%0 Journal Article
%A Loturco, Irineu
%A McGuigan, Michael R.
%A Freitas, Tomás T.
%A Bishop, Chris
%A Zabaloy, Santiago
%A Mercer, Valter P.
%A Moura, Túlio B.M.A.
%A Arruda, Ademir F.S.
%A Ramos, Mauricío S.
%A Pereira, Lucas A.
%A Pareja Blanco, Fernando
%T Half-Squat and Jump Squat Exercises Performed Across a Range of Loads: Differences in Mechanical Outputs and Strength Deficits
%D 2022
%U https://hdl.handle.net/10433/26342
%X Loturco, I, McGuigan, MR, Freitas, TT, Bishop, C, Zabaloy, S, Mercer, VP, Moura, TBMA, Arruda, AFS, Ramos, MS, Pereira, LA,and Pareja-Blanco, F. Half-squat and jump squat exercises performed across a range of loads: differences in mechanical outputsand strength deficits. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000–000, 2022—The aim of this study was to compare the peak force (PF), peakpower (PP), and peak velocity (PV) outputs produced during half-squat (HS) and jump squat (JS) exercises executed at 20, 40, 60,and 80% of 1 repetition maximum (1RM) in the HS (HS 1RM) and to compute and compare the strength deficit (SDef) achieved inthese exercises across these loads. Twenty-four national rugby union players (age: 25.7 6 3.6 years) performed HS 1RM and aprogressive loading test in the HS and JS exercises. The PF, PP, and PV values were obtained in all loads for both exercises, and theSDef was calculated as the percentage difference between the PF at distinct relative intensities and the PF at HS 1RM. Thedifferences in HS and JS variables were determined using an analysis of variance with repeated measures. Higher PF, PP, and PVoutputs were generated in the JS in comparison with the HS exercise (p,0.05); moreover, the SDef magnitudes were significantlylower in the JS (p , 0.01), for all loading conditions. Importantly, the differences in SDef, and as a consequence, PF, PP, and PVdecreased progressively with increasing load. Overall, the loaded JS exhibited increased levels of PF, PP, and PV and reducedlevels of SDef when compared to the traditional HS performed across a range of loads. The JS is indicated to reduce the SDef andimprove the athletes’ ability to apply force at higher velocities. Nevertheless, with heavier loads (i.e., $80% HS 1RM), its potentialadvantages and effectiveness may be seriously compromised.
%K Athletic performance
%K Team sports
%K Team sports
%K Ballistic exercises
%K Muscle power
%K Maximum strength
%~