NAME: SAM KENNEDY
UNIVERSITY NUMBER: ST08003615
SCHOOL OF SPORT
UNIVERSITY OF WALES INSTITUTE, CARDIFF
THE EFFECTS OF MAXIMAL BACK SQUAT STRENGTH SPORT SPECIFIC
AGILITY IN FEMALE BASKETBALL PLAYERS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page Numbers
List of Figures
List of Tables
Abstract
i
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Squat and Sports Performance
1
1.2 Definition of Agility
2
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Conditioning and Athleticism in Basketball
3
2.2 The Squat as a Training Modality
4
2.3 Athletic Movements versus the Squat
7
2.4 Court Speed and Agility
9
2.5 Aims of Research
13
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Experimental Approach to the Problem
14
3.2 Subjects
14
3.3 Experimental Procedures
15
3.3.1 Ten yard Sprint test
16
3.3.2 The Pro Agility Test (20 yard shuttle)
18
3.3.3 The Agility T-test
19
3.3.4 Countermovement Jump (CMJ)
21
3.3.5 Back Squat 3RM Test
22
3.3.5.1 Defining the Back Squat
22
3.3.5.2 Testing Procedure
22
3.3.6 Data Analysis
23
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS
4.1 Squat 3RM and Relative Squat versus Pro Agility
24
4.2 Squat 3RM and Relative Squat versus Agility T-test
25
4.3 Squat 3RM and Relative Squat versus 10 Yard Sprint
26
4.4 Squat 3RM and Relative Squat versus Vertical Jump
27
4.5 Bivariate Correlations between Vertical Jump,
Agility Tests and 10 Yard Sprint
28
4.6 Comparing the Means of Division 1 and Division 2 players
29
CHAPTER FIVE
DISCUSSION
5.1 Aim of Research
33
5.2 Main Findings
33
5.3 Division 1 and Division 2 Differences
33
5.4 Addressing Research Question and Appropriate Literature
36
5.5 Interpretation of Results and Implications
for Basketball Performance
37
CHAPTER SIX
CONCULSION
6.1 Conclusion of Findings
40
6.2 Limitations of Research
40
CHAPTER SEVEN
REFERENCES
42
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire
APPENDIX B: Participant Information Sheet
APPENDIX C: Informed Consent Form
List of Figures
Figure Number
1
Title
The basketball quick stance (Krause, Meyer and Meyer,
Page
5
1999).
2
Triple Extension in Sprinting (Epley, 2004).
7
3
Extension in the Back Squat (NSCA, 2008).
8
4
The Agility T-Test (Baechle and Earle, 2008).
11
5
The Pro Agility Test (Baechle and Earle, 2008).
12
6
The 10 Yard Sprint setup in NIAC.
16
7
Dimensions for the 10 Yard Sprint.
17
8
Athletic Stance.
17
9
Split Stance.
17
10
The Pro Agility setup in NIAC.
19
11
The Agility T-Test setup in NIAC.
20
12
Full Squat Depth, Hip axis lower than the knee axis
22
(Newton, 2006).
13
3RM Back Squat and Pro Agility Times.
24
14
Back Squat relative to bodyweight and 10 yard sprint
24
times.
15
3RM Back Squat and Agility T-test Times.
25
16
Back Squat relative to body weight and Agility T-test.
25
17
3RM Back Squat and 10 yard Sprint times.
26
18
Back Squat relative to bodyweight and 10 yard Sprint
26
times.
19
3RM Back Squat and Vertical Jump Height.
27
20
Back Squat relative to body weight and Vertical Jump
27
Height.
21
Comparison of mean 10 yard sprint time between
29
Division 1 and Division 2 Players.
22
Comparison of mean Pro Agility scores between
30
Division 1 and Division 2 Players.
23
Comparison of mean Agility T-test scores between
Division 1 and Division 2 Players
30
24
Comparison of mean Vertical Jump Height between
31
Division 1 and Division 2 Players.
25
Comparison of mean Squat 3RM between Division 1
32
and Division 2 Players.
26
Comparison of mean back Squat relative to bodyweight
between Division 1 and Division 2 Players.
32
List of Tables
Table Number
Title
Page
1
R.A.M.P Warm Up Activities.
16
2
Pro Agility Procedure.
18
3
Agility T-test procedure
20
4
Procedure for Countermovement Jump with no Arm
21
movement.
5
Bivariate Correlations between Further Variables
28
Abstract
The aim of the study was to investigate the effects of increased back squat 3RM
strength on performance in agility tests mimicking basketball movement patterns.
Countermovement jump (CMJ) was also compared to agility with the view of
determining which exercise is a more appropriate indicator basketball conditioning
programs.
Fourteen female basketball players participated in the study.
All
participants currently compete for the Archers club based at the University of Wales
Institute Cardiff (UWIC) in either EBL Division 1 or EBL Division 2. Squat 3 repetition
maximum (3RM) was assessed using a free-weight high bar back squat to a depth
where the hip axis was below the knee axis. Agility was assessed through the Pro
agility (20 yard shuttle) and T-test protocols using the Fusion sport Smartspeed
timing system (Brisbane, Australia). Countermovement jump (CMJ) with no arm
movement was assessed using a contact mat. 10 yard sprint was also assessed.
Insignificant correlations were observed between squat 3RM (relative to bodyweight)
and agility.
The CMJ demonstrates more significant correlations with agility
performance whilst the 10 yard sprint was better correlated with squat strength.
Subjects with lower times in the 10 yard sprint tended to have significantly lower
times in the Agility T-test. Suggested is how Squat strength is inappropriate as an
indicator when training for basketball agility. CMJ may be a better indicator and
possible training modality for improving these capabilities. The use of squat type
movements in conjunction with explosive movements like the CMJ is suggested but
further longitudinal research is required to determine the effectiveness of each
exercise as a modality.
i
CHAPTER 1:
INTRODUCTION
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Squat and Sports Performance
In the sports conditioning environment the squat stands out as a core exercise
featured in a huge number of programs for a variety of sports (Arthur and Bailey,
1998; Boyle, 2004; Grover, 2002; Newton, 2006). If an athlete participates in any
kind of games sport, athletics event or almost any other type of sport it is almost
certain that a squat derivative will be a core part of their training program.
Studies investigating the link between maximal weight lifted in the squat exercise
with desirable performance in sports specific tests are common place in sports
science (Blow, Dayne, Haines, Kirby, McBride and Triplett, 2009; Castagna,
Helgurud, Hoff, Jones, and Wisloff, 2004). Various studies investigating the link
between squat strength and speed or squat strength and vertical jump have
contributed to the general consensus that the squat exercise is critical to sports
conditioning programs (Baechle and Earle, 2008; Newton; 2006; Epley, 2004;
Groves, 2000). Due to this the squat has become generally accepted as the base
exercise for strength and conditioning programs.
Far less literature is available
comparing squat strength to a subject’s agility. Basketball performance, as well as a
number of other game sports, relies much more on the player’s levels of agility than
absolute speed and research in this area will have an application to conditioning in
these sports (England Basketball, 2006; Foran and Pound, 2007). A player who can
achieve rapid changes of direction, come to a stop fast and accelerate explosively
will be much more effective on the court than a player with a very high absolute
speed level. Literature in this area is limited further by the ambiguity of agility with a
1
variety of definitions being suggested. This creates difficulties in comparisons due to
the difference in what each study is actually investigating or aims to investigate.
1.2 Definition of Agility
Basketball as a sport places great demand on the agility capabilities of players.
Competitive players must be able to accelerate and decelerate quickly, react and
change directions at any number of angles all whilst utilising sports specific skills like
passing, dribbling or defence related movements (Sevim and Suveren, 2010;
Sigmon, 2003).
Inability to meet these demands will prevent any athlete from
competing at both the defensive and offensive ends of the court. It was critical to
research to select an agility definition which is appropriate to the abilities basketball
players wish to achieve.
Within the sports science community no agreement had been made on a precise
definition for agility (Sheppard and Young, 2006).
