IHIHIHIIJWI

I'HII

\
l

n

firs} WI

1!
II

 

THE RELATEONSTHEP EEI‘WEEN THE
[MP'R‘QVEMENT GF LEG STRENGTH
AW SKATING VELOCEYY

fine-819 {cm {the Degree. of M. A.
MCHEGAN STATE UHEVER’SETY
Anthony S. Paige
181628

 

3" '5 A. n
hwnfigi

W State

:rsimrsit‘yfl

 

 

 

 

 

 

RETURNING MATERIALS:
IVIESI_J Place in book drop to
IJBRARJES remove this checkout from

455.!3...._ your record. FINES will
be charged if book is

 

 

 

returned after the date
stamped‘below.

 

 

 

 

 

ABSTRACT

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE IMPROVEMENT
OF LEG STRENGTH AND SKATING VELOCITY

by Anthony S. Paige

Statement of the Problem

 

This study was designed with the intent of determining
the relationship between the improvement of leg strength
and skating velocity. It was also in the design of this
problem to devise a leg strength training program for
hockey players that required a minimum of time and equip-

ment.

Procedure

 

After initial and final tests for leg strength and
average velocity were administered, a sample of sixteen
available subjects was divided according to an alternating
ranking method of eight subjects each. The experimental
subjects participated in the leg strength program for a
period of six weeks. During this same six week period,
both the control and the experimental groups participated
in the regular hockey training program. At the end of
six weeks both groups were tested for leg strength and
average velocity.

Leg strength was measured by a back and leg dyna—

mometer. Average velocity was measured by an electric

V ac 7/ <5 3

Anthony S. Paige

timer. Leg strength and average skating velocity were
compared and a correlation of —.180 was obtained.

The experimental group showed a statistically sig-
nificant increase in leg strength at the end of the six-
week training program. Velocity did not improve signifi-
cantly from initial test in either the experimental or

control group.

Qonclusions

l. The leg strength training program described in
this study can produce a significant increase in leg
strength at the .05 level in six weeks or less.

2. The increase in leg strength did not produce any
significant increase in velocity at the .05 level.

It is possible that a much larger increase in leg
strength is necessary to significantly improve velocity.
There may be other basic skill factors, not measured in
this experiment, that combined to off set the leg strength
improvement.

Furthermore, a similar increase in leg strength in a
larger sample of the total population might result in a
corresponding increase in the average skating velocity.

3. A significant increase in leg strength does not
have an inhibitive effect on skating velocity. This is
in agreement with other studies that have shown that weight
training and strength increases do not have.a slowing effect

on speed of muscle contraction (30, 31).

Anthony S. Paige

A. The correlation computed in this report for leg
strength and average skating velocity, —.l80, may be mis—
leading and would probably be higher if appropriate

variables such as weight were controlled.

Approved

 

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE IMPROVEMENT

OF LEG STRENGTH AND SKATING VELOCITY

By

Anthony S. Paige

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Health, Physical Education,
and Recreation

1968

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author wishes to express his sincere appreciation
to his advisor, Dr. Gale Mikles, for his interest, super-
vision and guidance of this study.

Thanks are extended to the 1967-68 Michigan State
freshman hockey team and their coach for participating

as subjects for this investigation.

ii

 

 

DEDICATION

To Laurie, my wife, for her patience
and understanding during this past year.

Also, to Coach and Mrs. Amo Bessone,
our boundless gratitude could never match
their helpfulness and hospitality shown to

us during our stay here at Michigan State.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.. . . . . .’ . ., . . . .q . ii
DEDICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii
LIST OF TABLES . . . . . .q . . . .3 . . . vi
LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii‘
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . 1
Synopsis of the Related Literature . . . 1
Statement of the Problem . . . . . . I
Need for the Study . . . . . . . . 2
Purpose of the Study . . . . . ., . . 2
Limitations of the Study . . . . . . 3
Definitions of Terms . . .‘ . .- . . . 3
II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . . 5
Characteristics of Dynamic and Static
Strength Development . . . 5
Effects of Strength Training on Muscular
Speed and Endurance . . . 7-
Effects of Static Strength and Dynamic
Programs on Leg Strength . ' 8
Measuring Leg Strength with a Back and Lego
Lift Dynamometer . . . . . . 1 . 11
III. METHODOLOGY 0 0‘ c 9 o o o c o o_ o 12
Experimental Subjects and Sampling
Method . . . . . . .- . . l2-_
EXperimental Design . . . . . 12»
Testing Procedure and Equipment . . . . 13
Experimental Training Program . . . . . 15
Statistical Method . . . . . . . . 18

