM performance were 89.7 ± 15.4, 95.6 ± 14.4, and 103.0 ± 16.9 kg, respectively. Driver, strategy, and outcome metrics displayed moderate-to-excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.58–0.98) reliability with acceptable variability (% coefficient of variation: 2.02–10.00). Increased load resulted in significantly large increases in force, work, displacement, duration, power, and impulse (p < 0.001, = 0.534–0.903). Exercise selection had a significant and large effect on power, impulse, work, and force (p < 0.016, = 0.387–0.534). There was a significant and large effect of load × exercise interaction on work, displacement, and duration (p < 0.019, = 0.158–0.220). Practitioners are encouraged to use heavier loads (90 > 75 > 60% 1RM) during the SJ exercise to maximize output, driver, and strategy kinetics and kinematics.

Attentional Focus Effects on Lower-Limb Muscular Strength in Athletes: A Systematic Review

ABSTRACT

Pompa, D, Carson, HJ, Beato, M, di Fronso, S, and Bertollo, M. Attentional focus effects on lower-limb muscular strength in athletes: A systematic review. J Strength Cond Res 38(2): 419-434, 2024-Evidence links an athlete's focus of attention to enhancing strength performance. However, additional research is needed to investigate the applicability of studies beyond the tasks and population currently examined. Therefore, we aimed to systematically review studies concerning attentional focus effects on strength characteristics on lower-limb tasks in athletes. Scopus, Web of Science, and EBSCO databases were searched using PRISMA PERSIST guidelines and keywords related to the focus of attention, force production processes, and athletes. Subjects were categorized: world class (tier 5); elite (tier 4); highly trained (tier 3); trained/developmental (tier 2); nonathletes (tiers 1-0); and mixed (different levels). Fifteen of 296 studies met the inclusion criteria. Included studies investigated the focus of attention effects on performance ( n = 6), between skill levels ( n = 2), and for learning ( n = 5), with respect to subject preference ( n = 1); one study did not state the aim. Studies achieved an average risk of bias score of "excellent"; however, findings suffered in the assessment of certainty. Only 2 studies reported an advantage for one type of attentional focus (external focus) across conditions ( g = 0.13-0.42) with tier 2 and mixed tier athletes. Research does not address the needs of elite athletes, and there is limited evidence on each type of strength characteristics and muscle action. There is also a need to incorporate methodological steps to promote task-relevant instructions. Research should focus on contextualized information within professional practice to offer stronger translational implications for athletes and coaches.