Effect of Different Jab Techniques on Peak Activation of Upper-Body Muscles in Youth Boxers
-
Published:2022-12-23
Issue:4
Volume:22
Page:583-588
-
ISSN:1993-7997
-
Container-title:Physical Education Theory and Methodology
-
language:
-
Short-container-title:Teor. metod. fiz. vihov.
Author:
Kumar SandeepORCID, Ramirez-Campillo RodrigoORCID, Singh JosephORCID, Kumar SanjeevORCID, Gogoi HemantajitORCID
Abstract
The study purpose was to analyse the peak EMG at five upper-body muscles during four different jab techniques in youth boxers.
Materials and methods. Male youth national-level boxers (n=7) were assessed for peak electromyography (EMG) of anterior deltoid (AD), biceps brachii (BB), triceps brachii (TB), flexor carpi radialis (FCR), and upper trapezius (UT) while performing four jab techniques: long-range targeting head (LRH), long-range targeting body (LRB), medium-range targeting head (MRH), and medium-range targeting body (MRB).
Results. The LRH induced the highest EMG for AD (2092.9±411.9) and BB (1392.0±687.3). The MRB induced the highest EMG for the FCR (1337.16±538.28), TB (1589.3±600.3), and UT (1221.2±507.5). However, between jab techniques, only the AD showed a significant (p<0.001) different EMG. Specifically, the LRH induced greater AD EMG compared to LRB (157.5 [p<0.001]), MRH (411.0 [p=0.003]), and MRB (398.3 [p=0.010]). Further, the LRB induced greater AD EMG compared to MRH (253.5 [p=0.024]) and MRB (240.8 [p=0.049]). The MRH and MRB (-12.7 [p=0.911]) induced similar AD EMG.
Conclusions. Peak EMG at five upper-body muscles varies between jab techniques. However, the differences seem relatively small, except for the AD muscle, with a descending pattern of peak EMG for the LRH > LRB > MRH and MRB jab techniques.
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation,Health (social science)
Reference34 articles.
1. Chaabène, H., Tabben, M., Mkaouer, B., Franchini, E., Negra, Y., Hammami, M., Amara, S., Chaabène, R. B., & Hachana, Y. (2015). Amateur Boxing: Physical and Physiological Attributes. Sports Medicine, 45(3), 337-352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-014-0274-7 2. Buśko, K., Staniak, Z., Łach, P., Mazur-Różycka, J., Radosław Michalski, & Górski, M. (2014). Comparison of two boxing training simulators. Biomedical Human Kinetics, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.2478/bhk-2014-0022 3. Dinu, D., & Louis, J. (2020). Biomechanical Analysis of the Cross, Hook, and Uppercut in Junior vs. Elite Boxers: Implications for Training and Talent Identification. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living, 2, 598861-598861. PubMed. https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2020.598861 4. Wigle, C., Caples, Y., Leddy, E., Chen, R., & Mays, J. (2014). Grassroot Task Force Best Practices Training Manual (v. 01.1). USA Boxing. https://d36m266ykvepgv.cloudfront.net/uploads/media/lYivrDbNV6/o/usab-gtf-trainingmanual-v-01-1.pdf 5. Gilbert, S. (2018). The Biomechanics of a Knockout Punch [Commercial]. The Science of Striking. https://www.thescienceofstriking.com/training/the-biomechanics-of-a-knockout-punch/
|
|