624
Board #5 June 1, 1:00 PM - 3:00 PM Examination of Physiological Responses during CrossFit Workouts of Varying Duration Jake Frye1, Katie Heinrich1, Yuri Feito, FACSM2. 1Kansas State University - FIT Lab, Manhattan, KS. 2Kennesaw State University, Kennesaw, GA. (Sponsor: Yuri Feito, FACSM) Email:
[email protected] (No relationships reported)
PURPOSE: Although CrossFit (CF) is considered a high intensity exercise program, little data exist regarding intensity achieved during CF workouts. The purpose of this study is to explore physiological responses during short and long duration high-intensity CF workouts. METHODS: Participants, 8 adults (7 males, 1 female; age 21-38 yrs), with 1-7 years of CF experience, were placed into 3 testing groups. An incremental exercise test was used to establish peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) and peak heart rate (HRpeak) using the Bruce treadmill protocol and a Parvo TrueOne 2400 metabolic system. HRpeak values were used as an estimate of max heart rate. Groups completed 3 CF workouts in randomized orders on 3 separate days. Named CF workouts Chelsea (1; 30-minute gymnastics triplet), Fight Gone Bad (2; 17 minute, 1 minute intervals of 3 lightweight resistance movements, plyometrics, and rowing), and Annie (3; short-duration jump rope and gymnastics couplet for time) were used. Heart rate was continuously monitored with Polar V800 monitors and Polar H7 sensors. Data were entered into SPSS for analysis and a one-way ANOVA was used to determine between workout differences. RESULTS: Absolute VO2peak was 3.98±0.98 L/min and relative VO2peak was 48.31±8.99 ml/kg/min. HRpeak was 181.3±8.8 bpm. Workouts 1, 2, and 3 each elicited average heart rates greater than 85% HRpeak (92.4±3.3%, 91.9±3.9%, and 87.8±3.1%, respectively). No significant differences in max or average heart rate were seen. There was a significant main effect for proportion of time spent above 85% HRpeak for each workout (f (2,23) = 4.07, p=0.032 ), but a Tukey post hoc test did not find significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: All three workouts elicited heart rates around 90% of peak. Duration of CF workouts, utilizing less complex skills and lighter resistance movements, did not appear to affect participants’ abilities to maintain high intensity levels of exercise.
625
Board #6 June 1, 1:00 PM - 3:00 PM 4 Weeks of Plyometric Training Improves Rowing Performance in High School Male Rowers Julian Egan-Shuttler, Rohan Edmonds, Cassandra Eddy, Veronica O’Neill, Stephen J. Ives. Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs, NY. (Sponsor: Dr Paul J Arciero, FACSM) Email:
[email protected] (No relationships reported)
Plyometric training has been shown to increase power, performance, and even submaximal running economy in athletes. Despite its use by rowing coaches, there has been little research on whether Plyometrics are effective for increasing rowing performance or if such training might improve rowing economy. PURPOSE: To determine if plyometric training, in conjunction with on the water training, would improve rowing economy and performance. METHODS: 16 male high school rowers were assigned to perform 4 weeks of either plyometric training (E, n=8), or steady state cycling below ventilatory threshold (C, n=8), for 30 minutes prior to on the water practice (matched for training volume) 3 days/week. Rowing performance was assessed via 500m rowing time trial (TT) and peak rowing power (RP) while rowing economy (RE) was assessed by measuring the oxygen cost over 4 work rates (90, 120, 150, and 180 watts). RESULTS: Height, weight, calf and thigh circumferences did not change over the 4 weeks for both groups (p>0.05). RE did not change in either the E or C groups (p>0.05), while the 500m TT did improve significantly for the E group (96.6 ±2 to 94.6±1.9 sec, p0.05). Finally, PP was unchanged in both the E (620.8±49.3 to 628.9±50.8 Watts, p>0.05) or C (559.1±84.5 to 569±74.8 Watts, p>0.05) groups. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, 4 weeks of plyometric training improved 500m rowing performance, but not peak power, in a season when the athletes performed no sprint training. Interestingly, this increase in performance does not appear to be mediated by improvements in rowing economy or peak power, and requires further investigation.
626
Board #7 June 1, 1:00 PM - 3:00 PM High-Intensity Interval Training vs. Superset Training: A Comparison of Resistance Exercise Energy Expenditure Jacob E. Erickson, Zachary E. Wyatt, Sean J. Mahoney, Kyle J. Hackney, Donna J. Terbizan, FACSM. North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND. (No relationships reported)
High-intensity interval training (HIIT) is used as an alternative to traditional endurance training to increase cardiorespiratory fitness and energy expenditure, however, much less in known about HIIT resistance training (RT). In contrast, superset (SUPER) RT programs, consisting of performing two consecutive exercises on opposing muscle groups while limiting the rest duration between exercises, are common for both hypertrophy and energy expenditure. PURPOSE: To compare the energy expenditure between an acute bout of HIIT and SUPER RT. METHODS: Twelve males (23.91±3.58 y) with at least six months of RT experience completed one-repetition maximum testing and an acute bout of both HIIT and SUPER RT. To ensure volume load (VL) was not different for both protocols, HIIT was always performed first so that VL could be calculated and the number of repetitions for each exercise in the SUPER session could be determined. At least 72 hours rest was taken between the HIIT and SUPER RT protocols. Oxygen consumption (VO2), respiratory exchange ratio (RER), rate of perceived exertion (RPE), total kcal (aerobic), and heart rate (HR) were each collected at rest and after every set throughout each exercise session including between the paired sets in SUPER. Whole blood lactate measures were taken during both sessions at baseline and two-minutes post-exercise. RESULTS: Significant differences were seen between HIIT and SUPER RT: Total overall energy expenditure (346±47.4 vs. 295.5±45.65 kcal, p=0.005), aerobic (132.1±13.03 vs. 157.2±15.98 kcal, p
