Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Power output in traditional and ballistic bench press in elite athletes: Influence of
training background
a
Irineu Loturco , Lucas A. Pereiraa, Ronaldo Kobala and Michael R. McGuiganb,c
a
NAR - Nucleus of High Performance in Sport, São Paulo, Brazil; bSports Performance Research Institute New Zealand (SPRINZ), Auckland University
of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand; cSchool of Medical and Health Sciences, Edith Cowan University, Perth, Australia
CONTACT Irineu Loturco irineu.loturco@terra.com.br. NAR - Nucleus of High Performance in Sport. Av. Padre José Maria, 555 - Santo Amaro, 04753–060
São Paulo, SP, Brazil
© 2018 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
278 I. LOTURCO ET AL.
(e.g., power) may affect the performance of a secondary qual- comprising moderate to light self-selected running for 5-min,
ity (e.g., maximum strength), and (2) the optimal power devel- and sub-maximal attempts at each exercise.
opment seems to be dependent on a sequential and
progressive resistance training program (i.e., hypertrophy,
Participants
strength, and then muscle power) (Zamparo, Minetti, & Di
Prampero, 2002). Therefore, it may be premature to conclude Sixty athletes from different sports disciplines participated in
(at least for the upper limbs) that ballistic movements are this study. Athletes were divided into two groups according to
always superior to traditional exercises to maximize and their strength-power training characteristics as follows: hyper-
develop muscle power. trophy-based trained athletes (HTA: n = 31 [24 men and 7
In fact, some studies have revealed conflicting results women]; 27.1 ± 4.8 years; 76.1 ± 15.7 kg; 175.3 ± 8.6 cm) which
regarding the mechanical differences between TBP and BBT included athletes who had systematically performed hypertro-
exercises. Cronin, McNair, and Marshall (2001) found no differ- phy training programmes for at least 12 weeks (three to five
ences in peak acceleration and peak force between TBP and times a week), using a high number of sets (i.e., > 16 sets),
BBT. In an additional study concerning the force-velocity rela- moderate heavy to heavy loads (i.e., > 70% of 1RM), short rest
tionship and its respective implications for training and periods (i.e., ~ 60 s), and low velocity exercises; and power-
research, the same authors did not report significant differ- based trained athletes (PTA: n = 29 [25 men and 4 women];
ences in average force production among various types of TBP 25.3 ± 5.7 years; 80.6 ± 13.4 kg, 178.1 ± 9.5 cm) which included
and BBT, although greater force outputs were recorded using athletes who had usually performed power oriented training
higher loading intensities across all techniques (Cronin, sessions for at least 12 weeks (three to five times a week),
McNair, & Marshall, 2003). More recently, Loturco et al. using a low number of sets (i.e., > 12 sets), light to moderate
(2017c) observed that National team rugby players were able loads (i.e., 30–45% of 1RM), long rest periods (i.e., > 180 s), and
to produce higher power outputs during TBP, when compared high velocity exercises (i.e., loaded and unloaded plyometrics).
to its ballistic variation. The reasons behind this trend are still The sample (including both HTA and PTA groups) comprised
controversial but may be related to the training routine professional athletes involved in national and international
adopted by these athletes, who regularly perform hypertrophy competitions, including members of Brazilian national teams,
training sessions as part of their practice, with the primary a boxing Olympic champion, a two times Karate World cham-
objective of increasing muscle size. The features of this train- pion, Pan-American champions, former Ultimate Fighting
ing scheme (i.e., high number of sets, moderate to heavy Championship (UFC) belt owners, and Olympic and Pan-
loads, short rest periods, and low-velocity exercises) might American medalists, in 10 different sports disciplines, thus
have influenced the functional adaptations of the players, attesting to their high level of competitiveness. All participants
compromising their ability to apply force at higher velocities, signed an informed consent form prior to study participation
and thus their performance in ballistic movements (Loturco, and the study was approved by the local Ethics Committee.
2018). Nevertheless, this argument is speculative and requires
further research.
