Sentences with phrase «peak knee joint»

Comparing the effects of different training variables, Swinton et al. (2011a) found that there was no difference in peak knee joint angles when using relative loads ranging between 10 — 80 % of 1RM with the straight bar and hexagonal bar deadlifts.

Comparing the deadlift with the squat in a group of powerlifters, Hales et al. (2009) found that there was a difference in peak knee joint angles between the squat and deadlift.

Peak knee joint angle (at the bottom position) was more acute during the squat than during the deadlift.

Comparing the deadlift with the good morning, Schellenberg et al. (2013) found that peak knee joint angle was more acute during the deadlift than during the good morning.

Comparing skilled and unskilled adolescent powerlifters, Brown and Abani (1985) found that there was a difference in peak knee joint angles between groups.

For example, Peak knee joint angles become more flexed when going faster (Vanrenterghem et al. 2012; Spiteri et al. 2013), probably because the lower position allows athletes to display a more horizontal direction of braking and propulsive forces.

Not exact matches

In the second pull phase, peak hip, knee and ankle joint angular velocities are around 420 — 470, 280 — 400, and 210 — 370 degrees / s, respectively (Gourgoulis et al. 2002; 2009; Akkuş, 2012; Harbili, 2012; Harbili & Alptekin, 2014) and are not affected by the load used (Harbili & Alptekin, 2014) or whether the lift was successful (Gourgoulis et al. 2009).

Similarly, Baumann et al. (1988) reported that in lightweight (60 kg) athletes, peak hip and knee net joint moments were 260 — 300Nm and 60 — 100Nm, respectively, while in heavyweight (150 kg) athletes, peak hip and knee net joint moments were 560 — 660Nm and 175 — 185Nm, respectively.

Enoka (1988) explored hip, knee and ankle joint power outputs in competitive weightlifters during the first pull and transition phases and reported that joint peak power output did not alter with increasing load at the hip, knee or ankle.

Although peak velocity is less well - studied, linear barbell velocity reduces with increasing load (Suchomel et al. 2014a), as do the angular velocities of the hip, knee and ankle joints (Suchomel et al. 2014e).

Exploring the effects of training variables, Kellis et al. (2005) found that joint angles differed between relative loads but did not identify how the individual hip, knee and ankle joints differed; however, List et al. (2013) found that increasing load caused peak ankle angle to become more acute, from no load to 25 % of bodyweight, to 50 % of bodyweight.

Exploring the effects of training variables, Kellis et al. (2005) found that joint angles differed between relative loads but did not identify how the individual hip, knee and ankle joints differed; however, McKean et al. (2010) reported that peak hip angle was more acute with load compared to no load, while both List et al. (2013) and Gomes et al. (2015) reported that peak hip angle became less acute with heavier relative loads.

In contrast, Schellenberg et al. (2013) found that peak knee net joint moment during the deadlift did not increase with increasing load (from 25 % to 50 % of bodyweight).

Moreover, Jakobsen et al. (2013) reported that during lunges with both free weights and elastic resistance, EMG amplitude of most of the leg muscles is greatest at the point of peak hip and knee flexion, where ground reaction forces are exerted in order to start the lifting phase but that in the elastic resistance condition, there was a trend towards a more even level of EMG amplitude across joint angles.

The peak knee net joint moment during straight bar deadlifts was lower than during hexagonal bar deadlifts with the same absolute load.