Eight-Week Battle Rope Training Improves Multiple Physical

Accuracy in Collegiate Basketball Players

Abstract

Basketball players must possess optimally developed physical ﬁtness in multiple dimensions and shooting accuracy. This study investigated whether battle rope (BR) training enhances multiple physical ﬁtness dimensions, including aerobic capacity (AC), upper-body anaerobic power (AnP), upper-body and lower-body power, agility, and core muscle endurance, and shooting accuracy in basketball players and compared its effects with those of regular training (shuttle run [SR]). Thirty male collegiate basketball players were randomly assigned to the BR or SR groups (n = 15 per group). Both groups received 8-week interval training for 3 sessions per week; the protocol consisted of the same number of sets, exercise time, and rest interval time. The BR group exhibited signiﬁcant improvements in AC (Progressive Aerobic Cardiovascular Endurance Run laps: 17.6%), upper-body AnP (mean power: 7.3%), upper-body power (basketball chest pass speed: 4.8%), lower-body power (jump height: 2.6%), core muscle endurance (ﬂexion: 37.0%, extension: 22.8%, and right side bridge: 23.0%), and shooting accuracy (free throw: 14.0% and dynamic shooting: 36.2%). However, the SR group exhibited improvements in only AC (12.0%) and upper-body power (3.8%) (p < 0.05). The BR group demonstrated larger pre–post improvements in upper-body AnP (fatigue index) and dynamic shooting accuracy than the SR group did (p < 0.05). The BR group showed higher post-training performance in upper-body AnP (mean power and fatigue index) than the SR group did (p <

0.05). Thus, BR training effectively improves multiple physical ﬁtness dimensions and shooting accuracy in collegiate basketball players.

Introduction

Basketball is a sport characterized by intermittent bouts of high-intensity activity (e.g., jumping, sprinting, shuffling, and changing directions) repeated over a prolonged period of time (3,44).

It involves both aerobic and anaerobic energetic processes (58). Hence, to play successfully, basketball players must possess optimally developed physical fitness in multiple dimensions, including aerobic capacity, anaerobic power, upper-body and lower-body power, agility, and core muscle endurance (2,9,10,22). In addition to a high level of physical fitness, basketball players must possess excellent techniques such as shooting, jumping, passing, and dribbling.

Shooting accuracy is one of the most important techniques that determine the successful playing of basketball (25,49). Previous studies have shown that shooting accuracy is a crucial factor distinguishing between winning and losing basketball teams (48,59). Consequently, identifying the training method that can be more effective in developing multiple physical fitness dimensions and shooting accuracy in basketball players is important.

Interval training is the most common conditioning method and the most recommended training method in basketball (54). Interval training can effectively improve both anaerobic and aerobic energy supplying systems significantly (56). Interval training has been confirmed to be an effective training method for improving aerobic capacity in basketball players (21). Shuttle run (SR) training is one of the most common interval training methods in basketball (63). It was demonstrated that SR (180° directional changes) induces an increase in metabolic, cardiorespiratory, neuromuscular and perceptual responses compared with straight-line runs and repeated sprints (4,13,16,24,26,29). The psychophysiological responses with ratings of perceived exertion are about 0.8–8.0 and blood lactate values are about 0.8–9.7 mmol·L⁻¹ increase with the time spent accelerating at each turn increased by frequency of directional change and speeds of SR at 2.50, 3.25 and 4.00 m·s⁻¹ (4). Shuttle run interval training has been demonstrated to be effective in improving oxidative capacity and reducing lactate accumulation

in young basketball players (63). However, this type of running training is designed to primarily train the lower-body (leg) musculature (45), and it does not train the total-body musculature such as the trunk/core and upper-body musculature effectively. Moreover, depending on the speed and landing geometry, running causes impact forces that vary in magnitude, from approximately 1.5–5 times body weight, and last for a very brief period (<30 ms) (30). Thus, running training may be not the optimal method to enhance multiple physical fitness dimensions and total-body muscle capacity in basketball players, particularly players with lower extremity injury or a high risk of injury.