Sheppard and Young (2006)
suggest, “a rapid whole-body movement with change of velocity or direction in
response to a stimulus” (p. 919). This definition encompasses the acceleration and
deceleration factors of agility combined with the changes in direction and is ideal for
agility in basketball and a number of other game sports.
2
CHAPTER 2:
LITERATURE
REVIEW
Chapter 2: Literature Review
2.1 Conditioning and Athleticism in Basketball
Basketball is highly demanding on the athlete with elite performers expected to excel
in a variety of fitness components.
In the USA, high school, college and draft
combine players looking to enter professional basketball are regularly tested in lower
body power, agility, acceleration/speed, upper body strength and flexibility (Foran
and Pound, 2007). Players who excel in these areas are expected to excel on the
court and generate the most interest from coaches, scouts and team staff.
These tests are considered such an important part of player analysis as overall
athleticism and conditioning play such a huge role in basketball performance. The
physiological demands of the sport are high with an estimated 85% of the demand
falling under anaerobic (Foran and Pound, 2007). Competitive players spend around
34.1% of their court-time performing intense running and jumping type activity whilst
65.8% is spent walking or standing (Narazaki, Berg, Stergiou and Chen, 2009). The
nature of the sport calls for athletes who have full body quickness allowing them to
move rapidly in any direction (Krause, Meyer and Meyer, 1999; Wissel, 2004).
Players engage in repeated high intensity efforts over a short duration characterised
by rapid bursts of speed with frequent stops and starts using both lateral and forward
movements (Rose, 2004). Movement patterns include sprints, back pedals, lateral
slides and jumping explosively whilst utilising dynamic movements such as dribbling,
rebounding, shooting and passing (Sevim and Suveren, 2010). When accompanied
with appropriate skills training and coaching a basketball team with great athleticism
and conditioning can effectively run their opponents off the court. The knowledge of
this means players are constantly becoming bigger, faster and stronger as more and
3
more individuals and clubs commit increasing amounts of time to enhancing their
athleticism (Krause, 1998; Foran and Pound, 2007).
2.2 The Squat as a Training Modality
The back squat and other squat derivatives are widely considered cornerstone
exercises for strength development targeting musculature crucial to athletic
performance (Groves, 2000; Boyle, 2004). The emphasis on the Squat as a training
modality for athletic development is evident in a variety of basketball and sport
specific literature. On behalf of the National Basketball Conditioning Coaches
association (NBCCA) Foran and Pound (2007) specifically suggest the back squat
as a key training exercise. Similarly, Baechle and Earle (2008) identify squats as a
key exercise for developing an athlete’s hip and thigh muscles. Groves (2000)
describes how the squat increases neuromuscular efficiency and has an excellent
transfer to jumping type movements and sports, suggesting great basketball
specificity. The exercise is described by Newton (2006, p.122) as, “The foundation
for not only weightlifting, but also every functional athletic movement in sport today.”
Finally, Grover (2002) discusses the implementation of the back squat and other
derivatives in enhancing the vertical jump capabilities of athletes.
Further support for the squat as a training modality is found in a number studies
correlating maximal squat strength with performance in athletic tests. Castagna et al
(2004) found a strong positive correlation between maximal half squat strength and
sprint performance over ten, twenty and thirty metre distances. The study was
focused on elite soccer players, also correlating increased squat strength with
increased jumping performance. Significant however is how a ‘full’ parallel squat
was not used in the study (Baechle and Earle, 2008; Groves, 2000). Squat depth
4
can affect results greatly as deeper ranges are often less frequently trained so lack
muscular strength or co-ordination (Domire and Challis, 2007). Muscle activation
also differs greatly between shallower and deep squats with much more of the glutes
and hamstring muscle groups being engaged at the greater
depths (Caterisano, Moss, Pellinger, Woodruff, Lewis, Booth and Khadra, 2002).
Therefore it should be considered that deeper squats are more appropriate
measures of strength around the hip.
A further basketball application for squatting to a greater depth is suggested by
Krause, Meyer and Meyer (1999) which discusses how such exercise builds strength
and teaches the players to better achieve the low athletic stance required for
basketball defence and patterns of movement, referred to by the authors as ‘quick
stance’ (Figure 1.). It should be considered that basketball relies heavily on squat
strength through range for movements requiring a low body position and not just for
the concentric strength so regularly emphasized (Newton, 2006).
Figure 1. The basketball quick stance (Krause, Meyer and Meyer, 1999)
5
A study of American football athletes by Blow et al (2009) found that a higher 1RM
squat with 70 degree knee angle relative to athlete’s body mass gave lower times
over a 40 yard dash. The study states, “it is clear that strength or maximal force
production is an integral component to maximal sprinting velocity” (Blow et al, 2009,
p.1634). However specific to Football, a basketball court is only 28 metres long and
15 metres wide and basketball players will rarely reach maximal sprinting velocity
during a game (England Basketball, 2006). More critical to the research is how the
athlete’s squat strength effects acceleration, deceleration and agility in basketball
specific movement patterns and distances.
The basic back squat is primarily a strength exercise and when training at 3RM will
develop maximal strength defined as “the ability to exert a maximal force against a
resistance” (Newton, 2006, p.1).
However, compared with explosive Olympic type
lifts and power based movements the squat takes a long time to elevate a heavier
weight over a shorter distance which results in a low power measure. Power refers
to the rate at which work can be performed or, in simpler terms, how quickly an
athlete can produce force (Sandler, 2005; Foran, 2001).
Therefore the aim in
development of power is to move a load over a given distance as quickly as possible
(Newton 2006). In order to succeed in the sport basketball players must be able to
produce high amounts of force in a very short space of time (Foran and Pound,
2007). An athlete’s ability to do this is largely determined by their rate of force
development (RFD) defined as the maximal rate of rise in muscle force (Zatsiorsky &
Kraemer, 2006; Aagaard, Simonsen, Andersen, Magnusson and Dyhre-Poulsen,
2002). The development of strength, as in the squat, will aid in developing power
and speed up to a point, but it won’t maximise your capabilities (Foran and Pound,
2007).
Newton (2006) emphasizes how many athletes waste time developing
6
maximal strength which they do not need as they have not developed fast enough
RFD to make this strength accessible on the field or court. This training issue may
be more evident in athletes who train with a power-lifting style. This requires a lot of
slow repetitions at very high percentages of 1 repetition max. It may be effective for
power-lifting competitors who can take as long as they wish to apply force but is not
optimal for athletes who need to produce force quickly (Behm, 1995).
2.3 Athletic Movements versus the Squat
A biomechanical analysis of a vertical jump or sprinting movement shows an athlete
extending at the hip and knee and plantarflexing the ankle causing them to leave the
ground completely (Figure 2). Development of this explosive ‘triple extension’ is
critical to athletic success in a variety of sports and disciplines (Frounfelter, 2009).
Training the triple extension movement allows the athlete to take advantage of the
musculature contracting at all three joints simultaneously.
Developing the triple-
extension through explosive type training helps develop the correct neural activation
patterns for maximal performance (Frounfelter, 2009; Newton, 2006; Epley, 2004).
Figure 2. Triple extension in sprinting (Epley, 2004)
7
One of the biggest limitations of the squat in power development is the large
deceleration phase at the end of the concentric motion (McGuigan, Wallace and
Winchester, 2006). The use of accommodating resistance such as bands or chains
in squat training can reduce this deceleration phase but not to the point where the
exercise fully mimics explosive sports movements (Cronin, McGuigan and
McMaster, 2010; Dermody, Kenn and Rhea, 2009).
Throughout a back squat
repetition the athlete’s heels must stay grounded, preventing extension at the ankle
(Baechle and Earle, 2008). This prevents full triple extension making the exercise,
essentially, an extension of the hip and knee joints (Figure 3). Therefore the squat,
although still a great measure of hip and lower body strength, is not an appropriate
test for measuring lower body power in a performance specific manner.