iv

Chapter Page
IV. PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA . . . . l9
Correlations . . . . . . . . . . 19

V. DISCUSSION, SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND

RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . 22
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . 2A
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . 25
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . .‘ . . 3O

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Improvement of leg strength from initial test
to final test in the control and experimental
groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

2. Improvement of average velocity from initial

to final test in the control and experimental
groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

vi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page
1. Exercise equipment . . . . . . . . . . l6
2. Exercise (start) . . . . . . . . . . . l7

3. Exercise (finish) . .

vii

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM

In competitive skating today it is possible for one-
tenth of a second to separate first and third place. In:
ice hockey, the most important requisite is to be an
excellent skater. The possibility that leg strength is
highly correlated to the skating sprint leads in turn to
the possibility Of increasing an individual's total

skating speed by increasing leg strength.

Synopsis of the Related Literature

 

There is a wealth of material in the literature con-
cerning leg strength and its effect on running ability and
other athletic events. But, there is a definite gap in the
literature concerning leg strength and its effect on the

skating Sprint or even on competitive skating in general.

Statement of the Problem

 

This study was designed with the intent of deter-
mining the relationship between the improvement of leg
strength and the velocity of the skating sprint. It was
also in the design of this problem to devise a leg strength
training program for skaters that requires a minimum ofr

time and equipment.

Need for the Study

 

Few coaches involved in ice sports dealing with Speed
would deny the fact that an increase in Speed would lead to
better performances. In speed skating the swiftness of the
skater is an obvious factor in his level of performance.
Also, in ice hockey it is readily accepted that the superior
skaters are also the best players. Since this entire field
is almost totally unexplored the author hopes that this
study will show a better understanding of how speed is
attained on the ice, and to make way for further research
in this field.

Time is an important factor in competitive skating as
well as in ice hockey. As in most of the unexplored athle-
tic fields there is obviously a need for training techniques
that require little time to administer, and also produce

results conducive to increased skating speed.

Purpose of the Study

The main purpose of this study was to determine whether
or not a leg strength program oriented specifically to the
skating sprint has a place in the regular training proce-
dures for competitive skating sports.

In order to realize this purpose, three main objec-
tives were selected: (a) to determine the correlation
between leg strength and the skating sprint, (b) to deter-
mine the effect of increased leg strength on the skating

sprint, (c) to develop a leg strength training program

that requires a minimum of equipment, time, and financial

support.

Limitations of the Study

 

The effectiveness of the training program was
limited by three factors: (a) the amount of time available
for the programs administration, (b) difficulty in prevent—
ing the subjects from missing the training sessions, and
(c) difficulty in motivating the subjects to perform
maximally in the experiment.

No attempt was made to control any of the subjects
outside the training program and the testing periods.

There was not enough available time or money to
include more initial and final tests. It would have added
to the study to have tested at the end of every week of the
training program in order to establish a curve that would

project improvement patterns.

Definition of Terms

 

Leg Strength

A representative measure of leg strength was taken:
with a dynamometer. This refers only to the strength of

the hip extention, knee extention and plantar flexion.

Average Velocity
Average velocity, which was measured in both the

initial and final tests was determined with-the aid of an

electric timer. The subjects had to skate a distance
of 120 feet, from the goal line to the second blue line

on the hockey rink.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Since there is no research dealing with skating in
the literature this chapter will chiefly concern itself with
leg strengthening programs. It‘will be necessary to con—
sider the several types of training programs under dif-'
ferent headings.

