دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی تاثیر تمرینات سربالایی در مقابل تمرینات تراز صاف شدید اینتروال روی Vo2MAX، Vmax ، VLT ، و Tmax در دونده های مسافت که به خوبی آموزش دیده اند به همراه ترجمه فارسی
|عنوان فارسی مقاله:||تاثیر تمرینات سربالایی در مقابل تمرینات تراز صاف شدید اینتروال روی Vo2MAX، Vmax ، VLT ، و Tmax در دونده های مسافت که به خوبی آموزش دیده اند|
|عنوان انگلیسی مقاله:||The effects of uphill vs. level-grade high-intensity interval, training on vo2max,vmax,vlt and t max in WELL-Trained distance runners|
|رشته های مرتبط:||تربیت بدنی، فیزیولوژی فعالیت بدنی و تندرستی، فیزیولوژی ورزشی کاربردی|
|فرمت مقالات رایگان||مقالات انگلیسی و ترجمه های فارسی رایگان با فرمت PDF میباشند|
|کیفیت ترجمه||کیفیت ترجمه این مقاله خوب میباشد|
|توضیحات||مقاله انگلیسی ناقص می باشد.|
مقاله انگلیسی رایگان
|دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی|
ترجمه فارسی رایگان
|دانلود رایگان ترجمه مقاله|
|جستجوی ترجمه مقالات||جستجوی ترجمه مقالات تربیت بدنی|
بخشی از ترجمه فارسی مقاله:
بخشی از مقاله انگلیسی:
Abstract Ferley, DD, Osborn, RW, and Vukovich, MD. The effects of uphill vs. level-grade high-intensity interval training on Vo2max, Vmax, V| t , and Tmax in well-trained distance runners. J Strength Cond Res 27(6): 1549-1559, 2013-Uphill running represents a frequently used and often prescribed training tactic in the development of competitive distance runners but remains largely uninvestigated and unsubstantiated as a training modality. The purpose of this investigation included documenting the effects of uphill interval training compared with level-grade interval training on maximal oxygen consumption (Vo2max), the running speed associated with Vo2max (Vmax), the running speed associated with lactate threshold (V Lt ), and the duration for which Vmax can be sustained (Tmax) in well-trained distance runners. Thirty-two well-trained distance runners (age, 27.4 ± ۳٫۸ years; body mass, 64.8 ± ۸٫۹ kg; height, 1 73.6 ± ۶٫۴ cm; and Vo2max, 60.9 ± ۸٫۵ ml-min- 1 -kg-1) received assignment to an uphill interval training group ( G Hni = 1 2), level-grade interval training group (GFiat = 1 2), or control group (Gcon = 8). Ghw and Gpiat completed 12 interval and 12 continuous running sessions over 6 weeks, whereas G C o n maintained their normal training routine. Pre- and posttest measures of Vo2max, l/max, V LT, and Tmax were used to assess performance. A 3 X 2 repeated measures analysis of variance was performed for each dependent variable and revealed a significant difference in Tmax in both Ghiii and G Fiat (p < 0.05). With regard to running performance, the results indicate that both uphill and level-grade interval training can induce significant improvements in a run-to-exhaustion test in well-trained runners at the speed associated with Vo2max but that traditional level-grade training produces greater gains.
Uphill running represents a frequently prescribed and often used form of high-intensity interval training in the development of competitive distance runners. For example, a survey of teams competing in the 1996 National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I national cross-country meet verified its widespread use as a training method and revealed that uphill training correlated with faster team times (29). Moreover, references to its potential effectiveness as a high-velocity resistance-to-movement exercise have appeared in scholarly reviews (2,36). Although widely touted by coaches, athletes, and industry lay journals as a means to increase lower-body power output and running speed-and ultimately race performance-interestingly, a review of the literature produced just one study examining the physiological responses to uphill training for distance runners (24). With the physiological effects of uphill training on distance running performance remaining essentially unproven, its purported mechanisms of action for improving running performance have been proposed to be similar to other highintensity resistance-to-movement training tactics such as explosive strength training, heavy strength training, and plyometric training. Recent investigations suggest that these types of training methods improve distance running performance by enhancing muscular and neuromuscular characteristics, which ultimately lead to improved economy of movement (28,42,47,51). However, as opposed to other highintensity resistance-to-movement exercises, uphill running can be seen to represent a much more sport-specific training tactic and may therefore prove more effective at improving distance running performance than other high-intensity resistance-to-movement exercises. In comparison, traditional level-grade high-intensity interval training using at or near maximum intensities has long been recognized for its potent and robust effects on improving physiological indices such as V<>2max, blood lactate kinetics, and muscle buffer capacity in already well-trained distance runners (6,8,31). As a result, improvements in indices such as those just mentioned may manifest themselves during actual training and racing as both a greater time spent at or near Vc^max and a greater amount of work being completed at a high intensity (7). Improving through training the time spent at or near Vc^max or the amount of work completed at a high intensity appears crucial as the ability to sustain near maximum efforts in distance running correlates strongly with running performance in events ranging from 800 m to 10 km (3,6,39). Earlier research has revealed that when seeking to improve the running performance of well-trained distance runners, training velocities that elicit at least 90% Vo2max must be used (37,45). Whereas explosive strength training, heavy strength training, and plyometric training incorporate resistance-to-movement exercises such as weighted squat jumps, knee extensions, and single leg bounds that involve a percentage of 1 repetition maximum or body weight, at present, no recommendations exist for prescribing training intensities when performing uphill running. One possible training intensity to use in uphill running may be the running velocity associated with Vo2max, which in terms of levelgrade interval running represents a training intensity that has been the focus of many investigations. Termed Vmax, this training intensity can be determined in an incremental running test and may lead to greater improvements in Vo2max through a variety of means, including increased mitochondrial density and enhanced lactate removal (2,6,16). Bout duration represents the other main facet to interval training, and, similar to training intensity, at present, no recommendations exist for prescribing bout durations when performing uphill running. In contrast, previous investigations into level-grade interval training show both short bouts ranging 10 to 30 seconds and long bouts lasting up to 5 minutes can be effective for enhancing the physiological determinants associated with distance running performance (31,35). Regardless, similar to Vmax, 2 key considerations for interval length selection must include attempts to maximize both the time spent at Vo2max and the total work completed at a high intensity (7). Hence, pursuits to optimize these 2 criteria and to individualize interval training protocols have led to recent investigations examining the time to exhaustion while running at the velocity associated with Vo2max (21-23,49,50). This duration, defined previously as Tmax, has been shown to be highly variable among runners with the same Vmax (21) and therefore provides a physiological rationale for prescribing individualized bout durations when performing interval work. In attempts to maximize both the time spent at Vo2max and the total work completed at Vc^max, previous findings suggest that bout durations of 60% Tmax appear most effective (21,22,49,50). Because many coaches, distance runners, and industry pundits advocate uphill training as part of a comprehensive distance running training routine despite a lack of proven recommendations for training intensity, bout duration, hill grade, and evidence as to its overall physiological effectiveness, we sought to conduct an investigation comparing this mode of training with traditional level-grade highintensity interval training. Therefore, the purpose of this study included documenting, in well-trained athletes, the physiological effects associated with high-intensity interval training performed during uphill running on a 10% grade compared with level-grade running while using previously established training prescriptors for running intensity and bout duration. We hypothesized that both uphill high-intensity interval training at a 10% grade and high-intensity interval training performed on a level-grade would result in significantly improved Vc^max, velocity at lactate threshold (Vlt). velocity at Vc^max (Vmax), and time to exhaustion (Tmax) compared with a group of controls but that physiological gains from level-grade running would be more pronounced.