Figure 3. Extension in the back squat (NSCA, 2008)
The Olympic lifts renowned for their high power outputs are a possible alternative
(Hoffman, Cooper, Wendell and Kang, 2004). These exercises emphasize the triple
extension so vital to speed, acceleration and athletic performance (Frounfelter, 2009;
8
Newton, 2006; Dintiman and Ward, 2003).
However, successfully performing a
clean or snatch movement requires much technique and learned skill and the results
will likely be greatly affected by the participant’s competence in the lifts rather than
actual power (Cissik, 1998; Newton 2006). The vertical jump (VJ) is a movement
inherent in basketball and a movement with which all participants should be familiar
(Grover, 2002; Bompa and Tudor, 1999; Sigmon, 2003).
The use of this test,
particularly with the no arm movement variation, removes the skill factor and should
produce much more accurate measures of lower body power (Sigmon, 2003).
2.4 Court Speed and Agility
The areas of priority for basketball court speed are emphasized by Dintiman and
Ward (2003) as acceleration, deceleration, cutting rapidly to the basket, changing
direction, acceleration mechanics and speed endurance. This description lends itself
to the Athlete’s levels of Agility, defined by Hazar (2009) as, “a rapid whole-body
movement with change of velocity or direction in response to a stimulus.” Agility
performance is multifaceted, not only relying on power and speed but also an
athlete’s balance, proprioceptive abilities and the use of the vestibular system. It can
be broadly defined as an athlete’s collective coordinative abilities (Baechle and
Earle, 2008). On the court performance also relies on the utilisation of the Stretch
Shortening Cycle (SSC) which can greatly increase jumping ability and overall power
(Brown, Ferrigno and Santana, 2000; Baechle and Earle, 2008).
A study by Sporis, Milanovic, Jukic, Omrcen and Molinuevo (2010) found that as
agility performance increased so did countermovement jump height.
The study
concluded that complex agility training can be used to enhance explosive muscle
power. However, little is discussed about how much power affects agility.
9
Hazar (2009) looked, more specifically, into this with a study comparing vertical jump
(VJ) and agility performance in children. Results showed increased vertical jump
height to be related to improved performance in the agility tests. Hazar describes
how further research is needed in the area to determine whether lower-limb power
training can improve agility. Barnes, Schilling, Falvo, Weiss, Creasy and Fry (2007)
studied female volleyball athletes investigating the relationships between jumping
and agility performance. Conclusions made were that lower-limb power training,
even in the vertical domain, can increase agility results in tests with a horizontal
component. The study used a complex custom made platform with a force-plate
built into the design to measure agility and the countermovement jump was used as
a measure of jumping ability.
The platform used is restricting in its nature and
prevents a lot of sports specific movements over larger areas being tested. As a
result the test used was not very specific to the participant’s movements on the
court.
In order to test the effectiveness of the Squat and VJ as indicators to performance in
basketball court speed, the agility tests selected needed to mimic basketball specific
movement patterns (Baechle and Earle, 2008). The T-test, as described by Baechle
and Earle (2008, pp. 264) and Reiman and Manske (2009, p. 192), combines
acceleration, deceleration, rapid changes of direction, lateral slides and back pedals,
all over distances the player will work in during a game performance (Sevim and
Suveren, 2010; Foran and Pound, 2007; England Basketball, 2006).
10
Figure 4. The Agility T-Test (Baechle and Earle, 2008)
Sprinting to the second cone B (figure 4) and immediately switching to a lateral slide
over to cone C or D very closely mimics a basketball player closing out on a shooter
and then playing defence at game speed.
The pro-agility test (Baechle and Earle, 2008, pp. 265) also mimics game
movements with an emphasis on rapid change in direction and first step
acceleration. The full 180 degree changes in direction following short, explosive
accelerations lends the test to cutting motions frequently seen in basketball,
particularly the V-cut commonly used to get open and receive a pass during a game
(Wissel, 2004). The nature of the start and turns in the test requires the players to
move quickly from a lateral stance into a sprint to either their left or right before
turning back to a lateral position for the next turn. This mimics the movements a
player goes through when recovering to a good defensive position after being beaten
off the dribble.
11
Figure 5. The Pro Agility Test (Baechle and Earle, 2008)
Both the T-test and the Pro-agility are short in duration to ensure they are testing
agility and the anaerobic abilities so critical to elite basketball performance (Foran
and Pound, 2007).
In order to allow more in depth analysis of the agility tests a 10 yard sprint test is also
included. It is proposed that the nature of the agility tests means a subject who has
great acceleration may perform well despite being less competent at rapid switches
in direction. The inclusion of the 10 yard sprint allows comparisons to be made and
gives a greater understanding of why each individual performs well on the t-test and
pro agility.
It needs to be considered that basketball relies very much on open agility and the
selected tests are very much closed in nature. Open agility drills attempt to more
closely mimic a game situation by introducing reactive and decision making factors
(Cissik and Barnes, 2004).
The use of drills of this nature is inappropriate for
research in this area where the focus is to determine how increased strength and
power affects the components of an agility performance. The introduction of reaction
time would present another performance variable and likely decrease the validity of
12
results. The study does not aim to investigate the link between squat strength and
reaction time.
2.5 Aims of Research
Clear gaps in literature currently available have been identified. The influence of
squat strength on speed and acceleration is a well researched area but studies
which actually analyse the squat against agility in basketball are uncommon. The
emphasis on the squat in basketball literature suggests the need to further
investigate the link and identify how the exercise actually affects specific
performance on the court.
Research is undergone with the view of evaluating the squat exercise as an indicator
of performance in basketball specific agility. Furthermore, the vertical jump will also
be evaluated and compared to the squat to determine the more appropriate
indicator. Acceleration will be assessed allowing the performance of the subjects in
agility tests to be critically analysed, helping to determine where their strengths or
weaknesses lie.
It is suggested that those with greater squat strength relative to their bodyweight will
produce faster times in the T-test, Pro agility and ten yard sprint protocols. It is
further proposed that the vertical jump will produce greater correlations with each of
the tests due to the triple extension and greater power measure which closely
mimics acceleration and sprinting mechanics.
13
CHAPTER 3:
METHODOLOGY
Chapter 3: Methodology
3.1 Experimental Approach to the Problem:
To examine the relationship between back squat 3RM and performance in the
countermovement jump (CMJ), with performance in agility tests replicating basketball
court movements. Acceleration will be assessed through a 10 yard sprint to help
determine why each subject excels in the agility tests whilst also allowing
correlations between squat, CMJ and acceleration to be assessed. Research is
undergone with the view of determining the effectiveness of the squat as a training
modality and measure of performance for basketball athletes.
3. 2 Subjects
Fourteen female (n= 14) basketball players agreed to participate in the study. Seven
currently compete for the University of Wales Institute Cardiff (UWIC) Archers in
England Basketball (EBL) Division one and the remaining seven are signed to UWIC
Archers II competing in EBL Division two. All subjects have at least one basketball
season experience in resistance training and were able to demonstrate correct form
on the back squat exercise.
The health status of confirmed participants was
determined through use of a standardised Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire
(Par-Q) (Appendix A). Prior to testing participants were provided with an in-depth
information sheet (Appendix B) and required to complete an informed consent form
to ensure full awareness and understanding of the tests involved in the study
(Appendix C). All participants were informed that their names and results would
remain confidential and that they have the right to withdraw from the investigation at
any time. No attempts were made to modify the participant’s current basketball and
conditioning training regimes and all testing was performed at least 48 hours
14
following participant’s resistance based workouts.
During testing subjects were
permitted to wear any form of taping, bracing or support which they regularly wear on
the court or in training.
3.3 Experimental Procedures
4 testing days were conducted; 2 for agility and 10 yard sprint tests and 2 for vertical
jump and squat 3RM tests. Each participant was required to take part in all of the
tests and selected which dates to attend based on what was most convenient.
Session times were selected to fit into the subjects training regime, ensuring at least
48 hours recovery following any conditioning or resistance training they are currently
performing. Agility and 10 yard sprint testing was the first testing session undergone
by all participants. All tests in this category were performed at the National Indoor
Athletics Centre (NIAC) based at UWIC on a rubberised athletic track surface.
