15 views

Uploaded by govindasamy

International Journal of Yoga, Physiotherapy and Physical Education
ISSN: 2456-5067
Impact Factor: RJIF 5.24
www.sportsjournal.in
Volume 3; Issue 4; July 2018; Page No. 26-32

save

You are on page 1of 7

**International Journal of Yoga, Physiotherapy and Physical Education
**

ISSN: 2456-5067

Impact Factor: RJIF 5.24

www.sportsjournal.in

Volume 3; Issue 4; July 2018; Page No. 26-32

**Effect of plyometric training and circuit training on selected physical and physiological variables
**

among male Volleyball players

Dr. J Anitha1, Dr. P Kumaravelu2, Dr. C Lakshmanan3, K Govindasamy4

1 Assistant Professor, Department of Statistics and Computer Application, Tamil Nadu Physical Education and Sports University, Chennai,

Tamil Nadu, India

2, 3 Assistant Professor, Department of Physical Education, Tami lNadu Physical Education and Sports University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India

4 Research Scholar, Department of Physical Education, Tamil Nadu Physical Education and Sports University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to find out the effect of plyometric training and circuit training on selected physical and

physiological variables among male volleyball players. Twenty four male volleyball players aged between 18 to 25 years were

selected randomly. They were divided into two groups (two experimental and one control group) the experimental group I was

given plyometric training and experimental group II was given circuit training for six weeks and control group was not allowed to

participate in any training programme. Pretest was conducted dependent variables such as speed, muscular endurance, flexibility,

agility, explosive strength, vital capacity and anaerobic capacity at the beginning before the experimental treatment and posttest

was taken after the experimental treatment. The data were analyzed by applying dependent ‘t’ test and ANCOVA. The results

revealed that the plyometric training and circuit training had significantly improved the speed, muscular endurance, flexibility,

agility, explosive strength, vital capacity and anaerobic capacity.

Keywords: plyometric training, circuit training, speed, muscular endurance, flexibility, explosive strength, vital capacity, aerobic

capacity and anaerobic capacity

**Introduction: Plyometrics may improve motor performance with in 6 to 12 weeks. In
**

Plyometric is the term now applied to exercise, that have their addition to this, 3 sets of plyometric pushups may also

roots in “Europe” where they were first known simply as increase upper body strength. (Donald .A. Chu, 1998) [3]

“jumping training”.

Interest in this jump training increased during the early 1970’s Circuit Training

as east European athletes emerged as powers on the world Circuit training was invented in 1953 as effective and efficient

sports scene. As the eastern bloc countries began to produce way for coaches to train many athletes in a limited amount of

superior athletes in such sports as track and field, gymnastics, time with limited equipment. The exerciser moved through a

and weight lifting, the mystique of their success began to series of weight training or calisthenics arranged

Centre on the training methods. (Donald. A. Chu, 1998) [3] consequently. It was past paced workout of 15 to 45 seconds

per station with little (15 – 30 seconds) rest or no rest between

Importance of Plyometric Training stations. Today this is known as “circuit weight training”

Plyometric is the name given for a type of exercise that is research has shown that it can increase muscular strength and

designed to increase intensity or explosive power in certain endurance. There is mild improvement in aerobic stamina but

muscle groups. This kind of training is used to increase power only if the rest periods are kept very short. Another variation

of a boxer’s punch or the force of volleyball and basketball is “aerobic circuit training” aerobic station like treadmill,

player’s jump. Plyometric training is different from traditional rower or stepper (1 to 5 minute per station) or interspersed

strength training exercise because it is performed quickly and with weight training stations. This protocol has been found to

explosively. It increase muscle power by capitalizing on increase aerobic stamina and muscular endurance and

lengthening and shortening of the muscle cycles. This kind of endurance. (Dabir. R. Qureshi, 2012) [2].

training usually starts with a rapid stretch of a muscle or

eccentric phase followed by a rapid shortening of the same Hypotheses

muscle (or) the concentric phase burpees, clap push-ups, 1. It was hypothesized that there would be a significant

jumping ropes, and jumping jacks are types of plyometric improvement between pre and post-test due to 6 weeks of

exercise. Several studies suggest that plyometric can greatly combined plyometric and circuit training on selected

improve athletic performance in terms of vertical jumps, long physical and physiological variables among male

jumps, sprinting, cycling, volleyball, basketball, kick boxing volleyball players.

and many more. It is said that even one (or) two types of 2. It was hypothesized that there would not be a significant

plyometric training completed one to three times in a week improvement between pre and post-test for control group