Power outputs in the bench press and bench throw
Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the per-
exercises
formance obtained by athletes at different training phases or
with different training objectives (i.e., power-based trained Bar-power outputs were measured in the TBP and BBT exer-
athletes group [PTA] versus hypertrophy-based trained ath- cises; all performed on a Smith-Machine (Hammer Strength
letes group [HTA]) in TBP and BBT exercises. Considering our Equipment, Rosemont, IL, USA). Athletes performed the TBP
extensive experience with professional athletes and previous and BBT exercises on the same day, in a randomized order,
observations on this issue, we hypothesized that the PTA with a 30-min interval between exercises. The athletes were
would perform better in the ballistic variation, whereas the instructed to execute three repetitions at maximal velocity for
HTA would produce higher power outputs in the TBP. each load, with a 5-min interval provided between sets. The
test started at a load corresponding to 30% of the individual
body mass (BM). A load of 5% of BM was gradually added in
Methods each set until a clear decrement in the mean power (MP),
mean propulsive power (MPP), and/or peak power (PP) was
Testing procedures
observed. The load associated with the highest power output
This cross-sectional descriptive study aimed to compare the was considered as the load at the “optimum power zone”
performance obtained by athletes from different sports disci- (OPZ). During the BBT, the athletes were instructed to lower
plines in TBP and BBT exercises. They performed the TBP and the bar in a controlled manner until the barbell lightly
BBT exercises on the same day, in a randomized order. To touched their chest and then to throw the bar as fast as
perform the tests, athletes arrived at the sports laboratory possible. In the TBP exercise, the subjects were also instructed
prior to the first training session of the week after a rest period to move the load as fast as possible; however, they could not
of at least 24-h, in a fasting state for at least 2-h, avoiding lose contact with the bar. To determine the power outputs, a
alcohol and caffeine consumption for at least 24-h before the linear transducer (T-Force, Dynamic Measurement System;
tests. All athletes were previously familiarized with the testing Ergotech Consulting S.L., Murcia, Spain) was attached at the
procedures due to their constant assessments in our facilities. lateral extremity of the Smith-Machine bar. Comparison of the
A standardized warm-up was performed before the tests, bar-velocities between the TBP and BBT exercises was
JOURNAL OF SPORTS SCIENCES 279
Table 1. Test-retest reliability for all velocity outputs in the traditional bench press (TBP) and ballistic bench throw (BBT) exercises for both groups of athletes.
CV (95% CI) ICC (95% CI) SEM
TBP BBT TBP BBT TBP BBT
HTA MV 6.92 (5.12; 8.73) 6.04 (4.58; 7.50) 0.97 (0.93; 0.98) 0.98 (0.95; 0.99) 0.08 0.07
MPV 7.31 (5.41; 9.22) 6.31 (4.55; 8.07) 0.95 (0.90; 0.98) 0.96 (0.92; 0.98) 0.10 0.10
PV 8.02 (6.86; 9.17) 7.31 (5.92; 8.69) 0.98 (0.97; 0.99) 0.98 (0.96; 0.99) 0.10 0.13
PTA MV 5.54 (4.21; 6.96) 5.31 (4.27; 6.34) 0.90 (0.78; 0.95) 0.97 (0.94; 0.99) 0.08 0.06
MPV 6.45 (5.22; 7.68) 5.48 (4.20; 6.76) 0.92 (0.83; 0.96) 0.96 (0.91; 0.98) 0.09 0.10
PV 7.44 (6.45; 8.44) 6.62 (5.46; 7.78) 0.96 (0.92; 0.98) 0.97 (0.94; 0.99) 0.11 0.12
Note: HTA: hypertrophy trained athletes; PTA: power trained athletes; MV: mean velocity: MPV: mean propulsive velocity; PV: peak velocity; CV: coefficient of
variation; CI: confidence intervals; ICC: intraclass correlation coefficient; SEM: standard error of estimate.