Battle rope (BR) interval training is a low-impact, total-body, and intense metabolic modality (17,27,53). In recent years, its popularity has increased in various populations, from general health and fitness trainees to professional athletes (52). This exercise involves total-body muscle activity; the muscle activity for anterior deltoid, external oblique, and lumbar erector spinae (double-arm waves and alternating waves) ranges from 51% maximum voluntary isometric contractions (MVIC) to 73% MVIC, whereas gluteus medius muscle activity is 14%–

18% MVIC (17). Battle rope exercise commonly uses ropes of 12–15 m in length, 3–5 cm in diameter, and 9–16 kg in weight (27,35,41) and is normally performed at maximal speed during a given time, allowing a high number of repetitions and resulting in a vigorous cardiovascular workout (27,52,53). The acute cardiovascular stimulus provided by BR exercise is even greater than that provided by traditional resistance exercises (with a load of 75% of 1-repetition maximum) (52). Battle rope training improves multiple physical fitness dimensions and total-body muscle capacity, including aerobic capacity (8,35), muscular endurance (upper-total-body and trunk) (41), and power (lower-body) (8). It may be a highly effective method by which basketball players can enhance multiple aspects of physical fitness (aerobic, upper-body anaerobic power, upper- and lower-body power, agility, and core muscle capacity) and shooting accuracy. Therefore, this study explored the effects of BR interval training on multiple physical

fitness dimensions and on shooting accuracy in elite college basketball players and compared these effects with those of regular training (SR, interval training).

Methods

Experimental Approach to the Problem

A pre–post-test equivalent-group design was used to compare the enhancements made by BR and SR to multiple physical fitness dimensions and shooting accuracy in elite college basketball players over 8 weeks. All subjects were well-trained Division-I basketball players; they were randomly assigned to the BR and SR groups. Both groups received 3 sessions of interval training each week for 8 weeks; the protocol consisted of the same numbers of sets, exercise intervals, and rest intervals. The independent variables were BR training and SR training, and the dependent variables were aerobic capacity, upper-body anaerobic power, upper-body power, lower-body power, agility, core endurance, and shooting accuracy.

Subjects

Thirty male well-trained Division-I basketball players (age range: 18–25 years; basketball training: 6.7 ± 3.8 years) who had not sustained neuromuscular injury in the prior 6 months participated in this study. They routinely engaged in 3-hour basketball training sessions 3 times per week (Table 2-1) and in 1.5-hour resistance training sessions 2 times per week. Each resistance training session consisted of 4 sets of 6 exercises involving the upper limbs, trunk and lower limb muscles using a load of 6-10 repetition maximum. All subjects were recruited from the same university and had no BR training experience before the study. Each subject was randomly assigned either to the BR group (n = 15; age: 21.1 ± 1.7 years; height: 179.6 ± 9.6 cm; body mass: 79.2 ± 14.2 kg) or to the SR group (n = 15; age: 20.6 ± 1.8 years; height: 183.6

± 9.0 cm; body mass: 82.4 ± 14.7 kg). Thus, an identical training program and the same work ﬂow were applied to all subjects. This experiment was conducted during the off-season to prevent the other factors (e.g., training, injury, competition) from contributing to training effects.

All subjects were instructed to maintain their normal diet habits and team’s regular basketball and resistance training throughout the investigation period. The experimental procedures used

in this study were approved by the Institutional Review Board of University of Taipei in Taiwan.

All subjects were informed of the experimental risks and signed an informed consent form before participating in this study.

Table 2-1. Regular basketball training.

Week 1–2

Monday, Wednesday, Friday

Dribble: crossover, between-the-legs, behind-the-back, spin move, and inside-out.

Shoot off the dribble: crossover, between-the-legs, behind-the-back, spin move, and inside-out.

