Influence of Postactivation Potentiation on Shot Put Performance of Collegiate Throwers.

The purpose of this investigation was to determine the acute effects of heavy and light implements on subsequent overhead back (OHB) shot put performance with a competition weight shot put. This investigation was designed to test the efficacy of heavy implements for potentiating subsequent OHB performance. Participants included 41 athletes (20.9 ± 1.18 years.) from 2 National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I schools in the Midwestern United States (n = 23 male and n = 18 female). Mean distance for OHB throw with a competition shot put was examined after treatment (control, light shot put warm-up, and heavy shot put warm-up) through repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) with post hoc Bonferroni-corrected post hoc analysis. Responses after treatment on the 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS) fatigue were examined through repeated-measures ANOVA and demonstrated a significant main effect for treatment on VAS fatigue (F = 16.463; p = 0.001). The heavy shot put warm-up resulted in the greatest mean performance over the course of the 3 attempts (14.39 ± 1.82 m) followed by the light shot put warm-up (14.18 ± 1.68 m) and the control (14.15 ± 1.70 m). Results of the repeated-measures ANOVA demonstrated a significant main effect for treatment in regard to average distance (F = 6.276; p = 0.003). Post hoc testing suggested that the heavy shot put warm-up resulted in significantly better mean OHB performance than either the light shot put warm-up (t = 2.983; p = 0.0048; ES = 0.472; power = 0.901) or the control shot put warm-up (t = 3.349; p = 0.0018; effect size [ES] = 0.513; power = 0.939). Subsequent analysis examined the relationship between reported fatigue accrued during the overweight shot put warm-up and the change in performance on the OHB throw when compared to the control condition. Analysis revealed that subjects who reported higher levels of VAS fatigue did not perform as well after the overweight treatment (p = 0.0274).

The current state of NCAA Division I collegiate strength facilities: size, equipment, budget, staffing, and football status.

Strength and conditioning training programs are essential components of athletic performance, and the effectiveness of these programs can be linked to the strength and conditioning facilities (SCFs) used by athletes. The primary purpose of this study was to provide a statistical overview of National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division I SCFs, equipment and maintenance budget, and the relationship between SCF budget and staffing space, and equipment. The secondary purpose was to note differences in SCFs between those schools with and without football programs. An 84-item online survey instrument, developed with expert input from certified strength professionals, was used to collect data regarding the SCFs in NCAA Division I universities. A total of 110 valid and complete surveys were returned for a response rate of 38.6%. Results of Pearson's χ2 analysis demonstrated that the larger reported annual equipment budgets were associated with larger SCFs (χ2 = 451.4, p ≤ 0.001), greater maximum safe capacity of athletes using the facility (χ2 = 366.9, p ≤ 0.001), increased numbers of full-time coaches (χ2 = 224.2, p ≤ 0.001), and increased number of graduate assistant or intern coaches (χ2 = 102.9, p ≤ 0.001). Based on these data, it can be suggested to athletic administrators and strength and conditioning professionals at the collegiate level that budgets need to be re-evaluated as the number of personnel available to monitor student-athletes and the size and safe capacity of the facility are related to the ability of the strength and conditioning staff to safely and adequately perform their duties.

CSCS certification and school enrollment impacts upon high school strength facilities, equipment, and safety.

The rapid growth and expanding use of high school strength and conditioning facilities (SCFs) creates a need to research and better understand these vital facilities. This study was designed to examine SCFs at the high school level including facility size, equipment, leadership/staffing, and safety. A 70-item online survey instrument, developed with expert input from certified strength professionals, was used to collect data regarding the SCFs in high schools throughout a midwestern state, and was distributed via email to a total of 390 high school athletic directors. Survey respondents (n = 108) all reported the presence of SCFs with 95.4% indicating a dedicated SCF space. A strong positive correlation (r = 0.610, p ≤ 0.001) was determined between the variables of SCF size in square feet and school size measured by total enrollment. Analysis of variance and χ² analyses revealed significant differences in equipment, facility size, and safety factors based on the categorical variables of school size and the presence of certified strength and conditioning specialist (CSCS) leadership. It appears the CSCS's application of their scientific knowledge goes beyond training athletes for the goal of improving athletic performance to actually influence the SCF itself. Athletic administrators at the high school level need to recognize the impact CSCS program leadership can have on the overall quality of the strength and conditioning program and facility.

An examination of preactivity and postactivity stretching practices of NCAA division I, NCAA division II, and NCAA division III track and field throws programs.

The purpose of this study is to determine the pre- and postactivity stretching practices of Division I, II, and III track and field throws programs. A 33-item survey instrument was developed to collect data regarding the warm-up and flexibility practices at the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division I (n = 320), Division II (n = 175), and Division III (n = 275) universities. A total of 135 surveys were completed for a 17.5% return rate, and although the response rate was generally low, it did mirror the distribution percentages of the 3 divisions. Significant differences were found for the level of United States Track and Field (USATF) certification and the use of static stretching (SS) between throws (χ = 6.333, p = 0.048). Significance was also found for the USATF certification level and athletic trainer (AT) assistance in performing SS (χ = 13.598, p = 0.01). Significant differences were also found for the NCAA division levels and the use of soft tissue mobilization (χ = 5.913, p = 0.026). Although research supports dynamic warm-up/stretching over other forms of preactivity protocols, it seems that some track-and-field throws coaches are reluctant to completely discontinue preactivity SS. The results of this study suggest that it is necessary for track and field throws coaches to reevaluate their own practices, perhaps better aligning them with current research findings.