280 I. LOTURCO ET AL.
Figure 1. Comparison of mean power (MP), mean propulsive power (MPP), and peak power (PP) between the traditional bench press (TBP) and ballistic bench throw
(BBT) exercises for power trained and hypertrophy trained athletes (PTA and HTA, respectively). VL: very likely and significant difference between exercises, P < 0.05;
AC: almost certainly and significant difference between exercises, P < 0.05.
Figure 2. Comparison of mean force (MF), mean propulsive force (MPF), and peak force (PF) between the traditional bench press (TBP) and ballistic bench throw
(BBT) exercises for power trained and hypertrophy trained athletes (PTA and HTA, respectively). VL: very likely and significant difference between exercises, P < 0.05;
AC: almost certainly and significant difference between exercises, P < 0.05.
Figure 3. Comparison of mean velocity (MV), mean propulsive velocity (MPV), and peak velocity (PV) between the traditional bench press (TBP) and ballistic bench
throw (BBT) exercises for power trained and hypertrophy trained athletes (PTA and HTA, respectively). The differences between exercises were all rated as unclear
and non-significant P > 0.05.
Some previous investigations have also shown conflicting used to execute the exercise (ballistic or non-ballistic varia-
results when comparing ballistic and traditional exercises. For tions of bench press) across a wide range of loads (from 30 to
example, a classic study by Cronin et al. (2003) described that 80% of 1RM). Nevertheless, greater force outputs were pro-
the average force production was unaffected by the technique gressively recorded using higher loads, for all exercise
JOURNAL OF SPORTS SCIENCES 281
Table 2. Comparison of velocity-based variables using a load corresponding to 30% of the athlete’s body mass between power and hypertrophy trained athletes in
the traditional bench press and ballistic bench throw exercises.
Traditional Bench Press Ballistic Bench Throw
PTA HTA PTA HTA
MV 30% BM (m.s−1) 1.24 ± 0.12 1.26 ± 0.22 1.44 ± 0.19 1.36 ± 0.23L
MPV 30% BM (m.s−1) 1.33 ± 0.16 1.32 ± 0.25 1.60 ± 0.25 1.50 ± 0.27L
PV 30% BM (m.s−1) 2.38 ± 0.32 2.39 ± 0.43 2.71 ± 0.24 2.56 ± 0.48L
Note: PTA: power trained athletes; HTA: hypertrophy trained athletes; MV: mean velocity, MPV: mean propulsive velocity; PV: peak velocity; BM: body mass. LLikely
and significantly different from PTA, P < 0.05.
Table 3. Comparison of time related variables using a load corresponding to 30% of the athlete’s body mass and at the optimum power zone between power and
hypertrophy trained athletes in the traditional bench press and ballistic bench throw exercises.
Traditional Bench Press Ballistic Bench Throw
PTA HTA PTA HTA
Time to peak velocity (ms) 30% BM 316.5 ± 47.7 333.4 ± 77.0P 321.4 ± 53.0 340.4 ± 63.2P
OPZ 332.7 ± 60.5 351.1 ± 84.3P 343.4 ± 57.5 366.9 ± 65.9L
Time to peak power (ms) 30% BM 263.7 ± 51.6 275.7 ± 81.9 260.3 ± 51.3 280.1 ± 70.3P
OPZ 281.6 ± 64.2 295.4 ± 92.6 283.6 ± 58.9 306.7 ± 74.2P
Note: PTA: power trained athletes; HTA: hypertrophy trained athletes; BM: body mass; OPZ: optimum power zone. PPossibly and significantly different from PTA,
P < 0.05; LLikely and significantly different from PTA, P < 0.05.