Two-player sliding pass: chest pass, bounce pass, one-hand pass with one- and 2-ball.

Three-player moving pass: chest pass, bounce pass, and one-hand pass.

Week 3–4

Monday, Wednesday, Friday

Individual defense: sliding, sideways running, slide-run-slide, over play, and deny and stop the ball.

Two-, 3-, and 4-player fast break Two- and 3-player group cooperation

Team offense drills–offensive move to attack man to man defense Week 5

Monday, Wednesday, Friday

Two- and 3-player man to man defense–strong and weak side help and recover concept Five-player fast break

3 on 2 and 2 on 1

Half-court 3-player group offensive and defensive drills

Team offense drills–offensive move to attack man to man defense Week 6

Monday, Wednesday, Friday

Four- and 5-player man to man defense–strong and weak side help and recover concept Five-player fast break

3 on 2 and 2 on 1

Full-court 3-player and 4-player group offensive and defensive drills Team offense drills–offensive move to attack man to man defense Week 7

Monday, Wednesday, Friday

Half-court zone defense: 2-3, 3-2, 1-1-3, and 1-3-1.

Full-court 4 and 6 cones layup Three-, 4-, and 5-player fast break

Team offense drills–offensive move to attack zone defense Week 8

Monday, Wednesday, Friday

Half-court zone defense: 2-3, 3-2, 1-1-3, and 1-3-1.

Full-court zone defense (double-team): 2-2-1 and 1-2-1-1.

Full-court 5-ball layup

Three-, 4-, and 5-player fast break

Team offense drills–offensive move to attack zone defense

Battle Rope Training Protocol

Battle rope training commonly uses ropes of 12–15 m in length, 3–5 cm in diameter, and 9–16 kg in weight (27,35,41), and set durations usually range from 15 to 30 seconds, with rest intervals of 15 seconds to 2 minutes (27,52,53). In this study, the BRs used had a length of 15 m, diameter of 4 cm, and mass of 18 kg. Battle rope training involved 8 weeks of interval training for 3 sessions per week. The protocol for the 1st week and the second week consisted of 30 minutes of exercise at a work-to-rest ratio of 1:3 (15-second exercise; 45-second rest), totaling 30 sets; the protocol from the third week to the fifth week consisted of 30 minutes of exercise at a work-to-rest ratio of 1:2 (20-second exercise; 40-second rest), totaling 30 sets; the protocol from the sixth to the eighth week consisted of 36 minutes of exercise at a work-to-rest ratio of 1:2 (20-second exercise; 40-second rest), totaling 36 sets (Table 2-2). Battle rope training consisted of 6 BR exercises, with one type exercise performed in each set. The 6 BR exercises were performed in a circuit format: (a) double-arm waves, (b) side-to-side waves, (c) alternating waves, (d) in-out waves, (e) hip toss, and (f) double-arm slams (Table 2-3). The 6 exercise circuit was completed 5 times for the first week to the fifth week, and 6 times from the sixth to the eighth week. Before training, subjects took part in a familiarization session to familiarize with the 6 BR exercises by using BRs that be used during training, movement amplitude, and body position. Subjects practiced the exercises until the researcher was satisﬁed that the proper form was achieved. To maintain rope oscillations, subjects performed each repetition as rapidly as possible.

Shuttle Run Training Protocol

The SR group received 8 weeks of SR interval training for 3 sessions per week; the protocol consisted of the same numbers of sets, exercise intervals, and rest intervals as those of BR training protocol (Table 2-2). The difference between the BR and SR training protocols was that in SR training, each subject ran a 15-m distance with a 180° change in direction at an

*BR = battle rope group; SR = shuttle run group.

Table 2-3. Battle rope training exercises.

Battle rope exercise

Each exercise: athletic position, feet shoulder width apart, and shoulders retracted, with good posture.