26

International Journal of Yoga, Physiotherapy and Physical Education

**on selected physical and physiological variables among and physiological variables among male volleyball players. To
**

male volleyball players. achieve the purpose of the study 24 men volleyball players in

3. It was hypothesized that there would be a significant the age group 18 to 25 years were selected at random from

difference between experimental and control group on various engineering college in Chennai, Tamil Nadu. Selected

selected physical and physiological variables among male subjects were divided in to three groups of experimental I,

volleyball players. experimental II and control group. The experimental group I

participated combined plyometric training group and

Delimitations experimental group II circuit training group for the training

1. The following delimitations are considered in this study. period six weeks three alternate days per week. The control

24 male intercollegiate volleyball players were selected group were maintained their daily routine activities and no

randomly. special training was given.

2. The experimental group was given combined plyometric The data pertaining to the variables in this study were

and circuit training for a period of 6 weeks. examined by using dependent ‘t’ test to find out the significant

3. The subject’s age group ranged from 18-25 years. improvement and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) for each

4. The study was restricted to 5 physical variables such as variables separately in order to determine the differences and

speed, muscular endurance, flexibility, agility, explosive tested at 0.05 level of significance and post hoc test also

strength and 2 physiological variables such as vital administrated wherever ‘f’ ratio was significant. The analysis

capacity and anaerobic capacity. of dependent ‘t’ test on data obtained for speed, muscular

endurance, flexibility, agility, explosive strength, vital

Methodology capacity and anaerobic capacity of the pretest and posttest

The purpose of the study was to find out the effect of means of experimental and control group have been analyzed

plyometric training and circuit training on selected physical and presented in Table I.

Table 1: Computation of ‘t’ ratio between pre and post test scores of experimental group and control group

Mean SD

Variables Group Name SD Error DF ‘t’ ratio

Pre Post Pre Post

Experimental Group 3.64 3.54 0.24 0.21 0.012 8.33*

Speed 11

Control Group 3.63 3.64 0.23 0.31 0.032 0.312

Experimental Group 40.00 44.75 7.73 6.63 0.41 11.58*

Muscular Endurance 11

Control Group 39.91 39.25 3.36 3.07 0.43 1.56

Experimental Group 32.41 36.75 4.90 4.71 0.284 15.24*

Flexibility

Control Group 32.25 31.41 6.11 5.85 1.02 11 0.813

Experimental Group 11.73 10.78 0.93 0.76 0.31 3.03*

Agility

Control Group 11.64 11.71 0.97 0.92 0.084 11 0.821

Experimental Group 37.16 40.75 5.84 5.37 0.29 12.37*

Explosive Strength

Control Group 37.12 36.25 2.43 2.17 0.902 11 0.96

Experimental Group 3.75 4.15 0.61 0.42 0.076 5.26*

Vital Capacity

Control Group 3.72 3.60 0.51 0.41 0.084 11 1.42

Experimental Group 121.20 134.73 15.40 17.11 0.914 14.80*

Anaerobic Capacity

Control Group 121.03 119.23 15.41 14.41 0.86 11 2.08

*level of significance was fixed at 0.05 with df 11 table value is 2.20

The table I shows that the mean values of pre-test and post- of 2.20 for significance at 0.05 level of with 11 degrees of

test of experimental group in speed were 3.64 and 3.54 freedom it was found statistically significant. The mean values

respectively. The obtained ‘t’ ratio was 8.33 since the obtained of pre-test and post-test of control group in muscular

‘t’ ratio was greater than the required table value of 2.20 for endurance were 39.91 and 39.25 respectively. The obtained ‘t’

significance at 0.05 level of with 11 degrees of freedom it was ratio was 1.53 which was lesser than the table value of 2.20

found statistically significant. The mean values of pre-test and for significance at 0.05 level of with 11 degrees of freedom it

post-test of control group in speed were 3.63 and 3.64 was found statistically insignificant. The result of this study

respectively. The obtained ‘t’ ratio was 0.312 which was statistically proved that the experimental group showed

lesser than the table value of 2.20 for significance at 0.05 level significant improvement on muscular endurance due to

of with 11 degrees of freedom it was found statistically combined plyometric and circuit training on male volleyball

insignificant. The result of this study statistically proved that players.