Accurate timing was ensured by the use of the Smartspeed laser timing system
(Fusion sport, Brisbane, Australia). Smartspeed allows human error to be eliminated
(as with hand timing) and the break algorithm functionality ensures participants can
not dive for the beam to achieve faster times as is often an issue with other timing
systems (Deutsch and Woo, 2006). Prior to any activity the subject’s body mass (kg)
was taken using calibrated electronic scales (SECA, UK) and height without shoes
was measured using a stadiometer (SECA, UK).
Subject’s completed a
standardised R.A.M.P (Raise, activate, mobilise, potentiate) warm-up aimed at
preparing them for sprinting and agility type activity (Table 1.).
15
Table 1. R.A.M.P Warm Up Activities
R.A.M.P Warm-Up Activities
5 Shuttles between cones, 5 shuttles with back pedals, 4 lateral slides between
cones, fast feet 10 yards run out
Supine Bridging – alternate holds for 5 seconds x 8
Inchworms, Lunge with hip flexor stretch, Leg swings lateral and anterior-posterior,
Cariocha with high knee, Bulgarian split squat
Straight leg runs, High Knee skips for distance, High knee skips for height, 3
Accelerations over 20 – 30 yard, competitive accelerations to deceleration and stop
on line.
3.3.1 Ten yard Sprint test
The first test performed was the ten yard sprint. Two lanes were run simultaneously
and participants were partnered for approximate speed. The smartspeed gates were
set at a width of 48 inches matching the International Association for Athletics
Foundation (IAAF) laws for international competition (Figure 6.1).
Figure 6. The 10 yard Sprint setup in NIAC
The distance between gates was measured using a tape measure and set at 10
yards (9.144 meters). The start line was marked 50cm behind the first gate as
16
recommended by the manufacturers to ensure the beam was not accidentally broken
through arm action.
48 inches
50 cm
10 Yards (9.144 metres)
Figure 7. Dimensions for the 10 Yard Sprint
The use of a 3 or 4 point stance was not permitted and participants were required to
start from an athletic stance (Figure 6.3) or split stance (Figure 6.4) depending on
preference.
Figure 8. Athletic Stance Figure 9. Split Stance
Each participant had three separate attempts to achieve the fastest possible time for
the sprint.
A 4 minute rest was enforced between attempts to ensure recovery
following such a maximal effort (Baechle and Earle, 2008).
17
3.3.2 The Pro Agility Test (20 yard shuttle)
To ensure the safety of participants and the equipment the track width (distance
between smartspeed unit and reflector) was widened 12inches to 60 inches for
agility testing.
The pro agility test (Figure 7.) was adapted from procedures
described by Baechle and Earle (2008, p. 265) and Reiman and Manske (2009, p.
193). Table 2 outlines the procedure for the Pro Agility test.
Modifications to the standard protocol were the use of the smartspeed system and
the substitute of an athletic starting stance replacing the 3 point stance described by
Baechle and Earle (2008). All markings were measured with a tape measure and
marked out using tape. Participants were given 2 attempts where their first sprint
was to the left and 2 where they started right. 4 minutes rest was enforced between
attempts.
Table 2. Pro Agility Procedure
Pro Agility Procedure
Participant starts straddling the centre line (Figure 7.) in an athletic stance
Participant turns and sprints 5 yards to the right touching the line with the right
hand.
Immediately participant turns and sprints 10 yards touching the left line with the
left hand.
Participant immediately turns and sprints another 5 yards through the finish line.
Participant should not start to decelerate before they have crossed the finish line
18
Figure 10. The Pro Agility Test setup in NIAC
3.3.3 The Agility T-test
The t-test (Figure 8.) was the final test performed in category 1. The procedure for
testing was adapted from Reiman and Manske (2009, p. 192) with changes being
made to incorporate the smartspeed equipment. Tape, rather than a cone was used
to mark the start/finish line and the other three cones were set at a standardised
height of 12 inches. Participants were required to touch the top of each cone, not
the base as specified by Reiman and Manske (2009). The smartspeed gate was set
at a width of 60 inches. 2 testing tracks were run simultaneously for each test
undergone. The procedure for the T-test is outlined in table 3.
19
Table 3. Agility T-test Procedure
Agility T-test Procedure
Participant starts behind start line in either an athletic or split stance
Participant sprints 10 yards and touches middle cone
Immediately participant side steps 5 yards to the right and touches the right
cone
Immediately participant sidesteps 10 yards to the left and touches the left cone.
Participant side-steps a further 5 yards right returning to the middle cone
From middle cone participant must back pedal 10 yards through the finish line
A start line was marked 50 cm behind the smart speed gates to ensure the beam
was not accidentally broken before an attempt had begun.
Participants had 2
attempts where their first lateral movement was to the left and 2 attempts starting to
the right. 4 minutes rest was enforced between attempts.
Figure 11. The Agility T-Test setup in NIAC
20
3.3.4 Countermovement Jump (CMJ)
The first test performed from Category 2 was the countermovement jump for height.
To better isolate lower body power a no arm movement protocol was used. After
performing a standardised warm-up participants were given 3 attempts at achieving
a maximal jump height. Data was collected using the Smartspeed system and the
jump mat attachment (Fusion Sport, Brisbane, Australia). Jump height was collected
in centimetres (cm). The procedure for correctly performing the countermovement
jump with no arm movement is outline in Table 4.
Table 4. Procedure for Countermovement Jump with no Arm Movement
Procedure for Countermovement Jump (No Arm movement)
Participant starts on the jump mat in a self selected stance for jumping maximally
Participant places hands on hips and performs a CMJ
Should Participants hands leave their hips the attempt is negated
Should participant tuck knees whilst airborne to increase flight-time the attempt is
negated
The Smartspeed system with the jump mats calculates vertical jump essentially
through measures of flight time. For this reason it is possible to cheat the system by
flexing the hips and knees whilst airborne. This is an issue with all contact mats and
it is important to inform participants that this movement is not permitted during
testing.
21
3.3.5 Back Squat 3RM Test
3.3.5.1 Defining the Back Squat
The study requires the testing of a full high bar squat. Full is defined as squatting
low enough for the hip axis to pass the axis of the knee (Figure 9.0). High bar is
defined as the bar being rested on the upper traps (Rippetoe and Kilgore, 2007).
This type of squat allows trunk angles to be more similar to jumping and athletic
activity than when the alternative low bar squat is employed (Sandler, 2007). Due to
the relative difficulty of squatting within these parameters all participants were
screened to ensure good technique and form before any testing commenced.
Figure 12. Full Squat Depth, Hip axis lower than
the knee axis (Newton, 2006)
3.3.5.2 Testing Procedure
Back Squat testing was performed in the Strength and Conditioning Gym at NIAC.
Following the CMJ attempts participants performed a standardised squat specific
mobility warm-up to prepare them for the squat test. Squat form was analysed again
to ensure participant safety. Estimated 3RMs were taken from each participant to
approximate the loads each subject should be working up to.
22
All squats were
performed in a standard squat rack with an Olympic barbell and plates. Before
beginning their heavy attempts each participant performed a light set of 8 repetitions
and intermediate set of 5 repetitions with self selected loads as described by the
NSCA procedure for 1RM testing (Baechle and Earle,2008). Safety bars on the
squat rack were set to a height 2-3 inches below the full depth of each individual to
ensure safety if failures should occur. A resistance band was stretched across the
rack marking the depth each participant needed to achieve. When squatting each
participant was also given a verbal cue to when they had achieved the depth. Each
participant had up to 5 attempts to achieve a 3RM. Loads were largely self selected
and discussed with the investigator, increments between attempts were selected
depending on performance in the previous attempt.
Should the spotter have to
assist the participant at any point to make the lift, this attempt is negated.
An
experienced spotter was present for all attempts and a standardised spotting
protocol was implemented.
3.3.6 Data Analysis
Data was originally entered into Excel (Microsoft, USA) with further analysis
employing the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS v17.0).