Characteristics of Dynamic and Static
Strength Development

 

 

Goldenberg (15) expressed the following thought con-
cerning progressive weight training: "A muscle develOped
over a long period of time remains in good condition for a
long time, and a muscle developed through heavy weights
with few repetitions lasts a short time." Thus, he sug-
gests that light weights be used and that three bouts of
ten or fifteen repetitions is sufficient for developing
long range strength.

Burnham (10) maintained that one—half of the maximum
load will stimulate growth of muscles. Berger (2) found
that lifting once a week produced a significant increase in
strength. In another study Berger (4) found that three to
nine repetitions maximally to be the Optimum number of
repetitions with which to train for quickest strength

improvement.

In a study by Mathews and Kruse (21) a group of sub-
jects trained statically by exerting three consecutive six-
second maximal static pulls on a strap. The number of
practice sessions per week was different for each group but
not less than two or more than five times a week. The
results showed that individuals reacted to static strength
training in an independent manner. It is interesting to
note that as the frequency of the exercise was increased
from two to five times a week, a greater number of subjects
gained in strength.

In one of the earlier investigations of isometriC‘
exercises Hettinger and Muller (17) found that one daily
exercise in which tension was held for six seconds resulted>
in as much increase in strength as did exercise that involved
longer periods and more frequent practices.

Rasch and Morehouse (26) reported insignificant gains-
in elbow flexion strength following a six-week training
program which included only three training sessions per
week. Each training session-consisted of three.two-thirds
maximal contractions with a three minute rest between each
contraction. These same training techniques resulted in a
significant increase in arm elevation length.

In a summary of some of the literature on isometrics,
Wagner (28) reported that "researchers recommended that the
duration of the strain be about six seconds." "It is also
recommended that from one to three bouts of each exercise

be done daily, using about 75% of maximum effort."

Rarick and Larson (2”) supported the Hettinger-Muller
-hypothesis of static strength development. Their data
showed that tension levels greater than two-thirds maximum
with more frequent exercise bouts were not superior to a
single daily six-second bout in increasing isometric.
strength.

Effects of Strength Training on Muscular
Speed and Enduranoe .

 

In an attempt to determine the effects of static and
dynamic strength on muscular strength and endurance,
Dennison, Howell and Morford (12) found that both static
and dynamic training programs produced statistically sig-
nificant improvement in strength and muscular endurance of
the upper arms.

In a similar study, Howell, Kimoto and Morford (18)
found approximately the same results. They hypothesized
that "increases in muscular endurance may be effected by
certain-programs of isometric contractions as well as
isotonic exercises." -

Chui (11) compared a weight training group to a group
in a required physical education class in an attempt to
ascertain the effects systematic weight training had on
athletic power. The Sargent jump, the eight and twelve
pound shot put and the sixty yard dash were used as criteria.
It was concluded that the weight training group improved in

muscle power over the control group and that the results

indicated that speed could probably be increased through
systematic weight training.

Gray, Start and Walsh (16) found a correlation of'

.470 between leg speed, as measured by the bicycle ergometer,
and leg power, as measured by the vertical jump. The inves-
tigators mentioned that compared to other similar studies,
this correlation was somewhat low.

It was the intent of Wilkin (29) "to test the hypoth-
esis that training with exercise of the heavy resistance
type causes an incipient muscle-bound condition, defined
in part as impaired speed of movement." In order to test
this hypothesis, speed of movement of the arm action was
tested before and after resistance training.; The conclu-
sion was that over a period of one semester, weight train—
ing had no slowing effect on speed of arm movements.

Zorbas and Karpovich (31) conducted a similar experi-
ment to determine whether weight lifting would have a
slowing or speed-effect on the rate of arm movement. It
was their conclusion that in rotary arm motions the-weight.
lifting group was faster than the non—lifting group.

