Experience, Training Preferences, and Fighting Style Are Differentially Related to Measures of Body Composition, Strength, and Power in Male Brazilian Jiu Jitsu Athletes-A Pilot Study.

To examine relationships between Brazilian Jiu Jitsu (BJJ) descriptors (belt rank, experience, gi preference, and fighting style), resistance training (RT) experience, and measures of body composition, strength (maximal handgrip, 3-5-repetition maximum [RM] in barbell glute bridge [GB], prone bench row [PBR], and bench press [BP]), and velocity (GB, PBR, and BP at 7 kg and 30−60% 1-RM), 13 experienced (4.3 ± 3.4 years) BJJ athletes were recruited for this cross-sectional, pilot study. Significant (p < 0.05) Kendall's tau and Bayesian relationships were seen between belt rank and body fat percentage (τ = −0.53, BF10 = 6.5), BJJ experience and body fat percentage (τ = −0.44 to −0.66, BF10 = 2.6−30.8) and GB velocity (τ = −0.45 to −0.46, BF10 = 2.8−3.1), RT experience and strength (τ = 0.44 to 0.73, BF10 = 2.6−75.1) and velocity (τ = −0.44 to 0.47, BF10 = 2.6−3.3), gi preference-training and relative PBR strength (τ = 0.70, BF10 = 51.9), gi preference-competition and height and lean mass (τ = −0.57 to 0.67, BF10 = 5.3−12.4) and BP velocity (τ = −0.52 to 0.67, BF10 = 3.5−14.0). The relevance of body composition and performance measures to sport-specific training and research interpretation are differentially affected by a BJJ athlete's experience (BJJ, belt rank, RT), gi preferences, and fighting style.

Physiological differences between advanced CrossFit athletes, recreational CrossFit participants, and physically-active adults.

This investigation examined anthropometric, hormonal, and physiological differences between advanced (ADV; n = 8, 27.8 ± 4.2 years, 170 ± 11 cm, 79.8 ± 13.3 kg) and recreational (REC; n = 8, 33.5 ± 8.1 years, 172 ± 14 cm, 76.3 ± 19.5 kg) CrossFit (CF) trained participants in comparison to physically-active controls (CON; n = 7, 27.5 ± 6.7 years, 171 ± 14 cm, 74.5 ± 14.3 kg). ADV and REC were distinguished by their past competitive success. REC and CON were resistance-trained (>2 years) and exercised on 3-5 days·wk-1 for the past year, but CON utilized traditional resistance and cardiovascular exercise. All participants provided a fasted, resting blood sample and completed assessments of resting metabolic rate, body composition, muscle morphology, isometric mid-thigh pull strength, peak aerobic capacity, and a 3-minute maximal cycle ergometer sprint across two separate occasions (separated by 3-7 days). Blood samples were analyzed for testosterone, cortisol, and insulin-like growth factor-1. Compared to both REC and CON, one-way analysis of variance revealed ADV to possess lower body fat percentage (6.7-8.3%, p = 0.007), greater bone and non-bone lean mass (12.5-26.8%, p ≤ 0.028), muscle morphology characteristics (14.2-59.9%, p < 0.05), isometric strength characteristics (15.4-41.8%, p < 0.05), peak aerobic capacity (18.8-19.1%, p = 0.002), and 3-minute cycling performance (15.4-51.1%, p ≤ 0.023). No differences were seen between REC and CON, or between all groups for resting metabolic rate or hormone concentrations. These data suggest ADV possess several physiological advantages over REC and CON, whereas similar physiological characteristics were present in individuals who have been regularly participating in either CF or resistance and cardiovascular training for the past year.