Bivariate
Correlations were calculated to assess the relationships between test variables for
the whole group and individually for division 1 and division 2. An Independent
samples T-test was used to compare the mean scores of division 1 and division 2
players with the view of determining any differences between subjects competing at
different levels.
23
CHAPTER 4:
RESULTS
Chapter 4: Results
4.1. Squat 3RM and Relative Squat versus Pro Agility
Figure 10.1 plots the subject’s back squat 3RM scores against their Pro agility times.
Bivariate Correlations performed on the data showed a correlation between these
two variables (P>0.05). Pro Agility times were also plotted against Relative squat
(3RM squat/bodyweight) as demonstrated in Figure 10.2. An insignificant correlation
was found between these variables.
Mean Pro Agility (secs)
5.6
5.5
5.4
5.3
5.2
5.1
5
4.9
4.8
45
55
65
75
85
95
Back Squat 3RM (kg)
Figure 13. 3RM Back Squat and Pro Agility Times
Mean Pro Agility (secs)
5.6
5.5
5.4
5.3
5.2
5.1
5
4.9
4.8
0.50
0.70
0.90
1.10
1.30
1.50
Relative Squat (3RM/Bodyweight)
Figure 14. Back Squat relative to bodyweight and 10 yard Sprint times
24
4.2. Squat 3RM and Relative Squat versus Agility T-test
Figure 10.3 demonstrates an insignificant correlation between Squat 3RM and Agility
T-test times. Correlations performed on the data produced an r value of -.436 and a
P value of .180. Figure 10.4 plots the subjects relative squat scores against the
agility t-test times.
No significant correlations were found during data analysis
between these 2 variables (P>0.05).
Mean Agility T-test (secs)
11
10.8
10.6
10.4
10.2
10
9.8
9.6
9.4
9.2
45
55
65
75
85
95
Back Squat 3RM (kg)
Figure 15. 3RM Back Squat and Agility T-test Times
Mean Agility T-test (secs)
11
10.8
10.6
10.4
10.2
10
9.8
9.6
9.4
9.2
0.50
0.70
0.90
1.10
1.30
1.50
Relative Squat (3RM/Bodyweight)
Figure 16. Back Squat relative to body weight and Agility T-test
25
4.3. Squat 3RM and Relative Squat versus 10 Yard Sprint
Squat 3RM and Relative squat were also plotted against 10 yard sprint. Figure 10.5
demonstrates a significant correlation at the 0.05 level between Squat 3RM and 10
yard sprint.
Figure 10.6 demonstrates a further significant correlation between
10 Yard Sprint (secs)
relative squat and 10 yard sprint times (P>0.05).
2.1
2.05
2
1.95
1.9
1.85
1.8
1.75
1.7
1.65
1.6
45
55
65
75
85
Back Squat 3RM (kg)
Figure 17. 3RM Back Squat and 10 yard Sprint times
2.1
10 Yard Sprint (secs)
2.05
2
1.95
1.9
1.85
1.8
1.75
1.7
1.65
1.6
0.50
0.70
0.90
1.10
1.30
1.50
Relative Squat (3RM/Bodyweight)
Figure 18. Back Squat relative to bodyweight and 10 yard Sprint times
26
4.4. Squat and Relative Squat versus Vertical Jump
Figure 10.7 demonstrates correlation between the subjects squat 3RM scores and
vertical jump height.
A significant correlation is demonstrated at the 0.05 level.
Figure 10.8 demonstrates a more significant correlation between the vertical jump
and relative squat (P>0.05).
Vertical Jump Height (cm)
45
40
35
30
25
20
45
55
65
75
85
95
Back Squat 3RM (kg)
Figure 19. 3RM Back Squat and Vertical Jump Height
Vertical Jump Height (cm)
45
40
35
30
25
20
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
1.10
1.20
1.30
1.40
Relative Squat (3RM/Bodyweight)
Figure 20. Back Squat relative to bodyweight and Vertical Jump Height
27
4.5. Bivariate Correlations between Vertical Jump, Agility Tests and 10 Yard Sprint
Table 5 displays the r values for bivariate correlations between the vertical jump, 10
yard sprint and Agility tests. Insignificant correlations are demonstrated between
vertical jump, 10 yard sprint and pro-agility scores (P = .001).
A correlation
significant at the 0.05 level is demonstrated between vertical jump performance and
Agility T-test scores (P = .034). A correlation (significant at the 0.05 level) is also
demonstrated between the 10 yard sprint and pro agility and the 10 yard sprint and
Agility T-test.
Table 5. Bivariate Correlations between Further Variables
10 yard Sprint
Pro
Agility
Pro Agility
Agility T test
Vertical Jump
.733*
.621*
-.844*
.836**
-.843**
Agility T-test
-.640*
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two tailed)
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two tailed)
28
4.6 Comparing the Means of Division 1 and Division 2 players
The following section displays the results of an independent samples t-test used to
compare the mean results of subjects from different divisions of competition. Figure
10.9 demonstrates a difference in mean 10 yard sprint times between the players in
EBL division 1 and those in EBL division 2. Mean ± Standard deviation for each is
1.776 ± .050 and 1.852 ± .124 respectively.
1.86
10 yard sprint (secs)
1.84
1.82
1.80
1.78
1.76
1.74
1.72
1
2
EBL Division
Figure 21. Comparison of mean 10 yard sprint time between Division 1 and Division
2 Players
Differences between mean scores from divisions 1 and 2 in the pro agility and agility
t- test are demonstrated in Figure 11.0 and 11.1 respectively. Mean ± Standard
deviation for Pro agility is 5.0188 ± .14434 for Division 1 and 5.2541 ±.15611 for
Division 2. For the t-test division 1 is 9.854 ± .294 and division 2 is 10.446 ± .271.
29
5.30
5.25
Pro Agility time (secs)
5.20
5.15
5.10
5.05
5.00
4.95
4.90
1
2
EBL Division
Figure 22. Comparison of mean Pro Agility scores between Division 1 and Division 2
Players
10.50
10.40
Agility T-Test time (secs)
10.30
10.20
10.10
10.00
9.90
9.80
9.70
9.60
9.50
1
2
EBL Division
Figure 23. Comparison of mean Agility T-test scores between Division 1 and
Division 2 Players
30
Figure 11.2 compares the mean vertical jump heights of players from Division 1 and
Division 2. Division 1 mean jump height was 36.580 with a standard deviation of
2.23187. Division 2 mean jump height was 29.227 with a standard deviation of
4.811.
40.00
35.00
Vertical Jump (cm)
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
1
2
EBL Division
Figure 24. Comparison of mean Vertical Jump height between Division 1 and
Division 2 Players
Figure 11.3 compares the mean back squat 3RM scores of the players from division
1 and division 2. Division 1 mean 3RM was 72.500 with a standard deviation of
9.014. Division 2 had a mean 3RM of 59.167 with a standard deviation of 10.685.
Figure 11.4 makes the same comparison for the relative back squat.
Mean ±
Standard deviation is 1.098 ± .209 for division 1 and .855 ± .130 for division 2.
31
80.00
70.00
Squat 3RM (kg)
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
1
2
EBL Division
Figure 25. Comparison of mean Back Squat 3RM between Division 1 and Division 2
Players
1.20
Relative Squat (3RM/Bodyweight)
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
1
2
EBL Division
Figure 26. Comparison of mean Squat relative to Bodyweight between Division 1
and Division 2 Players
32
CHAPTER 5:
DISCUSSION
Chapter 5: Discussion
5.1 Aim of Research
Research was undergone with the view of investigating the effects of greater back
squat strength on performance in agility tests mimicking basketball specific
movement patterns. It was proposed that those with higher 3RM scores relative to
their bodyweight would perform better in agility testing. It was also proposed that
vertical jump height would better correlate with agility due to the jump being
predominantly a power measure rather than strength as with the squat 3RM. Both
relative squat and vertical jump were expected to correlate with the 10 yard sprint
with the vertical jump presenting a correlation of greater significance.
