Видео

Trend 2 and trend 4.

Hi there, thanks for such a thoughtful comment! This is certainly hitting on one of our most challenging areas across sports science and physical preparation - quantifying transfer to sport. It is often difficult to study specific performance aspects in the competitive arena. I'd suggest an excellent read on the topic of transfer of strength to performance (in general) is this review by Suchomel and colleagues: link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-016-0486-0 In terms of comparing isometric to dynamic strength development, they represent separate neuromuscular domains and should therefore, both be considered in training or rehab programmes. An excellent review and meta-analysis on this topic was recently published by Lachlan James and co: journals.humankinetics.com/view/journals/ijspp/19/1/article-p2.xml Lachan also has a RUclips channel @DocLachJames www.youtube.com/@DocLachJames

Thanks a lot!

Thanks very much Georgio! We really enjoyed recording the session with Jo, and hope practitioners found it useful. If you have any questions, do ask. Ciaran

Much appreciated!

Hi, thanks for your comment! Yes, I believe for small sample sizes (typically <30), a t-score is generally preferred because it accounts for additional variability in smaller samples. Z-scores may sometimes still be used if the population standard deviation is well-estimated. The choice depends on the context and the assumptions you're comfortable making. If you haven't already seen it, I do have another video on t-scores, here: ruclips.net/video/16GZ1Ed2uVE/видео.htmlsi=Fzw_y5mCvSctkF4b

Thanks for the sub!

Hi, thanks for your comment! Yes, you could use some sort of combination of lookup function to extract based on a particular condition. Probably most commonly though, I use a pivot table to extract by player name or periodisation day, and calculate the z-scores from that. Maybe I should demonstrate that in a future video?

@@globalperformanceinsights Thanks! I'll try with lookup combinations. In the meantime, I will wait patiently for your tutorial.

Hi there. Thank you! Impulse is a function of force and time, so it could just be higher due to doing the Nordic over a longer time period... However, if we identify it isn't the time factor then it is a result of greater force output. This higher force output could be due to neural adaptations like you mention (i.e. increased muscle activation during eccentric contractions) but could also be due to structural adaptations (i.e. increase in biceps femoris fascicle length). We wouldn't know with the NHE data alone exactly which of these adaptations (or the combined magnitude of both types) was driving the increased force output. That said, it would ultimately represent an improvement in eccentric muscle strength. I hope that makes sense. Thank you for your comment!

@@globalperformanceinsights thanks a lot for your reply! It really makes sense, it’d be really interesting to see if there’s any research done in this topic!

@@choi6539 Absolutely. Here is one paper on the structural adaptations: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2095254621000995#:~:text=Biceps%20femoris%20long%20head%20fascicle,distal%20portion%20of%20the%20muscle. And here is one looking into the neural adaptations: link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00421-015-3325-3

Yes, it is a similar concept, trying to help guide whether athletes would benefit more from plyometric or max strength emphasised training.

Sure. Ratio scaling (i.e. simple division by bodyweight) allows comparisons between athletes normalized to bodyweight. However, this simple approach assumes that strength is directly proportional to body mass, which is not necessarily the case. Allometric scaling may be more appropriate, particularly in settings with wide variation in body size and strength. Dividing strength by body mass raised to an appropriate power can eliminate the effects of body mass, although debate remains regarding the most appropriate scaling exponents. You can read more in Folland et al (2008): link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00421-007-0654-x

My pleasure!

Thank you!

My pleasure! Thank you.

Hi Nicolas. Thanks for your question. I presume that is because you find athletes of that height don't fit? I'd say there's a few different ways to build a rig, often using a squat rack, straps, or you can have a custom built rack made (if you have the budget for it!). Here's some examples: www.google.com/search?sca_esv=e4dd71f640266e19&q=seated+calf+isometric+force&udm=2&fbs=AEQNm0Aa4sjWe7Rqy32pFwRj0UkWd8nbOJfsBGGB5IQQO6L3J_86uWOeqwdnV0yaSF-x2joQcoZ-0Q2Udkt2zEybT7HdnwtJ4zecPSJKnTlqcRa4FingmzFHjMvqrWogZeShrrLVDeibS-5yZzsmYor4Krf6WoChzeuSwvgUMYwML507ycF_GBPIi95OGwcvBnfQE_zRQRk4&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj_s5fwttSHAxX1X0EAHcoJGMoQtKgLegQIEBAB&biw=1536&bih=730&dpr=1.25

Thanks!

Glad it was helpful!

That's great to hear, thank you!

Technology is definitely becoming more accessible across all different levels of sport. Thanks for your comment!

Glad it was helpful Braylee! Let me know if there were any other questions you had!

Thanks so much Jacob!

Hi, you can find it at this point in the video: ruclips.net/video/16GZ1Ed2uVE/видео.htmlsi=qr4GX4kGQU_eak0z&t=232 Also, I have written further instructions on my blog here: www.globalperformanceinsights.com/post/mastering-z-scores-t-scores-statistics-in-sports-science-zscore

Awesome, you're welcome!

Thanks! Will do!

Thank you. Not DSI specifically as that is based on force so you would need a force plate. Another option however, would be to look into Eccentric Utilisation Ratio (EUR). For this you compare the output of a squat jump vs a countermovement jump. You can use force if you have access to it, but crucially in your situation you could compare jump height of both using your jump mat. As always, there's limitations with ratios but it can be used to assess the individual's stretch shortening cycle. In theory, the CMJ should be higher than SJ, a ratio of around 1.1 and above has been suggested i.e. 10% greater jump performance in CMJ. If it is less than that, then perhaps the individual should focus on plyometric training to improve this quality.

Thanks! 😃

Thank you! I think they would represent different aspects of lower-body isometric strength. The ISO hip push is assessing hip extension, whereas the McCall 9090 is more focused on knee flexion. I did see the release of the new ISO measurements on the VALD system, so perhaps they should be a focus of a future video.

Hi there. Absolutely, you can use RPE and wellness - two evidence-based methods that only require pen and paper - to measure load and response in your athletes. RPE being a scale of intensity that can be multiplied by time to give you a "session RPE Load". Then you can track responses to training load with a subjective wellness questionnaire. I discuss both methods further in these videos: RPE: ruclips.net/video/YqXvO49Qy2I/видео.htmlsi=s62Kz0ZYggzvtSIo Wellness Questionnaires: ruclips.net/video/o01MbWyGx1w/видео.htmlsi=oBifAm_rzML31GFg I've also described in more detail in this open-access article in the Strength and Conditioning journal: journals.lww.com/nsca-scj/fulltext/2018/12000/developing_cost_effective,_evidence_based_load.11.aspx Let me know if you have any specific questions!

@@globalperformanceinsights Jo thank you so much for the resources recommended.. can you do a video on interaction of ergogenic aids with exercise and performance. It will be useful for many. Also share with me if you have any related sources.

Thanks, glad you think so!

Glad it was helpful!

Thank you. Yes that's exactly how I would cue the drop jump.

Thank you Carlos! Sounds like the courses will be perfect to help you develop and practice with sports science related examples and tasks. Good luck!

Awesome, thanks so much!

Glad to hear it! Thanks for your comment.

Great tip!

Thanks Eddie!

Thanks!