The purpose of this investigation was to determine the acute effects of 2 different overweight implements on weight throw performance. Seventeen collegiate and elite weight throwers were recruited to participate. A within-subject design was used to compare the difference between mean and peak distance after warm-up with a regulation weight (STAND), 1.37-kg overweight (OVRWGHT1), and 2.27-kg overweight implement (OVRWGHT2). Repeated-measures analysis of variance revealed a main effect for Treatment (p = 0.006) and a significant interaction effect for Treatment by Time (p = 0.041). The means for the OVRWGHT1 treatment (16.08 ± 2.5 m) and OVRWGHT2 (16.08 ± 2.7 m) were not different; however, the mean for STAND was significantly lower than that for the other treatments (15.58 ± 2.5, p < 0.02). Changes in performance between OVRWGHT treatments and STAND were found to correlate to one-repetition maximum (1RM) Power Clean (improvement for OVRWGHT 1, r = 0.536, p = 0.016; improvement for OVRWGHT2, r = 0.548, p = 0.014). The results suggest that in collegiate and elite athletes overweight implement warm-up may improve performance and that stronger athletes may be better suited to take advantage of this effect.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 June 2012.
All research outputs
#21,624,183
of 34,447,360 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research
#5,148
of 7,369 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#144,239
of 216,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research
#72
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,447,360 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,369 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.3. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 216,312 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