Effects of StatioyStrengph.and Dynamic
Programs on Leg Strength

 

Strength gains of high school boys in a static train—
ing program were studied by Wolbers and Sills (30).. The
subjects involved met five days a week and, in performing

the static exercise, the contraction was held for a period

of six seconds once a day. They concluded that, for the
hip and knee extensor muscles, "static muscle contractions
of six seconds' duration will cause significant gains in
strength." The increase in leg strength was not enough to
produce a statistically significant gain in the vertical
jump.

In an article concerning the explosive power of
athletes, Steitz (27) cited several reports concerning the
development of leg strength by using an overload training
program. A general conclusion drawn from these articles
was that a five week weight training program was sufficient
to significantly improve vertical jump and leg strength.

He also suggested that heel raises and deep knee bends with
an application of the overload principle were two very good
exercises for increasing leg strength.

An article on general weight training by Goldenberg
(15) referred to a list of nine suggested exercises to be
used as a pre-season training program. Among these
exercises were two designed to produce increases in leg
strength: (a) the squat and (b) heel raises. He suggested
several repetitions with lighter weights in order to pro-
duce strength that will be retained longer.

Brown and Riley (8), in an attempt to determine the
effect of weight training on leg strength, used a weight
training program of five weeks duration to train one group

of a matched sample while the other group did not train

10

at all. A simple heel raising exercise with weighted bar
bells on the subject's shoulders was used to increase leg
strength.. From the results it was concluded that a five
week weight training program using only the heel raising
exercise will increase leg strength, and consequently,
vertical jump.

Berger (3), in another study, concluded that signifi-
cant increases in strengthwould occur after only two weeks
of training twice weekly with two-thirds or more of the
l-RM, provided at least one maximum dynamic effort per week
was performed.

Berger and Blaschke (5) found that leg power, through
his test, was significantly more related to dynamic strength
than static strength (p. at .01). Berger also reported
that dynamic strength was more related to motor ability
than static strength. Berger (7) further found a correla-
tion coefficient of .71 between leg strength and leg power.

Berger and Hardage (6) concluded that the weight
training program, employing maximum or near maximum loads
for each of ten repetitions, was more effective-for increas—
ing strength than a program involving the performance of 10
repetitions with the lO—RM, among lifters with no previous
lifting experience and when training occurred three times
weekly for eight weeks.

Morehouse (23) concluded that the degree and rate of

strength development was about the same for groups of

11

subjects with different initial strengths when, one, three,
five or ten contractions were performed in training sessions
held four times each week.

Measuring Leg Strength with a Back
and Leg Lift Dynamometer

 

 

Hubbard and Mathews (19) decided that leg lifts
measured with a back and leg dynamometer without the use of
a belt could involve factors other than the ability to lift
with the legs.

Everts and Hathoway (13) found the same results and
suggested several ways in which the belt helped performance,
by increasing the accuracy of measurement, increasing the

confidence of the subject, and by increasing safety.-

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

Experimental Subjects and Sampling Method

 

For the purpose of this study the experimental pOpula-
tion was defined as freshman males between the ages of
eighteen and twenty who participated in hockey as a com—
petitive athletic event.

Permission was granted by the Michigan State hockey
coach to use his entire freshman squad as a representative
sample of this population. His squad consisted of sixteen
men between the ages of eighteen and twenty, all of whom
were enrolled as freshmen at Michigan State. There was a
wide range of hockey skill and ability represented in the
group.

The experimental group consisted of eight subjects
which left eight men in the control group. In order to
match the groups evenly, the subjects were ranked alter-
nately according to skating speed into control or experi-

mental group.

Experimental Design

 

Both the experimental and the control groups received
initial tests to determine average velocity and leg strength.
For six weeks following the initial test, the control group

12

l3

participated exclusively in the regular practice sessions
as directed by the coach of the team. During this same
six-week period, the experimental group engaged in both

the regular training program and the experimental training
program. At the end of six weeks both groups were tested
again. The final tests were identical to the initial ones,

testing both leg strength and skating velocity.