5.2 Main Findings
Data analysis with regards to relative squat (Squat 3RM/Bodyweight) demonstrated
a significant correlation with the 10 yard sprint time (Significant at the 0.05 level).
However, relative squat and pro agility demonstrated a correlation significant at only
the 0.01 level (P =.017) and no significant correlation was observed between relative
squat and agility t-test performance (P = .182). The vertical jump scores correlated
(significant at 0.05 level) with the T-test and less significantly (at the 0.01 level) with
pro-agility and 10 yard sprint. Subjects who performed well on the 10 yard sprint
were more likely to perform well on both the pro agility and t-test (Correlations
significant at the 0.05 level).
5.3 Division 1 and Division 2 Differences
The independent samples T-test was undergone with the view of determining any
results differences that may be caused through using subjects who compete at
different levels. Those who compete at the division 1 elite level may perform to a
33
greater level on tests mimicking basketball movement patterns due to practice and
learned skill rather than actual strength or power measures.
It is important to
compare the means and standard deviation between the groups to ensure results
validity.
Demonstrated between the Divisions was a difference in mean squat 3RM strength
with division one players having an average 13.333kg heavier than the Division 2
group.
However, both groups demonstrated high figures of standard deviation
around the means with a number of the higher squat results coming from the
Division 2 players. This suggests less difference between divisions than the initial
comparison of mean results demonstrates. Conversely, division 1 players present
substantially greater results in relative squat strength (3RM/Bodyweight). Standard
deviation about the means is low (.209 for division 1, .130 for division 2)
demonstrating that the subjects who compete in division 1 tend to be stronger
compared to their mass (kg).
The low levels of standard deviation observed for the mean results for agility t-test
suggests that the means can be considered a reliable assessment of division
differences between the subjects.
Division 1 players were on average 0.592
seconds faster through the t-test. The t-test is very basketball specific in nature and
it should be considered that division 1 players may excel due to increased basketball
training and familiarity with movement patterns accompanied with higher levels of
sports specific conditioning.
Means for pro agility differed very slightly between divisions and both groups
demonstrated low and similar levels of standard deviation (.144 for division 1 and
34
.156 for division 2).
It can be considered from results analysis that little to no
difference is present between groups for pro agility.
Mean results for ten yard sprint times for each group shows that division 1 players
are .076 seconds faster on average. However, the higher level of standard deviation
demonstrated by the division 2 sample is due to a number of players in the sample
producing faster sprint times despite being in the lower division. Again this may be
related to greater basketball specific conditioning and the likelihood of those playing
in the elite division possessing greater levels of athleticism relevant to basketball.
Vertical jump scores demonstrated a difference in means of 7.357cm with division 1
producing the higher score. Both groups demonstrated high standard deviation. A
review of raw data accompanied with the T-test shows that although Division 1
present a greater mean score, a number of division 2 scores fall into the upper
portion of the results. This suggests similar jumping capabilities between players
competing in either division.
Differences of greater significance have been identified; however, another factor
needs to be considered. Although standard deviation is often high in a number of
the variables, division 1 are constantly producing the better mean scores throughout
each test. This suggests those competing at this level generally demonstrate greater
levels of athleticism. To reach and compete at the higher level these players must
undergo more intense conditioning, sports specific training and likely possess
greater talent or genetics aiding them to perform in the sport (Rose, 2004).
35
5.4 Addressing Research Question and Appropriate Literature
The Squat exercise is analysed as an indicator of performance capabilities in
basketball agility. Results will help clarify the appropriateness of the back squat and
similar derivatives as training modalities for basketball resistance training programs.
Literature and studies in the area contribute to the idea that the squat is a
foundational exercise for increasing an athlete’s speed or acceleration, although
agility based studies are less well documented. Castagna et al (2004) supports this
hypothesis correlating increased half squat strength with sprint performance over
ten, twenty and thirty metre distances and vertical jump performance. Concluded by
the investigators was a recommendation that soccer players engage in maximal
strength training of the lower body to benefit from greater acceleration on the field of
play.
Critical to research is the correlation of squat strength and the ten metre
distance which starts to move into the basketball realm regarding distances covered
in a game situation.
Further support for squat strength as an indicator of
acceleration is reported by Blow et al (2009).
The study focused on American
Football players and results found maximal squat strength relative to bodyweight to
be a strong indicator of performance in the forty yard dash. Although 40 yards is too
great a distance to directly associate with basketball court performance much
football literature states that good times are decided at the start, suggesting the
importance of that initial explosive movement critical to basketball (Arthur and Bailey,
1998). Chelly, Fathloun, Cherif, Amar, Tabka and Van Praagh (2009) studied the
effects of a back squat training program on lower body power through jumping and
sprint based testing on junior soccer players. The training substantially increased
the lower body power of the athletes with applications to sprint performance and
jumping movements.
This study is advantageous in how it covers the squat
36
specifically as a training modality rather than purely an indicator of performance.
Literature attempting to correlate squat strength to agility specifically is a lot less
common. Agility is compared to vertical jump performance by Hazar (2009) using
the hexagon agility test (Baechle and Earle, 2008). Hazar concludes that the training
of leg muscular power could be emphasized for agility applications but further
research is needed. The concept of lower body power’s link with agility performance
is further supported by Sporis et al (2010) who found complex agility training to have
a positive effect on countermovement jump height. Although few specific studies
comparing squat directly to agility are available much literature discusses how
increased squat strength can increase maximum vertical jump, which is more well
documented as an indicator for agility performance (Witmer, Davis and Moir, 2010;
Castagna et al, 2004; Berning, Adams, Debeliso, Sevine-Adams, Harris, Stamford,
2010).
5.5 Interpretation of Results and Implications for Basketball Performance
Squat strength relative to bodyweight correlates well with ten yard acceleration and
vertical jump but the demonstration of less significant correlations with the agility
testing suggests the importance of skill in agility. It can be suggested from the
results that agility performance is not largely determined by relative strength and
power levels but by how much skill the subject has in performing the movements
within the test. Possible factors affecting agility outside of the measured variables
are balance, reaction time and proprioception although further research is required to
determine the contributions of each (Brown and Ferrigno, 2005). Testing identified a
number of subjects who were not particularly strong at the squat exercise but were
still able to produce some of the faster agility times recorded.
37
Significant correlation between squat 3RM/squat relative to bodyweight and the
subjects ten yard sprint times supports other literature in the area linking increased
strength with acceleration (Castagna et al, 2004; Blow et al, 2009). These results
also lend themselves to basketball specific performance demonstrating that
increases in relative squat strength can lead to faster sprinting over distances
commonly covered in competitive play. However, little support is provided for the
hypothesis that increased relative squat strength will cause an increase in basketball
specific agility.
Comparisons of vertical jump to agility performance gave
correlations of greater significance, particularly with the agility T-test. Suggested is
the greater appropriateness of triple-extension type lower body power movements as
possible training modalities and indicators for increased agility and court speed in
basketball players. Conversely, relative squat was better correlated with ten yard
sprint times than the vertical jump. This may be due to reliance on the contribution
of the stretch shortening cycle (SSC) during countermovement jumps. High level
basketball players are often very developed in utilisation of the SSC to maximise
power production in a short space of time (Foran and Pound, 2007; Baechle and
Earle, 2008). The 10 yard sprint will largely be affected by initial acceleration off the
start line where little to no SSC contribution is present. Therefore performance in
this test may be focused on the athlete’s ability to produce force quickly without
utilising the SSC. Maximal strength contributes to this capability which may explain
the increased significance of the relative squat correlation compared with the VJ.
The sudden changes of direction inherent in the agility tests allow for great utilisation
of the SSC in order to increase performance. The subject must go from an eccentric
as they attempt to decelerate their momentum to a concentric pushing explosively in
the other direction as quickly as possible (Baechle and Earle, 2008). This also
38
applies to the countermovement jump (CMJ) used in testing and suggests why more
significant correlations are present between VJ and Agility.