282 I. LOTURCO ET AL.
subjects exposed to these stimuli may even present significant The results of this study confirm previous findings that the
decreases in their ability to perform high-velocity activities, optimum power zones always occur at narrow ranges of bar-
such as unloaded vertical jumps or maximal short sprints velocities (Loturco et al., 2015, 2017c). Of note, this phenom-
(McBride et al., 2002; Pareja-Blanco, Sanchez-Medina, Suarez- enon appears to be independent of relative strength level,
Arrones, & Gonzalez-Badillo, 2017). Although the mechanisms exercise-type, sport discipline, or training background
behind these responses are not completely understood, it can (Loturco et al., 2017b, 2016b, 2018; Sanchez-Medina et al.,
be speculated that hypertrophy-based programs result in sig- 2010). Thus, coaches interested in increasing the strength-
nificant reductions in contraction velocities, which is sup- power related qualities in their athletes through the use of
ported by a large number of studies showing the specificity optimum power loads are encouraged to use the bar-velocity
of force-velocity adaptations (Andersen & Aagaard, 2010; reference values reported here and in other studies (Loturco
Behm & Sale, 1993; Cormie et al., 2011a, 2011b; Dinn & et al., 2015, 2017c). This information is of practical importance
Behm, 2007). for sports practitioners, due to the established effectiveness,
The data reported here clearly demonstrate how specific applicability, and timesaving characteristics of the optimum
training adaptations may affect performance in upper body power loads (Loturco et al., 2016a; Wilson, Newton, Murphy, &
ballistic and traditional exercises. For example, when analyzing Humphries, 1993). It is worthwhile noting that this loading
the BBT outputs, it can be noted that the HTA attained lower range and the force-velocity profile usually fluctuate during a
bar velocities for all the measured variables (MV, MPV, and PV), given training period (e.g., microcycle), emphasizing the
and spent more time reaching both peak velocity (+ 6%) and necessity of performing frequent measurements to properly
peak power (+ 8%) than the PTA under the lightest loading determine the load for maximum mechanical power produc-
condition (30% BM). This finding favors the athletes more tion (Banyard, Nosaka, & Haff, 2017; Kawamori & Haff, 2004).
prone to apply force at higher velocities (i.e., PTA). Moreover, Finally, it is important to highlight that: (1) tests were per-
the HTA achieved the optimum power zone in the TBP with a formed on a Smith-machine, thus limiting the extrapolation of
meaningfully heavier load (10%) than the one used to achieve our findings to other exercise settings (e.g., free-weight exer-
the same zone in the BBT. On the other hand, the PTA used cises), and (2) outputs were collected from the barbell, using a
similar loads to achieve the optimum zones in both the TBP linear position transducer; therefore, our results do not repre-
and BBP. Considering that both groups presented the same sent the total power of the system and cannot be compared
bar-velocities at the optimum power zone (Figure 3), it may be with force plate data. In this sense, it must still be remem-
concluded that the HTA has the ability to move heavier loads bered that in several sport tasks the level of performance is
with the same velocity in the TBP, which also denotes a directly related to the power applied by the athlete to an
velocity-specific training response in this group. These find- external implement or to the opponent (Gabbett, Jenkins, &
ings reveal that athletes who train under hypertrophy-based Abernethy, 2011; Loturco et al., 2017c; Meir, Newton, Curtis,
conditions during a particular phase are likely to develop a Fardell, & Butler, 2001; Reid & Schneiker, 2008).
reduced capability to rapidly accelerate light loads, while pre- We recognize that this study is limited by the very particu-
senting a relatively increased capacity to generate higher lar and unique characteristics of the sample, totally composed
levels of power at higher loads, lower velocities (mechanical of top-level athletes from different sports disciplines, including
condition that favors the TBP) (Loturco, 2018; Loturco et al., Olympic Champions and medalists, World and Pan-American
2017c). Champions and medalists, and international and national
To some extent, our data are in accordance with the results competitors well-classified in their respective rankings and
of Cronin et al. (2003), who indicated that different variations confederations, which could compromise the extrapolation
of BBT do not necessarily produce greater force outputs than of our data for less trained subjects. Nevertheless, it is essential
TBP. In fact, at the OPZ, the force production – for all the to contrast these data with the more standardized and uni-
assessed variables (Figure 2) – was superior in the TBP. form concepts, to provide coaches and researchers with
Although more research is needed to clarify the exact nature detailed information regarding the distinct traits of these indi-
of this phenomenon, it may be speculated that the load plays viduals at the extreme edge of human performance. These
a key role in modulating the force application throughout steps are critical to design training programs and practices
these exercises, with the kinematic variables (i.e., acceleration that will effectively serve this population.