Testing Procedure and Equipment

 

Leg_Strength

 

A back and leg dynamometer was used to obtain a
representative measure of leg strength. As stated by
Mathews (20), this was one of the most difficult strength
tests to administer. A slight variation in the angle
formed by the femur and the tibia-fibula can produce a
marked difference in the related measure of strength. The
method of adjusting this machine to the individual does not
provide an accurate means of regulating this angle. Thus
it is possible that the dynamometer does not record true-
leg strength. But, for the purpose of this study a repre—
sentative measure was deemed sufficient to demonstrate any
significant change in leg strength.

Leg strength was measured in the same manner for both
the initial and final tests. All the subjects were given a
chance to try the testing apparatus once to become familiar

with the correct procedure. In this practice lift, each

1A

person was asked not to lift maximally to eliminate the
possibility of fatigue. For the actual test each man lifted
maximally only once at the approximate angle of 130 degrees.
The dial units of the particular piece of apparatus
used were not a common unit of measure. Thus, the machine

was calibrated and all scores were measured in pounds.

Average_Velocity

 

Average velocity, which was measured in both the
initial and final tests, was determined with the aid of an
electric timer. The distance the subjects had to skate.
was 120 feet, from the goal line to the second blue line°
The subjects were individually lined up on the goal line
and on signal skated as fast as possible to the second
blue line. As the judge gave the signal he simultaneously
pressed the button to start the timer, and when the sub-
ject crossed the blue line at the finish he had to break
a string that was attached to a circuit breaker which.
stopped the timer.

All the subjects in the experimental group were
timed three times for the initial and three times for the
final test. A mean velocity was determined for each sub-

ject for both the initial and final tests.

15

Experimental Training Program

 

Procedure

 

The training program began immediately after the
initial test. At the end of six weeks the final test was
administered. The training sessions were held on Mondays,
Wednesdays and Fridays to eliminate conflicts with the
team's scheduled games and scrimmages. In addition to
the experimental training program, each subject partici-
pated in the regular daily practice just as did the control

group.

Equipment

 

The apparatus necessary for the training consisted
of a set of barbells and two hard rubber mats. A piece
of sponge tubing was placed around the middle of the bar
to prevent soreness while the exercise was being performed

with heavy weights (Figure l).

Exercises

 

The training program consisted of one exercise
designed to increase leg strength from complete dorsal to
complete plantar flexion. Specifically, the exercise was
a half squat with weights over the shoulders of the subject.
The individual was standing so that the phalanges and
metatarsals of the feet were supported by the hard rubber
mats that measured three inches high. The heel of each

foot was extended beyond the edge of the mats. Thus, the

l6

 

Fig. l.-—Exercise equipment.

supported weight was raised with concentric plantar
flexion of each foot. Subsequently, the supported weight
was lowered slowly by an eccentric contraction of the
plantar flexor muscles.

The range of motion was from an extreme plantar
flexed position to an extreme dorsal flexed position
where the heel was lower than the horizontal plane of the
mats (Figures 2 and 3).

During the first training period each subject lifted
150 pounds of weight. Each week 25 pounds was added to

the weight, and at the end of the six week training period

l7

 

. .
. 1
‘ I a. .
D ‘ , . ‘1 h .v‘ r. a 0
. , I ..t"l.‘..." 1.. Q...‘.l.. .l. '0 L .a
c Q‘ A Q gfi‘ I g‘ Q . g
.o ,r ~v' .Q. i... .\ ‘u-V‘ SQ .c .v~ .
o". .. v " .3. .‘.'..L" ‘.q.-‘ “‘0" .U‘.. "” O'. . .. 0 I .. ‘ I
5 -* .O'. -I' -r.‘ 5". .‘N. 0". . .Q‘. -O“ ’ _ " ¢ . o ‘

Fig. 2.--Exercise (start).

 

Figure 3.-—Exercise (finish).

 

 

18

a maximum of 275 pounds was reached. As each subject did
as many repetitions as he could, repetitions increased on

an individual basis.

Statistical Method

 

The Pearson product moment correlation coefficient
was used to correlate leg strength with skating speed.
The t—test for determining the difference between mean
changes was used to test for the significance between the
improvement of the control subjects and the improvement
of the experimental subjects. The .05 level of confidence

was used to indicate significance.