the experimental group showed significant improvement on The table I shows that the mean values of pre-test and post-

speed due to combined plyometric and circuit training on male test of experimental group in flexibility were 32.41 and 36.75

volleyball players. respectively. The obtained ‘t’ ratio was 15.24 since the

The table I shows that the mean values of pre-test and post- obtained ‘t’ ratio was greater than the required table value of

test of experimental group in muscular endurance were 40.00 2.20 for significance at 0.05 level of with 11 degrees of

and 44.75 respectively. The obtained ‘t’ ratio was 11.58 since freedom it was found statistically significant. The mean values

the obtained ‘t’ ratio was greater than the required table value of pre-test and post-test of control group in flexibility were

27

International Journal of Yoga, Physiotherapy and Physical Education

32.25 and 31.41 respectively. The obtained ‘t’ ratio was 0.813 significant improvement on explosive strength due to

which was lesser than the table value of 2.20 for significance combined plyometric and circuit training on male volleyball

at 0.05 level of with 11 degrees of freedom it was found players.

statistically insignificant. The result of this study statistically The table I shows that the mean values of pre-test and post-

proved that the experimental group showed significant test of experimental group in vital capacity were 3.75 and 4.15

improvement on flexibility due to combined plyometric and respectively. The obtained ‘t’ ratio was 5.26 since the obtained

circuit training on male volleyball players. ‘t’ ratio was greater than the required table value of 2.20 for

The table I shows that the mean values of pre-test and post- significance at 0.05 level of with 11 degrees of freedom it was

test of experimental group in agility were 11.73 and 10.78 found statistically significant. The mean values of pre-test and

respectively. The obtained ‘t’ ratio was 3.03 since the obtained post-test of control group in vital capacity were 3.72 and 3.60

‘t’ ratio was greater than the required table value of 2.20 for respectively. The obtained ‘t’ ratio was 1.42 which was lesser

significance at 0.05 level of with 11 degrees of freedom it was than the table value of 2.20 for significance at 0.05 level of

found statistically significant. The mean values of pre-test and with 11 degrees of freedom it was found statistically

post-test of control group in agility were 11.64 and 11.71 insignificant. The result of this study statistically proved that

respectively. The obtained ‘t’ ratio was 0.821 which was the experimental group showed significant improvement on

lesser than the table value of 2.20 for significance at 0.05 level vital capacity due to combined plyometric and circuit training

of with 11 degrees of freedom it was found statistically on male volleyball players.

insignificant. The result of this study statistically proved that The table I shows that the mean values of pre-test and post-

the experimental group showed significant improvement on test of experimental group in anaerobic capacity were 121.20

agility due to combined plyometric and circuit training on and 134.73 respectively. The obtained ‘t’ ratio was 14.80

male volleyball players. since the obtained ‘t’ ratio was greater than the required table

The table I shows that the mean values of pre-test and post- value of 2.20 for significance at 0.05 level of with 11 degrees

test of experimental group in explosive strength were 37.16 of freedom it was found statistically significant. The mean

and 40.75 respectively. The obtained ‘t’ ratio was 12.37 since values of pre-test and post-test of control group in anaerobic

the obtained ‘t’ ratio was greater than the required table value capacity were 121.03 and 119.23 respectively. The obtained

of 2.20 for significance at 0.05 level of with 11 degrees of ‘t’ ratio was 2.08 which was lesser than the table value of 2.20

freedom it was found statistically significant. The mean values for significance at 0.05 level of with 11 degrees of freedom it

of pre-test and post-test of control group in explosive strength was found statistically insignificant. The result of this study

were 37.12 and 36.25 respectively. The obtained ‘t’ ratio was statistically proved that the experimental group showed

0.96 which was lesser than the table value of 2.20 for significant improvement on anaerobic capacity due to

significance at 0.05 level of with 11 degrees of freedom it was combined plyometric and circuit training on male volleyball

found statistically insignificant. The result of this study players.

statistically proved that the experimental group showed

Result and discussion

**Table 2: Computation of analysis of co-variance on speed among experimental group and control group
**

TEST Experimental Group Control Group SSV SS DF MS ‘F’

PRE-test Mean 3.74 3.67 BG 0.002 1 0.002

0.026

PRE-Test SD 0.25 0.23 WG 1.29 22 0.059

Post-Test Mean 3.64 3.62 BG 0.062 1 0.062

0.852

Post-Test SD 0.22 0.31 WG 1.60 22 0.073

BG 0.084 1 0.084

Adjusted posttest mean 3.53 3.65 11.38*

WG 0.155 21 0.007

*Significant at 0.05 level of confidence

Table value at 0.05 level of significance for 1 and 22 degrees and 3.64 respectively. The obtained ‘F’ ratio of post-test mean

of freedom is 4.30 and 1 and 21 degrees of freedom is 4.32. is 0.852. The adjusted post-test mean value on speed of