Exercise 1: double arm waves Subject waves ropes up (shoulder level) and down synchronously Exercise 2: side to side waves Subject waves ropes in side to side transverse motion to create S waves Exercise 3: alternating waves Subject waves ropes up (shoulder level) and down, alternating arms Exercise 4: in-out waves Subject waves ropes in and out transverse motion like clapping hands Exercise 5: hip toss Begin with both hands placed next to one hip, quickly pivot hips while

simultaneously swinging arms up and over to the opposite side. Repeat.

Exercise 6: double-arm slams Subject waves ropes up (overhead) and forcefully slam the rope down to the floor to create big waves

To confirm the intensity of BR and SR training, this study measured the heart rate of 12 subjects (n = 6 per group) selected by random sampling during 30 minutes training from the third week to the fifth week. The heart rate was measured by Polar RS800 monitor (Polar Electro Oy; Kempele, Finland). The result of independent t-test showed that there were no signiﬁcant differences in average and peak heart rate between BR and SR training (p < 0.05).

The average heart rate of BR and SR training was 144.8 ± 5.7 and 145.3 ± 6.4, respectively.

The peak heart rate of BR and SR training was 169.8 ± 6.1 and 166.3 ± 6.4, respectively.

Procedures

For all tests, the same procedure was applied before and after training. All tests were performed in the afternoon of 2 different days. On day 1, upper-body power, lower-body power, agility, core endurance, and upper-body anaerobic power were tested. After 48 hours, shooting accuracy and aerobic capacity were tested on day 2. Post-tests were performed at intervals of 2 days after training. Before the measurements, all subjects performed standardized warm-up activities including ankle pops, running forwards and backwards, carioca, lateral slide step, Frankenstein, Frankenstein to Romanian Deadlift, running hip out and hip in, walking knee to chest, hip stretch with a twist, reverse lunge with twist, butt kicks, quad walk, inchworm, and t-push-ups.

The test-retest reliability of all the dependent variables was assessed using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Because the intensity of aerobic capacity, upper-body anaerobic power and core endurance tests was very rigorous, these 3 tests were only executed 1 time in 1 day to avoid fatigue effect. Accordingly, the test-retest reliability of the 3 variables was reported by the ICC between day test sessions. On the other hand, the test-retest reliability of the other variables was reported by the ICC within day sessions.

Aerobic Capacity Test

The Progressive Aerobic Cardiovascular Endurance Run (PACER) test was used to measure aerobic capacity (32,62). In this test, subjects ran for as long as possible back and forth across a 20-m distance at a specified cadence, which increased each minute. The test was terminated when a subject failed to reach the appropriate marker twice in the allotted time or could no longer maintain the pace. The number of laps completed was recorded. In the present study, the between-day ICC of the PACER test was 0.877.

Upper-Body Anaerobic Power Test

The 30-second Wingate anaerobic test was used to measure anaerobic performance (37). In the present study, the upper-body Wingate anaerobic test was conducted using an arm ergometer (Ergomedic 891E; Monark Exercise AB, Vansbro, Sweden). Subjects sat in a chair (fixed to the ground), kept their feet flat on the ground, and remained seated throughout the Wingate anaerobic test. The arm ergometer height was adjusted so that the crank was positioned on the opposite side of the body, and during the grasping of the handles, the elbow joint was almost in full extension (165°–175°) and the shoulder was in line with the center of the ergometer’s shaft.

During the 5-minute warm-up period, 2–3-second flat-out sprints were performed at the beginning of the fourth minute of warm-up. Tests were started 5 minutes after the end of the warm-up period. The Wingate anaerobic test consisted of exercise performed at maximal power for 30 seconds, with an external resistance corresponding to 62 g kg⁻¹ body mass (11). The test on the arm ergometer began without external resistance, which was added immediately after the test was initiated. Values at 5-second intervals were recorded and were used to calculate peak power (PP) in the initial 5-second period, mean power (MP) for 30 seconds, and fatigue index = (PP − Minimal power) / PP × 100%. The between-day ICC values for PP, MP, and fatigue index were 0.928, 0.865, and 0.607, respectively.