CHAPTER IV

PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

Correlations

 

Leg strength and skating speed were compared and a

correlation of —.l80 was obtained.

The Effects of the Training
Program on Leg Strength

 

 

Using the t-test for determining the difference
between mean changes, the improvement of the leg strength
of the control subjects was compared with the improvement
made by the experimental subjects. It was discovered that
there was a significant difference at the .05 level in
favor of the experimental subjects. This result supports
the effectiveness of the training program developed for

this investigation (Table 1)°

TABLE l.-—Improvement of leg strength from initial test to
final test in the control and experimental groups.

 

Pre and Post Mean Strengths (lbs.)

 

 

 

Group
Initial Final-
Control 212.5 213.8
EXperimental 218.3 237.9
Difference A.2 2A.1
ltl = 1.90*

19

20

The Effects of the Training
Program on SkatingyVelocity

Using the t—test for determining the difference
between mean changes, the improvement of the skating of
the control subjects was compared to the improvement made
by the eXperimental subjects.

There was no significant difference between the mean
average velocity of the control group and the mean average
velocity of the experimental group for either the initial

or final tests.

TABLE 2.—-Improvement of the average velocity from initial
to final tests in the control and experimental groups.

 

Pre and Post Average Velocity (secs.)

 

 

 

Group
Initial Final
Control 5.11 5.12
Experimental 5.13 5.15
Difference - .02 - .03
ltl = —.05

The increases in leg strength did not seem to affect
the average velocity of their skating speed. Thus, the
particular training program devised for this study may not

be effective in increasing skating velocity.

21

Two of the eXperimental subjects received injuries
during the training period and had to suspend their

exercises for a short period of time.

CHAPTER V

DISCUSSION, SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS,

AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Discussion

 

The low correlation may be partially the result Of
an indicated lack Of motivation in the subjects involved.
Also, the skating sprint in the test may rely heavily on
the reaction time Of the subject as well as his leg
strength. Perhaps, if body weight had also been included
as a factor in the computation Of the correlation, a
higher value would have been Obtained.

One possible explanation for the lack Of a statisti-
cally significant change in velocity and a low correlation
found in this investigation is the lack of motivated subjects.
Several Of the subjects, particularly in the experimental
group, were not highly motivated to participate in the
experiment. With the groups as small as they were, three
or four poorly motivated subjects might have a negative

influence on the results Of the investigation.

Summary

The purpose Of this study was to determine whether

or not a leg strength program, oriented specifically to

22

23

skating Speed, has a place in the regular training program
for athletic skating events.

The need for such a study is indicated by the lack
Of literature concerning the effects Of strength training
on skating Speed in particular and on competitive ice
Sports in general. The possibility that an increase in
leg strength would increase skating Speed was the main
motivation for this study.

A leg strength training program was devised which
required little time and a small amount Of financial
support. After initial tests for leg strength and average
velocity were administered, a sample Of sixteen available
subjects was alternately divided into control and experi-
mental groups Of eight each. The experimental group
participated in the leg strength program for a period Of
Six weeks. During this same six—week period, both the
control and the experimental grOUps participated in the
regular hockey training program. At the end of six weeks
both groups were tested for leg strength and average‘
velocity.

Leg strength was measured by a back and leg dyna—
mometer. Average velocity was measured by the use of an
electric timer. Each subject skated a designated distance
three times and then a mean was computed.

Leg strength and Skating time were compared and a

correlation of -.l80 was obtained.

2A

The experimental group Showed a statistically signifi-
cant increase in leg strength at the end Of the six—week
training program. Velocity did not improve Significantly
from the initial test to final test in either the experi-

mental Or control group.

Conclusions

 

l. The leg strength program described in this study
did produce a significant increase in leg strength at the
.05 level in six weeks or less.

2. The increase in leg strength did not produce any
significant increase in velocity at the .05 level.

It is possible that a much larger increase in leg
strength is necessary to significantly improve velocity.
There may be other basic skill factors, such as reaction
time, that were not measured in this experiment, that com-
bined to Off-set the leg strength improvement.