Table II shows that the pre-test mean value on speed of experimental group (plyometric training group) and control

experimental group (plyometric training group) and control group were 3.53 and 3.65 respectively. The obtained ‘F’ ratio

group were 3.74 and 3.67 respectively. The obtained ‘F’ ratio of adjusted post-test mean was 11.38 which was greater than

of pre-test mean was 0.026, which was lesser than the required the required table value of 4.32 for df 1 and 21 at 0.05 level of

table value of 4.30 for df 1 and 22 at 0.05 level of confidence confidence on speed. The result of the study indicates that

on speed. The post-test mean value on speed of experimental there was a significant difference between the adjusted post-

group (plyometric training group) and control group were 3.54 test mean of plyometric training and control group on speed.

28

International Journal of Yoga, Physiotherapy and Physical Education

**Table 3: Computation of analysis of co-variance on muscular endurance among experimental group and control group
**

Test Experimental Group Control group SSV SS DF MS ‘F’

Pre-test mean 40.00 39.91 BG 0.042 1 0.042

0.001

Pre-test sd 7.73 3.36 WG 782.917 22 35.59

Post-test mean 44.75 39.25 BG 181.5 1 181.5

6.79*

Post-test sd 6.63 5.78 WG 588.5 22 26.75

BG 176.87 1 176.87

Adjusted posttest mean 45 39.28 131.16*

WG 28.319 21 1.349

*Significant at 0.05 level of confidence

Table value at 0.05 level of significance for 1 and 22 degrees greater than the required table value of 4.30 for df 1 and 22 at

of freedom is 4.30 and 1 and 21 degrees of freedom is 4.32. 0.05 level of confidence on muscular endurance. The adjusted

Table III shows that the pre-test mean value on speed of post-test mean value on muscular endurance of experimental

experimental group (plyometric training group) and control group (plyometric training group) and control group were 45

group were 40.00 and 39.91 respectively. The obtained ‘F’ and 39.28 respectively. The obtained ‘F’ ratio of adjusted

ratio of pre-test mean was 0.001, which was lesser than the post-test mean was 131.16 which were greater than the

required table value of 4.30 for df 1 and 22 at 0.05 level of required table value of 4.32 for df 1 and 21 at 0.05 level of

confidence on muscular endurance. The post-test mean value confidence on muscular endurance. The result of the study

on speed of experimental group (plyometric training group) indicates that there was a significant difference between the

and control group were 44.75 and 39.25 respectively. The adjusted post-test mean of combined plyometric and circuit

obtained ‘F’ ratio of post-test mean was 6.79 which were training and control group on muscular endurance.

Table 4: Computation of analysis of co-variance on flexibility among experimental group and control group

TEST Experimental Group Control Group SSV SS DF MS ‘F’

Pre-Test Mean 32.41 32.25 BG 0.16 1 0.16

0.005

Pre-Test SD 4.90 6.11 WG 676.66 22 30.75

post-test Mean 36.75 31.41 BG 170.66 1 170.66

6.045*

Post-Test SD 4.71 5.85 WG 621.16 22 28.24

Adjusted post test BG 160.71 1 160.71

37 31.49 180.66*

mean WG 18.68 21 0.89

*Significant at 0.05 level of confidence

Table value at 0.05 level of significance for 1 and 22 degrees test mean is 6.045 which were greater than the required table

of freedom is 4.30 and 1 and 21 degrees of freedom is 4.32. value of 4.30 for df 1 and 22 at 0.05 level of confidence on

Table IV shows that the pre-test mean value on flexibility of flexibility. The adjusted post-test mean value on flexibility of

experimental group (combined plyometric and circuit training experimental group (combined plyometric and circuit training

group) and control group were 32.41 and 32.25 respectively. group) and control group were 37 and 31.49 respectively. The

The obtained ‘F’ ratio of pre-test mean was 0.005, which was obtained ‘F’ ratio of adjusted post-test mean was 180.66

lesser than the required table value of 4.30 for df 1 and 22 at which was greater than the required table value of 4.32 for df

0.05 level of confidence on flexibility. The post-test mean 1 and 21 at 0.05 level of confidence on flexibility. The result

value on flexibility of experimental group (combined of the study indicates that there was a significant difference

plyometric and circuit training group) and control group were between the adjusted post-test mean of combined plyometric

36.75 and 31.41 respectively. The obtained ‘F’ ratio of post- and circuit training and control group on flexibility.

