Optimal elastic cord assistance for sprinting in collegiate women soccer players.

Overspeed exercises are commonly integrated into a training program to help athletes perform at a speed greater than what they are accustomed to when unassisted. However, the optimal assistance for maximal sprinting has not been determined. The purpose of this study was to determine the optimal elastic cord assistance for sprinting performance. Eighteen collegiate women soccer players completed 3 testing sessions, which consisted of a 5-minute warm-up, followed by 5 randomized experimental conditions of 0, 10, 20, 30, and 40% body weight assistance (BWA). In all BWA sessions, subjects wore a belt while attached to 2 elastic cords and performed 2 maximal sprints under each condition. Five minutes of rest was given between each sprint attempt and between conditions. Split times (0-5, 5-10, 10-15, 15-20, and 0-20 yd) for each condition were used for analysis. Results for 0-20 yd demonstrated a significant main effect for condition. Post hoc comparisons revealed that as BWA increased, sprint times decreased up to 30% BWA (0%: 3.20 ± 0.12 seconds; 10%: 3.07 ± 0.09 seconds; 20%: 2.96 ± 0.07 seconds; 30%: 2.81 ± 0.08 seconds; 40%: 2.77 ± 0.10 seconds); there was no difference between 30 and 40% BWA. There was also a main effect for condition when examining split times. Post hoc comparisons revealed that as BWA increased, sprint times decreased up to 30% BWA for distances up to 15 yd. These results demonstrate that 30% of BWA with elastic cords appears optimal in decreasing sprint times in collegiate women soccer players for distances up to 15 yd.

Validity of field expedient devices to assess core temperature during exercise in the cold.

INTRODUCTION: Exposure to cold environments affects human performance and physiological function. Major medical organizations recommend rectal temperature (TREC) to evaluate core body temperature (TcORE) during exercise in the cold; however, other field expedient devices claim to measure TCORE. The purpose of this study was to determine if field expedient devices provide valid measures of TcRE during rest and exercise in the cold. METHODS: Participants included 13 men and 12 women (age = 24 +/- 3 yr, height = 170.7 +/- 10.6 cm, mass = 73.4 +/- 16.7 kg, body fat = 18 +/- 7%) who reported being healthy and at least recreationally active. During 150 min of cold exposure, subjects sequentially rested for 30 min, cycled for 90 min (heart rate = 120-140 bpm), and rested for an additional 30 min. Investigators compared aural (T(AUR)), expensive axillary (T(AXLe)), inexpensive axillary (T(AXLi)), forehead (T(FOR)), gastrointestinal (T(GI)), expensive oral (T(ORLe)), inexpensive oral (T(ORLi)), and temporal (T(TEM)) temperatures to T(REc) every 15 min. Researchers used mean difference between each device and T(REC) (i.e., mean bias) as the primary criterion for validity. RESULTS: T(AUR), T(AXLe), T(AXLi), T(FOR), TORLe, T(ORLi), and TTEM provided significantly lower measures compared to T(REC) and fell below our validity criterion. T(GI) significantly exceeded T(REC) at three of eleven time points, but no significant difference existed between mean T(REC) and T(GI) across time. Only T(GI) achieved our validity criterion and compared favorably to T(REC). CONCLUSION: T(GI) offers a valid measurement with which to assess T(CORE) during rest and exercise in the cold; athletic trainers, mountain rescuers, and military medical personnel should avoid other field expedient devices in similar conditions.