and velocity) assuming a less dominant influence in this
mechanical relation. Therefore, to provide more precise com-
Conclusions
parisons of ballistic and traditional exercises, it is essential to
assess their outputs over a comprehensive range of loads, Ballistic exercises are widely recognized by their inherent capa-
which likely reduces the probability of committing errors of city to produce muscle power and should undoubtedly be used
accuracy during data collection and interpretation. These data to improve the capability to produce greater force outputs at
emphasise the necessity to systematically evaluate athletes higher velocities. Nonetheless, it seems that in highly trained
from different sport disciplines and training backgrounds, athletes, some specific resistance training approaches (e.g.,
who usually develop very specific adaptations, according to hypertrophy-based programs) may reduce the ability to apply
their individual characteristics and workout routines. For elite force against lighter loads, thus affecting performance during
athletes, the use of general concepts in which some notions of upper-body ballistic movements. For these subjects, the tradi-
uniformity are implied might be extremely inadequate and, tional bench press is able to generate higher levels of muscle
more importantly, ineffective. power than its ballistic variation, and this is independent of the
JOURNAL OF SPORTS SCIENCES 283
power outcome used to compare the exercises. These results Cronin, J., McNair, P. J., & Marshall, R. N. (2001). Developing explosive
have very important applications in more applied settings. For power: A comparison of technique and training. Journal of Science
and Medicine in Sport, 4(1), 59–70.
example, if the subject presents this mechanical characteristic
Cronin, J. B., McNair, P. J., & Marshall, R. N. (2003). Force-velocity analysis of
and must be able to apply force against very-light loads (or even strength-training techniques and load: Implications for training strat-
in unloaded conditions) as rapidly and forcefully as possible, the egy and research. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 17(1),
coach is encouraged to rethink the workout routine, possibly 148–155.
Dinn, N. A., & Behm, D. G. (2007). A comparison of ballistic-movement and
implementing training schemes which prioritize explosive exer-
ballistic-intent training on muscle strength and activation. International
cises performed at very-high velocities (e.g., ballistic throw Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 2(4), 386–399.
movements). On the other hand, athletes who are required to Gabbett, T. J., Jenkins, D. G., & Abernethy, B. (2011). Correlates of tackling
generate greater force and power outputs against moderate to ability in high-performance rugby league players. Journal of Strength
heavy loads, may also use traditional bench press (performed at and Conditioning Research, 25(1), 72–79.
Gonzales-Badillo, J. J., & Sanchez-Medina, L. (2010). Movement velocity as
optimum power loads) to develop these specific neuromecha-
a measure of loading intensity in resistance training. International
nical qualities. Importantly, independent of the main objective Journal of Sports Medicine, 31(5), 347–352.
of the training, due to their unique characteristics, elite athletes Kawamori, N., & Haff, G. G. (2004). The optimal training load for the
must be assessed regularly. For this selected group of subjects, development of muscular power. Journal of Strength and Conditioning
general assumptions can be very misleading and ineffective. Research, 18(3), 675–684.
Lake, J., Lauder, M., Smith, N., & Shorter, K. (2012). A comparison of ballistic
Experimental interventions should be conducted to test the
and nonballistic lower-body resistance exercise and the methods used
effectiveness of traditional bench press and ballistic bench to identify their positive lifting phases. Journal of Applied Biomechanics,
throws in improving the strength-power qualities of top-level 28(4), 431–437.
athletes, as well as assessing the transference of their respective Loturco, I. (2018). Authors’ response to letter to the editor Bar velo-
neuromechanical adaptations to more specific motor skills (e.g., cities capable of optimising the muscle power in strength-power
exercises. by Loturco, Pereira, Abad, Tabares, Moraes, Kobal,
punching or throwing ability).