Table 5: Computation of analysis of co-variance on agility among experimental group and control group

**Test Experimental group control group SSV SS DF MS ‘F’
**

Pre-test Mean 11.73 11.64 BG 0.043 1 0.043

0.048

Pre-test Sd 0.93 0.97 WG 19.93 22 0.906

Post-test Mean 10.78 11.71 BG 5.19 1 5.19

7.17*

Post-test Sd 0.76 0.92 WG 15.94 22 0.72

Adjusted osttest BG 5.72 1 5.72

10.76 11.73 12.20*

Mean WG 9.86 21 0.47

*Significant at 0.05 level of confidence

Table value at 0.05 level of significance for 1 and 22 degrees lesser than the required table value of 4.30 for df 1 and 22 at

of freedom is 4.30 and 1 and 21 degrees of freedom is 4.32. 0.05 level of confidence on agility. The post-test mean value

Table V shows that the pre-test mean value on agility of on agility of experimental group (combined plyometric and

experimental group (combined plyometric and circuit training circuit training group) and control group were 10.78 and 11.71

group) and control group were 11.73 and 11.64 respectively. respectively. The obtained ‘F’ ratio of post-test mean is 7.17

The obtained ‘F’ ratio of pre-test mean was 0.048, which was which were greater than the required table value of 4.30 for df

29

International Journal of Yoga, Physiotherapy and Physical Education

**1 and 22 at 0.05 level of confidence on agility. The adjusted than the required table value of 4.32 for df 1 and 21 at 0.05
**

post-test mean value on agility of experimental group level of confidence on agility. The result of the study indicates

(combined plyometric and circuit training group) and control that there was a significant difference between the adjusted

group were 10.76 and 11.73 respectively. The obtained ‘F’ post-test mean of combined plyometric and circuit training

ratio of adjusted post-test mean was 12.20 which was greater and control group on agility.

Table 6: Computation of analysis of co-variance on explosive strength among experimental group and control group

Test Experimental Group Control group SSV SS DF MS ‘F’

pre-test mean 37.16 37.12 BG 0.010 1 0.010

0.001

Pre-test SD 5.84 2.43 WG 441.22 22 20.05

Post-test mean 40.75 36.25 BG 121.50 1 121.50

7.21*

Post-test SD 5.37 2.17 WG 370.50 22 16.84

BG 119.51 1 119.51

Adjusted posttest mean 41 36.27 113.99*

WG 22.01 21 1.048

*Significant at 0.05 level of confidence

Table value at 0.05 level of significance for 1 and 22 degrees greater than the required table value of 4.30 for df 1 and 22 at

of freedom is 4.30 and 1 and 21 degrees of freedom is 4.32. 0.05 level of confidence on explosive strength. The adjusted

Table VI shows that the pre-test mean value on explosive post-test mean value on explosive strength of experimental

strength of experimental group (combined plyometric and group (combined plyometric and circuit training group) and

circuit training group) and control group were 37.16 and 37.12 control group were 41 and 36.27 respectively. The obtained

respectively. The obtained ‘F’ ratio of pre-test mean was ‘F’ ratio of adjusted post-test mean was 113.99 which was

0.001, which was lesser than the required table value of 4.30 greater than the required table value of 4.32 for df 1 and 21 at

for df 1 and 22 at 0.05 level of confidence on explosive 0.05 level of confidence on explosive strength. The result of

strength. The post-test mean value on explosive strength of the study indicates that there was a significant difference

experimental group (combined plyometric and circuit training between the adjusted post-test mean of combined plyometric

group) and control group were 40.75 and 36.25 respectively. and circuit training and control group on explosive strength.

The obtained ‘F’ ratio of post-test mean was 7.21 which were

Table 7: Computation of analysis of co-variance on vital capacity among experimental group and control group

Test Experimental Group Control Group SSV SS DF MS ‘F’

Pre-test Mean 3.75 3.72 BG 0.005 1 0.005

0.017

pre-test SD 0.61 0.51 WG 6.97 22 0.32

Post-test Mean 4.15 3.60 BG 1.83 1 1.83

10.37*

Post-test SD 0.42 0.41 WG 3.88 22 0.18

Adjusted post test BG 1.70 1 1.70

4.15 3.61

mean WG 0.88 21 0.042 40.70*

* Significant at 0.05 level of confidence

Table value at 0.05 level of significance for 1 and 22 degrees the required table value of 4.30 for df 1 and 22 at 0.05 level of

of freedom is 4.30 and 1 and 21 degrees of freedom is 4.32. confidence on vital capacity. The adjusted post-test mean