Furthermore a similar increase in leg strength in a
larger segment Of the total population might result in a
corresponding increase in skating velocity.

3. A significant increase in strength did not have
an inhibitive effect on skating velocity. This was in
agreement with other studies that have shown that weight
training and strength increases did not have a Slowing
effect on Speed Of muscle contraction (29, 31).

The correlation computed in this report for leg

strength and average velocity of skating Speed, —.180,

25

may be misleading and might have been higher if appropriate

variables, such as weight, were controlled.

Recommendations

 

1. This study should be repeated or a similar study
conducted with a better motivated, better controlled sample.
In a future study the effect of body weight on leg strength
and average velocity should be considered.

2. A study should be conducted concerning the
reaction time Of the skaters in connection with their Speed
for a given distance.

3. A similar study should be conducted with subjects

using a uniform starting stance for their start.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

26

10.

ll.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Barney, Vernon 8., and Bangerter, Blauer L. "Compari-
son Of Three Programs Of Progressive Resistance
Exercises." Research Quarterly 32:138—1A6, May, 1961.

 

Berger, Richard A. "Comparison Between Resistance
Load and Strength Improvement." Research Quarterly
33:637, December, 1963.

 

. "Comparisons of the Effects of Various Weight
Training Loads on Strength." Research Quarterly 36:
141-1u6, May, 1965.

 

. "Optimum Repetitions for the Development Of
Strength." Research Quarterly33z33A—338, October,
1962.

 

Berger, Richard A., and Blaschke. "Relationship Of
Leg Power and Motor Ability to Static and Dynamic
Strength." Research Quarterly 38:14“, March, 1967.

 

Berger, Richard A., and Hardage. "Effect of Maximum-
Loads for each Of Ten Repetitions on Strength
Improvement." Research Quarterly 38:715, December,
1967.

 

Berger, Richard A., and Henderson, Joseph M. "Rela-
tionship of Power to Static and Dynamic Strength."
Research Quarterly 3729-13, October, 1966.

 

Brown, R. J., and Riley, D. R. "Effect of Weight
Training on Leg Strength." Scholastic Coach 27:
AA—A7, December, 1957.

 

Bunn, John W. Scientific Principles Of Coaching.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1960.

 

Burnham, Stan. "What to Expect from Weight Training."
Athletic Journal 42:288, June, 1962.

 

Chui, Edward. "The Effect Of Systematic Weight Train-
ing on Athletic Power." Research Quarterly 21:188-
194, October, 1950.

 

27

l2.

13.

IA.

15.

16.

l7.

l8.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

28

Dennison, J. S., Howell, M. L., and Morford, W. R.
"Effects of Isometric and Isotonic Exercise Programs
Upon Muscular Endurance." Research Quarterly 32:
3A8-352, October, 1961.

 

Everts, Edgar W., and Hathway, Gordon J. "The Use Of

a Belt to Measure Leg Strength Improves the Administra-
tion Of Physical Fitness Tests." Research Quarterly 9:
62-69, October, 1938.

 

Goldenberg, Joseph. "A General Progressive Weight-
Training Course for all Athletes." Scholastic Coach
31:408, October, 1961.

 

. "Training with Weights." Scholastic Coach
31:60—62, November, 1961.

 

Gray, R. K., Start, K. B., and Walsh, A.‘ "Relation—
ship Between Leg Speed and Leg Power." Research
Quarterly 33:395—399, October, 1963.

 

Hettinger, Thomas E., and Muller, E. A. "Muskellei—
stung and Muskeltraining." Arbeitspysiologie.

October, 1953, as in Morgan, Bill. "Static Exercises."
Scholastic Coach 32:24, February, 1963.

 

 

Howell, Maxwell L., Kimoto, Roy, and Morford, W. R.
"Effect of Isometric and Isotonic Exercise Programs

upon Muscular Endurance." Research Quarterly 33:
536-5A0, December, 1962.

 

Hubbard, Alfred W., and Mathews, Donald K. "Leg Lift
Strength: A Comparison Of Measurement Methods."
Research Quarterly 2A:33—3A, March, 1953.