Kitamura & Nakamura (2017) Journal of Sports Sciences, 36(14),
1602–1606.
Loturco, I., Kobal, R., Kitamura, K., Fernandes, V., Moura, N., Siqueira, F., . . .
Disclosure statement Pereira, L. A. (2017a). Predictive factors of elite sprint performance:
Influences of muscle mechanical properties and functional parameters.
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, In Press doi: 10.1519/
JSC.0000000000002196.
Loturco, I., Kobal, R., Moraes, J. E., Kitamura, K., Cal Abad, C. C., Pereira, L.
ORCID A., & Nakamura, F. Y. (2017b). Predicting the maximum dynamic
Irineu Loturco http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1309-2568 strength in bench press: The high precision of the bar velocity
approach. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 31(4),
1127–1131.
Loturco, I., Nakamura, F. Y., Kobal, R., Gil, S., Pivetti, B., Pereira, L. A., &
References Roschel, H. (2016a). Traditional periodization versus optimum training
load applied to soccer players: Effects on neuromuscular abilities.
Andersen, J. L., & Aagaard, P. (2010). Effects of strength training on muscle
fiber types and size; consequences for athletes training for high-inten- International Journal of Sports Medicine, 37(13), 1051–1059.
sity sport. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 20(S2), Loturco, I., Nakamura, F. Y., Tricoli, V., Kobal, R., Abad, C. C., Kitamura, K., . . .
Gonzales-Badillo, J. J. (2015). Determining the optimum power load in
32–38.
Baker, D. (1995). Selecting the appropriate exercises and loads for speed- jump squats using the mean propulsive velocity. PLoS One, 10(10),
e0140102.
strength development. Strength and Conditioning Coach, 3(2), 8–16.
Baker, D. (2001). A series of studies on the training of high-intensity Loturco, I., Pereira, L. A., Abad, C. C., Tabares, F., Moraes, J. E., Kobal, R., . . .
muscle power in rugby league football players. Journal of Strength Nakamura, F. Y. (2017c). Bar velocities capable of optimising the muscle
power in strength-power exercises. Journal of Sports Sciences, 35(8),
and Conditioning Research, 15(2), 198–209.
Banyard, H. G., Nosaka, K., & Haff, G. G. (2017). Reliability and validity of the 734–741.
Loturco, I., Pereira, L. A., Cal Abad, C. C., Gil, S., Kitamura, K., Kobal, R., &
load-velocity relationship to predict the 1RM back squat. Journal of
Nakamura, F. Y. (2016b). Using bar velocity to predict the maximum
Strength and Conditioning Research, 31(7), 1897–1904.
Batterham, A. M., & Hopkins, W. G. (2006). Making meaningful inferences dynamic strength in the half-squat exercise. International Journal of
Sports Physiology and Performance, 11(5), 697–700.
about magnitudes. International Journal of Sports Physiology and
Performance, 1(1), 50–57. Loturco, I., Suchomel, T., Kobal, R., Arruda, A. F. S., Guerriero, A., Pereira, L.
A., & Pai, C. N. (2018). Force-velocity relationship in three different
Behm, D. G., & Sale, D. G. (1993). Velocity specificity of resistance training.
variations of prone row exercises. Journal of Strength and Conditioning
Sports Medicine, 15(6), 374–388.
Castillo, F., Valverde, T., Morales, A., Pérez-Guerra, A., De León, F., & García- Research, In Press doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002543.
Manso, J. M. (2012). Maximum power, optimal load and optimal power Maloney, S. J., Turner, A. N., & Fletcher, I. M. (2014). Ballistic exercise as a
spectrum for power training in upper-body (bench press): A review. pre-activation stimulus: A review of the literature and practical applica-
Revista Andaluza De Medicina Del Deporte, 5(1), 18–27. tions. Sports Medicine, 44(10), 1347–1359.
