Increases In Lean Body Mass Do Not Negatively Affect Broad Jump Performance In Soccer Players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: There is an unfounded dogma that suggests that an increase in body mass would interfere with broad jump performance. The hypothesis is that a gain in body mass obtain from resistance training (RT) will not be deleterious to performance. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to measure the effect of a RT program and the resulting gain in lean mass on broad jump testing results in soccer players. METHODS: Fifteen male soccer players from a U-19 team of the Elite Ivory Coast Training Academy (age:15.8 ± 1.42) took part in a RT program intervention twice a week, over the course of 12 weeks, while maintaining their regular soccer training program. The RT program included three different full-body workouts, with percentage of Maximum Repetition (RM) ranging from 75% to 87% of 1 RM. Participant bodyweight (BW) was recorded and bodyfat percentage (BF%) was measured using an Harpenden caliper and the Durin & Ramahan method. significant differences in improvement were calculated with a paired sample T-test. All statistical analyses were performed with SPSS 27. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: Results show a significant (p˂0.05) improvement for the BJ from a mean baseline group performance of 2.26 ± 0.15 m to 2.44 ± 0.12 m after 12 weeks of RT even though mean BW significantly increased from 63.29 ± 5.65 kg to 64.29 ± 5.80 kg as a result of a significant improvement in mean lean body mass (LBM) from 57.13 ± 5.04 kg to 59.06 ± 4.95 & while BF% mean values significantly went down from 9.72 ± 1.49 % to 8.03 ± 1.22 %. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study show a significant improvement on the BJ and therefore on lower limb power. 12 weeks of RT and the increase in LBM that result from it did not negatively affect BJ performance, and this improvement was observed despite a significant increase in total body mass. However, further research should include a control group, to confirm without a doubt that an RT protocol can, in fact, improve BJ performance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".