Table VII shows that the pre-test mean value on Vital capacity value on vital capacity of experimental group (combined

of experimental group (combined plyometric and circuit plyometric and circuit training group) and control group were

training group) and control group were 3.75 and 3.72 4.15 and 3.61 respectively. The obtained ‘F’ ratio of adjusted

respectively. The obtained ‘F’ ratio of pre-test mean was post-test mean was 40.70 which was greater than the required

0.017, which was lesser than the required table value of 4.30 table value of 4.32 for df 1 and 21 at 0.05 level of confidence

for df 1 and 22 at 0.05 level of confidence on vital capacity. on vital capacity. The result of the study indicates that there

The post-test mean value on vital capacity of experimental was a significant difference between the adjusted post-test

group (combined plyometric and circuit training group) and mean of combined plyometric and circuit training and control

control group were 4.15 and 3.60 respectively. The obtained group on vital capacity.

‘F’ ratio of post-test mean was 10.37 which were greater than

Table 8: Computation of analysis of co-variance on anaerobic capacity among experimental group and control group

Test Experimental group Control group SSV SS DF MS ‘F’

Pre-test mean 121.20 121.03 BG 0.167 1 0.167

0.001

pre-test SD 15.40 15.41 WG 5223.50 22 237.43

Post-test mean 134.73 119.23 BG 1441.19 1 1441.19

5.76*

Post-test SD 17.11 14.41 WG 5506.97 22 250.31

adjusted post test BG 1409.98 1 1409.98

134.6 119.3 175.13*

mean WG 169.07 21 8.05

*Significant at 0.05 level of confidence

30

International Journal of Yoga, Physiotherapy and Physical Education

Table value at 0.05 level of significance for 1 and 22 degrees between adjusted post-test means of experimental group

of freedom is 4.30 and 1 and 21 degrees of freedom is 4.32. (combined plyometric and circuit training group) and control

Table VIII shows that the pre-test mean value on anaerobic group. It is concluded that the combined Plyometric and

capacity of experimental group (combined plyometric and circuit training group showed significant improvement in

circuit training group) and control group were 121.20 and flexibility of volleyball players.

121.03 respectively. The obtained ‘F’ ratio of pre-test mean

was 0.001, which was lesser than the required table value of Agility

4.30 for df 1 and 22 at 0.05 level of confidence on anaerobic The result of the study reveals that there is a significant

capacity. The post-test mean value on anaerobic capacity difference in agility of combined plyometric and circuit

experimental group (combined plyometric and circuit training training group between pre and post-test. But there is no

group) and control group were 134.73 and 119.23 significant difference in the agility of control group between

respectively. The obtained ‘F’ ratio of post-test mean was 5.76 pre and post-test. Regarding statistical analysis it is observed

which were greater than the required table value of 4.30 for df that there is a significant difference in agility between adjusted

1 and 22 at 0.05 level of confidence on anaerobic capacity. post-test means of experimental group (combined plyometric

The adjusted post-test mean value on vital capacity of and circuit training group) and control group. It is concluded

experimental group (combined plyometric and circuit training that the combined Plyometric and circuit training group

group) and control group were 134.7 and 119.3 respectively. showed significant improvement in agility of volleyball

The obtained ‘F’ ratio of adjusted post-test mean was 175.13 players.

which was greater than the required table value of 4.32 for df

1 and 21 at 0.05 level of confidence on anaerobic capacity. Explosive strength

The result of the study indicates that there was a significant The result of the study reveals that there is a significant

difference between the adjusted post-test mean of combined difference in explosive strength of combined plyometric and

plyometric and circuit training and control group on margaria circuit training group between pre and post-test. But there is

kalamen power test. no significant difference in the explosive strength of control

group between pre and post-test. Regarding statistical analysis

Discussion on findings it is observed that there is a significant difference in explosive

Speed strength between adjusted post-test means of experimental

The result of the study reveals that there is a significant group (combined plyometric and circuit training group) and

difference in speed of combined plyometric and circuit control group. It is concluded that the combined Plyometric

training group between pre and post-test. But there is no and circuit training group showed significant improvement in

significant difference in the speed of control group between explosive strength of volleyball players.