Cormie, P., McGuigan, M. R., & Newton, R. U. (2010). Adaptations in athletic McBride, J. M., Triplett-McBride, T., Davie, A., & Newton, R. U. (2002). The
performance after ballistic power versus strength training. Medicine and effect of heavy- vs. light-load jump squats on the development of
Science in Sports and Exercise, 42(8), 1582–1598. strength, power, and speed. Journal of Strength and Conditioning
Cormie, P., McGuigan, M. R., & Newton, R. U. (2011a). Developing maximal Research, 16(1), 75–82.
neuromuscular power: Part 2 - training considerations for improving Mcevoy, R. P., & Newton, R. U. (1998). Baseball throwing speed and base
maximal power production. Sports Medicine, 41(2), 125–146. running speed: The effects of ballistic resistance training. Journal of
Cormie, P., McGuigan, M. R., & Newton, R. U. (2011b). Developing maximal Strength and Conditioning Research, 12(4), 216–221.
neuromuscular power: Part 1-biological basis of maximal power pro- Meir, R., Newton, R., Curtis, E., Fardell, M., & Butler, B. (2001). Physical
duction. Sports Medicine, 41(1), 17–38. fitness qualities of professional rugby league football players:
284 I. LOTURCO ET AL.
Determination of positional differences. Journal of Strength and in professional rugby players. Journal of Strength and Conditioning
Conditioning Research, 15(4), 450–458. Research, 27(8), 2282–2287.
Newton, R. U., Kraemer, W. J., & Häkkinen, K. (1999). Effects of ballistic Wilson, G. J., Newton, R. U., Murphy, A. J., & Humphries, B. J. (1993). The
training on preseason preparation of elite volleyball players. Medicine optimal training load for the development of dynamic athletic perfor-
and Science in Sports and Exercise, 31(2), 323–330. mance. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 25(11), 1279–1286.
Pareja-Blanco, F., Sanchez-Medina, L., Suarez-Arrones, L., & Gonzalez- Winchester, J. B., McBride, J. M., Maher, M. A., Mikat, R. P., Allen, B. K., Kline,
Badillo, J. J. (2017). Effects of velocity loss during resistance training D. E., & McGuigan, M. R. (2008). Eight weeks of ballistic exercise
on performance in professional soccer players. International Journal of improves power independently of changes in strength and muscle
Sports Physiology and Performance, 12(4), 512–519. fiber type expression. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research,
Reid, M., & Schneiker, K. (2008). Strength and conditioning in tennis: 22(6), 1728–1734.
Current research and practice. Journal of Science and Medicine in Zamparo, P., Minetti, A. E., & Di Prampero, P. E. (2002). Interplay among
Sport, 11(3), 248–256. the changes of muscle strength, cross-sectional area and maximal
Sanchez-Medina, L., Gonzalez-Badillo, J. J., Perez, C. E., & Pallares, J. G. explosive power: Theory and facts. European Journal of Applied
(2014). Velocity- and power-load relationships of the bench pull vs. Physiology, 88(3), 193–202.
bench press exercises. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 35(3), Zaras, N., Spengos, K., Methenitis, S., Papadopoulos, C., Karampatsos, G.,
209–216. Georgiadis, G., . . . Terzis, G. (2013). Effects of strength vs. ballistic-
Sanchez-Medina, L., Perez, C. E., & Gonzalez-Badillo, J. J. (2010). Importance power training on throwing performance. Journal of Sports Science &
of the propulsive phase in strength assessment. International Journal of Medicine, 12(1), 130–137.
Sports Medicine, 31(2), 123–129. Zehr, E. P., & Sale, D. G. (1994). Ballistic movement: Muscle activation
West, D. J., Cunningham, D. J., Crewther, B. T., Cook, C. J., & Kilduff, L. P. and neuromuscular adaptation. Canadian Journal of Applied
(2013). Influence of ballistic bench press on upper body power output Physiology, 19(4), 363–378.
Copyright of Journal of Sports Sciences is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.