Recent experimental research has attempted to determine the most effective training methods for developing upper body power in cross-country skiers. A series of studies has focused on maximum strength training (high load, low number of repetitions), trying to offer an alternative to the traditional approach of low loads with many repetitions, (Hoff et al., 2002; Hoff et al. ., 1999; Osteras et al., 2002).
These studies evaluated a traditional training program and a maximum strength training program, using a single exercise that closely mimicked an impulse movement with cross-country poles. The maximal strength-based training program resulted in a considerable improvement in endurance in the double pole technique compared to those who performed the traditional program.
The group that performed the strength program based on maximal strength also showed significant increases in economy of effort in the technique in question. The authors suggested that because the subjects had increased their maximum strength is that they now performed the double-pole movement with less relative cost than the other athletes studied, and therefore after this program they could perform better double-pole tests than at the same time. beginning.
Another possibility that could have caused the increase in the economy of effort in the double pole, commented by the scientists, was the decrease in the time to execute the movement in the double pole due to the increase in the peak of maximum force, (Hoff et al. ., 1999). In other words, these subjects experienced an increase in the speed of contraction of their muscles, and were able to generate more power by increasing their level of force production. The authors proposed that a faster contraction means that over the course of one stroke to another, the muscle groups spent less time working (hiring) and more time resting. The final study identified an increase in the speed of real movement of the subjects as another mechanism of an increase in the economy of effort in the double cane (Osteras et al., 2002).
Reaching high movement speed appears to be more difficult during movements performed with loads such as those used in maximal strength training. However, Behm and Sale (1993) found that movement through a high-speed range of motion was not necessary to improve the rate of force production in a muscle. In this study, subjects trained one leg using an isokinetic device that allows dorsum flexion of the ankle at high speed, while the other leg was trained in isometric strength by attempting dorsum ankle flexion against a fixed force. Subjects had to attempt high-speed contractions during isometric exercise. Isometric training was found to be as effective as isokinetic training at the level of force production, leading the authors to conclude that attempting to move a load at a high speed, rather than the actual movement itself, was the main stimulus. for the improvement of the neuromuscular ability to produce force rapidly. These authors propose that high-load training plans can provide better results in improving maximum strength than high-speed exercises for the development of muscular power.
As a result of these findings, many considered elite cross-country ski plans have begun using high-load training as a means of increasing maximum strength. However, it is not clear whether weightlifting exercises are as effective in improving upper body power for the double pole as the specific exercise used in recent maximal strength training studies (Hoff et al., 2002 ; Hoff et al., 1999; Osteras et al., 2002). The only study that directly compared weight training with double pole specific strength training seems to indicate that specific training is superior for the development of upper body power for the double pole (Nesser et al., 2004). However, this study suffered from a high level of burnout in the weight training group. The study used a mix of maximal and submaximal load training while trying to develop power, endurance and upper body strength. Whether or not training with maximum loads improves upper body power for the cross-country double pole remains unclear.
Other studies have focused on comparing similar specific ski training methods. Downing and Wilcox (2003) compared rollerboard machine training programs and wind machines that simulate double pole movement. The rollerboard is a board that rolls up and down on an inclined ramp; subjects stand on the board and pull themselves down the ramp with a pair of ropes.
A wind machine consists of a set of blades that rotate like a fan when a pair of strings is pulled, providing resistance. Both devices allow a movement similar to the double pole in cross-country skiing. The researchers found that both methods are equally effective in improving upper body power. However, the group that worked on the rollerboard seemed to have achieved greater power by increasing maximum force, while the subjects that worked with the wind machine did not achieve the same results. Unfortunately, no data was collected to determine which method provided the best upper body power performance for analysis.
Another study of specific ski training compared the effects of 20-second and 180-second double pole interval work on a variety of upper body parameters, including peak and mean upper body power, lactate concentration during the performance of the double baton with submaximal load, the peak of VO2 and the economy of work (Nilsson et al., 2004). Both training programs resulted in many significant advances, but at different points. The group that worked in 20 seconds showed an improvement in peak and mean power in a 30-second test and in work economy. The 180-second group improved mean power in a 6-minute trial, peak VO2, and lactate concentration during submaximal double-pole exercise. This group also showed gains in 30-second power and work economy, but not as great as the 20-second group.
Conclution
Although there is no consensus on which is the most effective method for developing upper body power for cross-country skiers, recent studies have made progress toward identifying ideal training methods. However, although several studies have found significant relationships between upper body power and competition performance, there is little evidence to suggest whether short-term or long-term upper body power is the most important determinant of performance. Finally, the relationship between upper body power and competition performance in classic technique skiing has never been evaluated. We now have to wait for the researchers to continue providing data and evidence that will close the doubt as to how much and how we should work this part of the body to achieve the maximum level of performance in our athletes.
Bibliography:
- Hoff, J., Gran, A., & Helgerud, J. (2002). Maximal strength training improves aerobic endurance performance. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 12, 288-295.
- Hoff, J., Helgerud, J., & Wisloff, U. (1999). Maximal strength training improves work economy in trained female cross-country skiers. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 31, 870-877.
- Osteras, H., Helgerud, J., & Hoff, J. (2002). Maximal strength-training effects on force-velocity and force-power relationships explain increases in aerobic performance in humans. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 88, 255-263.
- Behm, DG, & Sale, DG (1993). Intended rather than actual movement velocity determines velocity-specific training response. Journal of Applied Physiology, 74, 359-368.
- Nesser, TW, Chen, S., Serfass, RC, & Gaskill, SE (2004). Development of upper body power in junior cross-country skiers. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 18, 63-71.
- Downing, JJ, & Wilcox, AR (2003). Effects of an eight-week training program on upper-body power in women cross-country skiers. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 17, 726-733.
- Nilsson, JE, Holmberg, HC, Tveit, P., & Hallen, J. (2004). Effects of 20-s and 180 ″ double poling interval training in cross-country skiers. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 92, 121-127.