Comparing the VJ and squat with the aim of selecting a training modality or indicator
may not be appropriate as although different results have been found for each,
Squat 3RM/Relative squat and Vertical jump also correlate significantly. Those who
are able to squat a greater weight compared to their bodyweight are more likely to
achieve higher vertical jump heights. Suggested therefore is the appropriateness of
using squat type exercise in conjunction with jumping type activities to aid in
increasing basketball agility. However, the greater link between VJ performance and
performance in the desirable movement patterns suggests the necessity of
appropriate programming when employing the squat as a training modality for
basketball. Suggested is how basketball athletes should train the squat with the goal
of increasing VJ using an exercise like the CMJ as an indicator for performance.
These performance increases will then translate better to court speed.
With
incorrect programming and use of inappropriate indicators athletes may significantly
increase squat strength and appear to be progressing but if this strength does not
transfer to an increased CMJ (or similar indicator) they will not maximise their gains
with regards to performance on the court. This concept may be less appropriate
depending on periodization.
A basketball player may lose VJ height during a
hypertrophy phase, but later gain VJ height in a strength or power phase if a linear
periodization model is being implemented.
39
CHAPTER 6:
CONCLUSION
Chapter 6: Conclusion
6.1 Conclusion of Findings
Analysis of results identified a number of correlations. When Compared to the CMJ,
back squat 3RM relative to bodyweight is identified as a less appropriate indicator of
training success when aiming to increase basketball specific agility. This outcome
was hypothesized and may be due to the specificity of the explosive triple extension
movement pattern of the CMJ.
Relative squat is identified as a more appropriate
indicator for ten yard sprint performance compared to CMJ. Subjects with faster 10
yard sprint times are more likely to excel in the agility tests.
The link of squat
strength with CMJ height suggests the use of these modalities conjunctively to try
and produce speed in the movements desirable in basketball.
6.2 Limitations of Research
Although implications of squatting for increases in a number of areas of performance
have been suggested the design of the study presents limitations in presenting
arguments for the squat as a training modality for basketball players.
The nature of the study essentially analyses the Squat and Vertical jump purely as
indicators of athletic performance. It is difficult to determine how effective these
exercises will be as training modalities in a periodized basketball program without
more longitudinal research. A much larger sample also should be used to increase
reliability and validity of results. The inclusion of male basketball players should also
be considered so results may be generalised throughout basketball. Future research
should include the implementing of longitudinal training studies attempting to
determine the long-term effects of squat training on basketball agility. More specific
40
test protocols may be used to analyse subject’s levels of deceleration, acceleration
and speed of direction changes with the view of determining why those with higher
squat strength perform better or worse at each test.
These results would have
applications to basketball conditioning allowing weaknesses to be better assessed
41
CHAPTER 7:
REFERENCES
Chapter 7: References
Aagaard, P., Simonsen, E, B., Andersen, J, L., Magnusson, P. and Dyhre-Poulsen,
P. (2002) Increased Rate of Force Development and Neural Drive of Human
Skeletal Muscle following Resistance Training Journal of Applied Physiology
93(4) 1318-26
Arthur, M. and Bailey, B. (1998) Complete Conditioning for Football 1st edition
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics
Baechle, T, R., and Earle, R, W., (2008). Essentials of Strength, Training and
Conditioning Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics
Barnes, J, L., Schilling, B, K., Falvo, M, J., Weiss, L, W., Creasy, A, K., Fry, A, C.
(2007) Relationship of Jumping and Agility Performance in Female Volleyball
Athletes, Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 21(4) 1192-1197
Behm, D, G. (1995) Neuromuscular Implications and Applications of Resistance
Training Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 9(4) 264-274
Berning, J, M., Adams, K, J., Debeliso, M., Sevine-Adams, P, G., Harris, C.,
Stamford, B, A. (2010) Effect of Functional Isometric Squats on Vertical Jump
in Trained and Untrained Men Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research
24(9) 2285
Blow, D., Dayne, A, M., Haines, T, L., Kirby, T, J., McBride, J, M., and Triplett, N, T.,
(2009). Relationship Between Maximal Squat Strength and Five, Ten and
Forty Yard Sprint Times Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 23(6)
1633-1636
Bompa,. and Tudor, O. (1999). Periodization Training for Sports Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics
Boyle, M. (2004) Functional Training for Sports 1st edition Champaign, IL: Human
Kinetics
Brown, L, E., Ferrigno, V, A., and Santana, J, C. (2000) ‘Training for Speed, Agility
and Quickness’ Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics
Brown, L, E., and Ferrigno, V, A., (2005) ‘Training for Speed, Agility and Quickness’
2nd edition, Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics
Castagna, C., Helgurud, J., Hoff, J., Jones, R., and Wisloff, U., (2004) ‘Strong
correlation of maximal squat strength with sprint performance and vertical
jump height in elite soccer players.’ British Journal of Sports Medicine, 38(3)
285-288
42
Caterisano, A., Moss, R, E., Pellinger, T, K., Woodruff, K., Lewis, V, C., Booth, W.,
and Khadra, T. (2002) ‘The Effect of Back Squat Depth on the EMG activity of
3 Superficial Hip and Thigh Muscles’ Journal of Strength & Conditioning
Research, 16(3) 428-432
Chelly, M, S., Fathloun, M., Cherif, N., Amar, M, B., Tabka, Z. and Van Praagh, E.
(2009) Effects of a Back Squat Training Program on Leg Power, Jump, and
Sprint Performances in Junior Soccer Players Journal of Strength &
Conditioning Research 23(8) 2241-2250
Chiu, L, Z., (2007) ‘Does an Optimal Load Exist for Power Training?’ Strength and
Conditioning Journal, 30(2), 67-69
Cissik, J, M. (1998) An Introduction to Olympic-Style Weightlifting, 2nd Edition, U.S.A:
McGraw-Hill Companies
Cormie, P., McBride, J, M., McCauley, G, O, and Triplett, N, T. (2007) ‘Optimal
Loading For Maximal Power Output During the Jump Squat, Power clean and
Squat.’ Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 39, 340-349
Cronin, J., McGuigan, M, R., and McMaster, D, T., (2010) ‘Quantification of Rubber
and Chain Based Resistance Modes’ Journal of Strength and Conditioning
Research, 24(8) 2056-2065
Dermody, B, M., Kenn, J, G., and Rhea, M, R., (2009) ‘Alterations in Speed of Squat
Movement and The Use of Accommodated Resistance Among College
Athletes Training for Power’ Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research,
23(9) 2645-2650
Dintiman, G., and Ward, B. (2003) ‘Sport Speed’ 3rd Edition, Champaign, IL: Human
Kinetics
Domire, Z, J., and Challis, J, H. (2007) ‘The Influence of Squat Depth on Maximal
Jump Performance’ Journal of Sports Sciences, 25(2) 193- 200
England Basketball (2006). ‘Basketball: Know the Game’ London, GB: A & C Black
publishers
Epley, B. (2004) The Path to Athletic Power: The Model Conditioning Program for
Championship Performance, Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics
Foran, B. (2001) High Performance Sports Conditioning 1st edition Champaign IL:
Human Kinetics
Foran, B., and Pound, R., (2007) ‘National Basketball Conditioning Coaches
Association: Complete Conditioning for Basketball’ Champaign, IL: Human
Kinetics
43
Frounfelter, G., (2009). ‘Triple Extension: The Key to Athletic Power’ NSCA’s
Performance Training Journal, 8(1) 14-16
Fuchimoto, T., Kaneko, M., Suei, K., and Toji, H. (1983). ‘Training Effect of Different
Loads on Force-Velocity Relationship and Mechanical Power Output in
Human Muscle’ Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 5,
50-55
Grover, T, S., (2002) ‘Jump Attack: The Ultimate Program on how to Jump Higher,
Gain Quickness and be more Explosive’ Chicago, IL: A.T.T.A.C.K athletics
publishing
Groves, B., (2000) ‘Power Lifting: Technique and Training for Athletic Muscular
Development’ Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics
Hazar, F., (2009). ‘The Relationship of Jumping and Agility Performance in Children’
Ovidius University Annals, Series Physical Education & Sport/Science,
Movement and Health, 9(2) 138-142
Hoffman, J, R., Cooper, J., Wendell, M., and Kang, J. (2004). ‘Comparison of
Olympic vs. Traditional Power Lifting Training Programs in Football Players’
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 18(1), 129-135