Upper-Body Power Test

The basketball chest pass technique was chosen in this study because it is the most convenient assessment of players’ upper-body power during practice sessions (23). In addition, it has been applied in recent studies comparing different basketball playing positions (23). Subjects sat with their heads, backs, and buttocks against a wall. Their legs were resting straight horizontally on the ﬂoor in front of their bodies, with their feet at shoulder width. Through a 2-handed chest pass, they pushed a basketball in the horizontal direction as far as possible. The ball pass speed was measured using a self-developed infrared grating. The infrared grating consisted of 2 gratings separated by 20 cm. The 2 gratings were placed in front of the subject, and the first grating was 10 cm from the subject’s heel. The players performed 2 trials to become familiar with the gratings. Subsequently, 5 trials were performed, and the upper-body power in the best of 3 trials was averaged. A new basketball was used in this test. The within-day ICC for upper-body power was 0.890.

Lower-Body Power Test

Subjects performed counter movement jumps (CMJs) on a force plate (Kistler 9260AA; Kistler Instrument Corp., Winterthur, Switzerland) at a sampling rate of 1,000 Hz. Subjects completed 3 trials in total. The vertical jump height was calculated from the flight time, as follows: jump height = (g × flight time × flight time)/8 (18), where g is the acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m·s⁻²). The average jump height of 3 trials was used for analysis. The within-day ICC for CMJ was 0.965.

Agility Test

The T-test was used to measure agility in this study because it uses most of the basic movements performed during a game (23). In this test, 4 cones were arranged in a T shape, with a cone placed 9.14 m from the starting cone and 2 more cones placed 4.57 m on either side of the second cone (43). From the starting line, each subject sprinted 9.14 m forward to the first cone and touched the tip with his right hand. Subsequently, he shuffled 4.57 m left to the second cone and touched the tip with his left hand. He then shuffled 9.14 m right to the third cone and touched the tip with his right hand and shuffled 4.57 m left back to the middle cone and touched with the tip his left hand before finally backpedaling to the starting line (23). The times taken for this test were recorded using an electronic timing gate (Smart Speed; Fusion Sport, Queensland, Australia), with a height of 1.2 and a width of 3 m in line with the marked starting point. Subjects completed 3 trials in total. The average time (seconds) across the 3 trials was determined for each subject. The within-day ICC for the T-test was 0.871.

Core Endurance Test

Following the protocols established by Waldhelm and Li (60), core endurance tests were performed. The core endurance tests provided the most reliable core stability-related measurements and comparisons of strength, flexibility, motor control, and function, with an ICC of 0.66–0.96 (60). Core endurance tests consisted of the trunk ﬂexor, trunk extensor, and bilateral side bridge tests. All tests were terminated when the subject could no longer hold the position, and the times taken for the tests were recorded. The between-day ICC values for trunk ﬂexor, trunk extensor, right side bridge, and left side bridge were 0.821, 0.672, 0.649, and 0.789, respectively.

Stationary Free Throw Shooting Test

The stationary free throw shooting test was a modification of a previous protocol (47). In the modified test, all subjects performed one practice series of 10 free throw shots using same ball and rim as formal series, and then 2 formal series of 10 free throw shots, with a 3-minute rest period between the series. Two rebounders caught all shots made and passed the ball to a passer.

The passer always passed the ball to the testee. The average field goal percentage of the 2 trials was used for analysis. The within-day ICC for free throw shooting was 0.848.

Dynamic Shooting Test

A dynamic shooting test was chosen in this study because it is a more favorable determinant of shooting accuracy during the season than a stationary test is (47). This test was a modification of a previous protocol (47). The testee starting position was after cone 1 (Figure 2-1). After the

在文檔中 Effects of battle rope training on performance in collegiate basketball players (頁 12-35)