pre and post-test. Regarding statistical analysis it is observed

that there is a significant difference in speed between adjusted Vital Capacity

post-test means of experimental group (combined plyometric The result of the study reveals that there is a significant

and circuit training group) and control group. It is concluded difference in vital capacity of combined plyometric and circuit

that the combined plyometric and circuit training group training group between pre and post-test. But there is no

showed significant improvement in speed of volleyball significant difference in the vital capacity of control group

players. between pre and post-test. Regarding statistical analysis it is

observed that there is a significant difference in vital capacity

Muscular Endurance between adjusted post-test means of experimental group

The result of the study reveals that there is a significant (combined plyometric and circuit training group) and control

difference in muscular endurance of combined plyometric and group. It is concluded that the combined Plyometric and

circuit training group between pre and post-test. But there is circuit training group showed significant improvement in vital

no significant difference in the muscular endurance of control capacity of volleyball players.

group between pre and post-test. Regarding statistical analysis

it is observed that there is a significant difference in muscular Anaerobic capacity

endurance between adjusted post-test means of experimental The result of the study reveals that there is a significant

group (combined plyometric and circuit training group) and difference in anaerobic capacity of combined plyometric and

control group. It is concluded that the combined Plyometric circuit training group between pre and post-test. But there is

and circuit training group showed significant improvement in no significant difference in the anaerobic capacity of control

muscular endurance of volleyball players. group between pre and post-test. Regarding statistical analysis

it is observed that there is a significant difference in anaerobic

Flexibility capacity between adjusted post-test means of experimental

The result of the study reveals that there is a significant group (combined plyometric and circuit training group) and

difference in flexibility of combined plyometric and circuit control group. It is concluded that the combined Plyometric

training group between pre and post-test. But there is no and circuit training group showed significant improvement in

significant difference in the flexibility of control group anaerobic capacity of volleyball players.

between pre and post-test. Regarding statistical analysis it is

observed that there is a significant difference in flexibility Conclusion

31

International Journal of Yoga, Physiotherapy and Physical Education

**The plyometric training group had shown significant
**

improvement in all selected physical and physiological

variables (speed, muscular endurance, flexibility, explosive

strength, agility, vital capacity and anaerobic capacity) among

male volleyball players.

The control group had not shown any significant changes on

selected physical and physiological variables (speed, muscular

endurance, flexibility, explosive strength, agility, vital

capacity and anaerobic capacity) among male volleyball.

The result of the study showed that there is a significant

difference among the adjusted post-test mean of the

experimental group and control group on selected physical

and physiological variables among male volleyball players.

Reference

1. Aneja OP. How to play volleyball, Prerna Prakashan

Publications, 2012.

2. Dabir Qureshi R. Science of Sports Training, Sports

Publication, 2009.

3. Donald A. Chu Jumping in to the Plyometrics, Human

kinetics Publications, 1998.

4. Edward L, Fox Richard W, Bowers Merle L. The

physiological basis of Physical Education and Athletics,

Brown Publications, 2001.

5. Gopala Krishnan RW. Physical Fitness Exercises and

Health, Sports Publications, 2012.

6. Harold M, Barrow Rosemary MC, Gee Kathleen A.

Practical Measurement in Physical Education and Sports,

Philadelphia: Lea and Fibiger publishers, 1989.

7. Karad PL. Test and Measurements Evaluation in Physical

education, Khel Sahitya Kendra Publications, 2011.

8. Ranganathan PP. Volleyball a guide to playing and

coaching, Friends Publications, 2000.

9. Sandhya Tiwari. Exercise Physiology, Sports Publication,

1999.

10. Sanjay Agashe R. Introduction to Physical Education

Fitness and Sports, KhelSahithya Kendra Publications,

2013.