Johnson, J, B., Sabatini, P, L., and Sparkman, M, R. (2008). ‘A Debate between
Power Lifting and Olympic Lifting as the Main Athletic Training Method’
Virginia Journal, Fall, 19-22
Krause, J, V. (1998) NABC Drill Book 1st Edition, Chicago, IL: Masters Press
Krause, J, V., Meyer, D. and Meyer, J. (2008) Basketball Skills and Drills 3rd edition
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics
McGuigan, M, R., Wallace, B, J., and Winchester J, B. (2006). ‘Effects of Elastic
Bands on Force and Power Characteristics during the Back Squat Exercise’
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 20(2) 268-272
McKeag, D, B. (2003) Handbook of Sports Medicine and Science: Basketball,
Malden, MA: Blackwell
Newton, H., (2006) ‘Explosive Lifting for Sports’ Enhanced Edition, Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics
Narazaki, K., Berg, K., Stergiou, N. and Chen, B. (2009) Physiological Demands of
Competitive Basketball Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in
Sports 19(3) 425-432
44
National Strength and Conditioning Association (2008). NSCA – Performance
Analysis Video: Back Squat [online] Available at: http://www.nscalift.org/videos/backSquat/defaultsquat.shtml [Accessed 1st February 2011]
Newton, H., (2006) ‘Explosive Lifting for Sports’ Enhanced Edition, Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics
Reiman, M, P. and Manske, R, C. (2009) Functional Testing in Human Performance
1st edition Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics
Rose, L, H. (2004) The Basketball Handbook – Winning Essentials for Players and
Coaches 1st edition Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics
Sandler, D. (2005) Sports Power 1st edition Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics
Sevim, O., and Suveren, C. (2010). ‘Statistical Analysis of Balance and
Anthropometric Variables of Male Basketball Players, Aged 9-11’ Ovidius
University Annals, Series Physical Education & Sport/Science, Movement &
Health 2010, 10(2) 168-176
Sigmon, C. (2003). 52-Week Basketball Training: A Proven Plan for Strength, Power,
Speed, Agility and Performance, Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics
Sporis, G., Milanovic, L., Jukic, I., Omrcen, D. and Molinuevo, J, S. (2010). The
Effect of Agility Training on Athletic Power Performance, Kinesiology, 42(1)
65-73
Wissel, H. (2004) ‘Basketball: Steps to Success’ 2nd Edition, Champaign, IL: Human
Kinetics
Witmer, C, A., Davis, S, E., Moir, G, L. (2010) The Acute Effects of Back Squats on
Vertical Jump Performance in Men and Women Journal of Sports Science &
Medicine 9(2) 206
Zatsiorsky, V, M. and Kraemer, W, J. (2006) Science and Practice of Strength
Training 2nd edition Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics
45
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q)
Name of Participant:
Please circle ‘YES’ or ‘NO’ to the following questions:
1
2
Do you currently suffer from asthma or any breathing-related
conditions?
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
Have you ever consulted your doctor as a result of suffering
from a heart-related condition?
3
Have you/do you suffer from any chest pains that may be
aggravated by exercise?
4
Do you suffer from bouts of dizziness or from feeling faint?
YES
NO
5
Have you ever been told by a medical consultant that you suffer
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
from a bone and/or joint condition which might be further
aggravated by exercise?
6
Have you ever been diagnosed with high blood pressure?
7
Have you ever been diagnosed with diabetes?
8
Are you unaccustomed to regular vigorous exercise?
9
Is there a significant physical reason not mentioned above why
you should not take part in this research project?
If you have circled ‘YES’ to any of the questions, please provide further details in the
space below. Also, if there are any health and fitness reasons related conditions that
could affect your participation in the research project which are not covered in
questions 1-8, please provide further information.
Should your situation change regarding any of the conditions mentioned above,
please notify a member of the research team as soon as possible.
Signed (participant):
Signed (investigator):
Date:
APPENDIX B
Participant Information Sheet
Title of Project: The Relationship between Maximum Strength, Power and Agility in
Female Basketball Players.
Background: For my dissertation project I am undergoing research into the
relationship between lower body strength and power and performance in agility tests
which mimic basketball movement patterns. Consenting participants will be required
to perform the following tests:






Anthropometrics (Height, Weight etc.)
3 Repetition Maximum on the Barbell Back Squat exercise
Vertical Jump using counter-movement jump with no arm movement
Agility T-test
Pro agility (5-10-5 shuttle run)
10 yard sprint
Why have you been asked: I have contacted you play for one of the teams based
at UWIC listed below:


EBL Division 1 Basketball (Women)
EBL Division 2 Basketball (Women)
If you play for either of the above teams and regularly compete at a guard position I
would be grateful of your involvement in the study.
What does the Testing Involve: The testing protocols have been standardised and
will remain the same for all participants throughout the study. Please read the
following:



3 Repetition Maximum: Back squat will be performed in NIAC using a squat
rack. All participants will perform a squat specific warm-up before performing
a number of lighter sets working up to their attempts. Each participant will
have 5 attempts at achieving a max with 3 minutes rest between attempts.
Vertical Jump (Counter-movement jump, no arm movement). This will be
performed in NIAC and will be done on a timing mat using the smart-speed
system. Participants will stand on the matt with their hands on their hips
squat down and immediately explode upwards trying to achieve a maximal
height. Any movement of the arms negates the attempt. Each participant has
2 attempts at 3 single jumps and the highest jump will be recorded. A
thorough jumping specific arm-up will be performed prior to testing
Agility T-test and Pro Agility test: These tests will be performed in NIAC using
the smart-speed system. For each test each participant will have 2 attempts
starting left and 2 attempts starting right. A thorough warm-up will be
performed prior to testing.

10 yard sprint: This test will be performed in NIAC using the Smart-speed
system. Each participant will have 2 attempts starting left and 2 attempts
starting right to achieve the fastest times possible. All running tests start from
a split or athletic stance, no 3 or 4 point starts.
Are there any Risks: As with basketball and any other competitive sport or physical
activity there is a potential risk of injury. However, none of the tests will place your
body under stresses it won’t experience during training, competition and conditioning
sessions you take part in prior to and during the season. If you wear any form of
taping, brace or strapping please feel free to wear this during the running and
jumping tests.
Your Rights: All participants have the right to drop out of the study at any point
regardless of whether or not their results have been gathered. If you feel you can
not perform the tests after signing up, please contact me as quickly as possible so a
replacement can be found.
What happens to the results: The results will be entered into excel and kept on a
password protected computer file. At a later date the results will be entered into a
statistics package for further analysis. All names are removed and each participant
will be saved as a number.
Are there any benefits from taking part: The study is a convenient opportunity to
measure many areas of your performance using some of the best, most accurate
equipment available.
Interested?
I’m grateful of your interest in my study and thank you for your co-operation. Please
fill out the consent from attached and return it to me as soon as is convenient.
Any further information or queries please contact me at:
[email protected]
Or phone at
07766747225
APPENDIX C
UWIC PARTICIPANT CONSENT FORM
Title of Project:
The Relationship Between Maximum
Strength, Power and Agility in Female
basketball players
Name of Researcher:
Sam Kennedy
Participant to complete this section:
Please initial each box.
1. I confirm I have read the provided information sheet and fully
understand
The protocols involved with the study.
2. I understand that my participation is voluntary and
that I may discontinue participation at any time, without
providing a
reason.
3. I would like to take part in the study and give my consent to
take part in
the 3 tests described in the information form.
____________________________________________________
Name of Participant
____________________________________________________
Signature of Participant
Date
* When completed, one copy for participant and one copy for
researcher’s files.
____________________________________________________