32

- Government Expenditure and Economic Growth Nexus: Empirical Evidence from Nigeria (1970-2012)Uploaded byInternational Organization of Scientific Research (IOSR)
- Futsal FitnessUploaded byalmaforma
- [Doi 10.1519%2FJSC.0b013e3182606cd9] R. Barroso; C. Silva-batista; V. Tricoli; H. Roschel; C. Ugrinow -- The Effects of Different Intensities and Durations of the General Warm-up on Leg Press 1RMUploaded byakmal
- Pavel Tsatsouline - 2005 interview.pdfUploaded byRaspeL
- usain bolt body in motionUploaded byapi-320928500
- brochure physical activityUploaded byapi-340126515
- Lab 3Uploaded bydavidvandenberg1
- Application of the Repetitions in Reserve Based.10Uploaded byAndreas Stoupas
- Ramoglu 2010Uploaded byRamez W Bandak
- 5-day-menu-plan-newUploaded byJasmina Mina Bogucanin
- Artigo_Application of the Repetitions in ReserveBased Rating of Perceived Exertion Scale for Resistance TrainingUploaded byPaulo Camelo
- Cfa L1 Session03Uploaded byFernando Fraga
- Lyle McDonald Generic Bulking Routine FAQUploaded byockhamsrazor2
- skittles project epofolioUploaded byapi-220502804
- Hypothesis N Testing.ppt (1)Uploaded byAnup Ratnaparkhi
- Math 101 3rd Lec Exam ReviewerUploaded bySirWheistein
- Anatomy of Grappling SportsUploaded byculopelu
- Unit 6 Fit Test Ass Brief StudentUploaded bymancoll
- one rep max - 10 week program 1Uploaded byapi-358762053
- Essay on FlexibilityUploaded byJohn Doe
- Eight Keys to Maximal Strength DevelopmentUploaded byKyle Carter

- Impact of circuit resistance training on leg strength among University players from different disciplineUploaded bygovindasamy
- Efficacy of SAQ drills on selected bio-motor abilities among inter collegiate athletesUploaded bygovindasamy
- Effect of yoga therapy on selected bio-chemical variables among diabetic mellitus middle aged men Virudhunagar districtUploaded bygovindasamy
- Effect of prescribing and monitoring direct and indirect physical activity on selected health related fitness and cardio respiratory variables among obese school boysUploaded bygovindasamy
- Analysis of anthropometric peculiarities among fast and spin bowlers in the cricket academy of Tamil Nadu cricket associationUploaded bygovindasamy
- Effect of yogic practice on selected biochemical variables among obese middle age school boysUploaded bygovindasamy
- Comparison of selected motor ability variables among football players of different positional playUploaded bygovindasamy
- Effect of yoga on selected physiological and haematological variables among irregular menstrual womenUploaded bygovindasamy
- Relationship between selected coordinative abilities and concentration among hearing impaired studentsUploaded bygovindasamy
- Analysis of life stress obesity and cardiovascular risks among professional of different sectorsUploaded bygovindasamy

- amanda jacobson 2016onlineverisionUploaded byapi-278058369
- multimodal[1].pdfUploaded byJulio Peña Galindo
- Base Para Tesis ConsentimientoUploaded byAndres Narvaez
- The Impact of Mobile and Internet Banking on Performance of Financial Institutions in KenyaUploaded byTumusiime Isaac
- 4.1.2 amaiUploaded byManuel Resendiz Lovecraft
- BBS10_ppt_ch01Uploaded bycleofecalo
- Training and Development Practiced by TnbUploaded byKhalilahjung
- William Dowd, "A Bright Idea?: The Promise and Peril of a Memory Drug"Uploaded byMIT Comparative Media Studies/Writing
- eliuslideUploaded byapi-284720550
- fminuncUploaded bySyarif Hidayat
- 070559.pdfUploaded byCláudio Zarco II
- EKO PROJECT EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES AS PREDICTORS OF MATHEMATICS ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENTSUploaded byOnakoya Sunday Oluwaseun
- BANDO UNICOUploaded byFederico Castellani
- Ensayo de Titulacion Comprension Lectora FINAL COPIA CORREGIDAUploaded byKabutoCarmona
- Wayne Daniel PptUploaded bykmeena73
- Extrinsic risk factors.pdfUploaded bylectorix
- Urban Simulation ModelUploaded byAsian Development Bank Conferences
- 1.MG 08-09 Prog. Final Conferences(2)Uploaded byAndra Vasile
- HMISUploaded byayubbin
- Rrajatt Chawla A3906414572 D68Uploaded byRajat Chawla
- 45.4_Effects-of-Industrial-Safety-and-Health-on-Employees----Job-Performance-in-Selected-Cement-Companies-in-Cross-River-State-Nigeria.pdfUploaded bySumon Ahmed
- final eval0Uploaded byapi-354005756
- Ghost of JupiterUploaded byAbraxaz
- Project SynopsisUploaded byraymar2k
- L07_Grp3.pptxUploaded byDavid Lee
- prUploaded byFelipe Melo
- P H Artes, published papers 1999-2013Uploaded byPaul H Artes
- Performance ManagementUploaded byfariskts
- Terratek Integrity Monitoring of StructuresUploaded byoniel888
- Trend Following Stocks-Market Trend Signal-Incyte Corporation INCYUploaded byMarket Trend Signal