 

Mathews, Donald K. Measurement in Physical Education.
Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Company, 1963.

 

Mathews, Donald K, and Kruse, Robert. "Effects of
Isometric and Isotonic Exercise on Elbow Flexor
Muscle Groups." Research Quarterly 28:26e37, 1957.

 

McCloy, C. H., and Young, D. Y. Tests and Measure-
ment in Health and Physical Education. New York:
Appleton-Century-Crofts, 195A.

 

 

Morehouse, F. L., "Development and Maintenance Of
Isometric Strength of Subjects with Diverse Initial
Strength." Research Quarterly 38:AU9, October, 1967.

 

2A.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

29

Rarick, G. Lawrence, and Larsen, Gene L. "Observa-
tions on Frequency and Intensity Of Isometric

Muscular Effort in Developing Static Muscular Strength
in Post-Pubescent Males." Research Quarterly 29:
333-341, October, 1958.

 

Rasch, Philip J., and Burke, Roger K. Kinesiology
and Applied Anatomy. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger,
1959.

 

 

Rasch, Philip J., and Morehouse, Lawrence E. "The
Effect Of Static and Dynamic Exercise on Muscular
Strength and Hypertrophy." The Journal of Applied
Physiology 11:29-3A, July, 1957.

 

 

Steitz, Edward S. "Increase the Explosive Power of
Your Athletes." Athletic Journal 39:18, February,
1959.

 

Wagner, Berny. "Simple Isometrice." Scholastic
Coach 32:22-23, December, 1962.

 

Wilkin, Bruce M. "The Effect Of Weight Training on
Speed of Movement." Research Quarterly 23:361?369,
October, 1952.

 

Wolbers, Charles, P., and Sills, Frank D. "DevelOp-
ment Of Strength in High School Boys by Static Muscle
Contractions." Research Quarterly 27:446-450,
December, 1956.

 

Zorbas, William S., and Karpovich, Peter V. "The
Effect Of Weight Lifting Upon the Speed Of Muscular
Contractions." Research Quarterly 22:145-1A8, May,
1951.

 

APPENDIX

30

31

 

 

 

APPENDIX 1.
Initial Testing Times

Name and (in sec.)

Number Height_ height Age Group Trial Trial Trial

1 2 3

Bingham

#2 5'7" 150 18 Control 5.43 .27 .39
Kastys

#3 6'1" 175 18 Exptl. 4.92 .86 .02
VonGruben

#4 5'11" 165 18 Control 5.26 .34 .32
Lansky

#5 5'9" 180 20 Exptl. 4.96 .11 .93
Charest

#6 5'10" 175 19 Control 5.10 .00 .01
Finegan

#7 5'11" 170 19 Exptl. 5.03 .22 .43
Gosselin

#8 5'10" 150 18 Exptl. 5.20 .39 .41
Clements

#9 5'10" 170 18 Exptl. 5.36 .28 .27
Malcombson

#10 5'11" 195 18 Exptl. 5.15 .96 .98
Sokoll

#11 5'10" 184 19 Control 4.70 .72 .88
O'Connor

#13 6'0" 181 20 Control 5.30 .24 .26
M. DeMarco

#14 5'11" 174 20 Exptl. 5.00 .31 .22
Houtteman

#15 5'10" 163 18 Control 5.20 .01 .20
Maier

#16 5'11" 187 19 Exptl. 5.07 .10 .09
J. DeMarco

#17 5'11" 179 19 Control 4.93 .13 .00
Schmidt

#18 5'6" 130 18 Control 5.00 .12 .93

 

32

 

Final Testing Times

 

 

Mean Leg (in sec.) Mean Leg
Times Strength~ Times Strength
(sec) (lbs) Trial Trial Trial (sec) (lbs.)
1 2 3

5.36 189 5.29 5.37 5.34 5.33 193
4.93 212 5.01 5.03 4.97 5.00 233
5.30 221 5.34 5.36 5.30 5.00 221
5.00 234 4.87 5.10 5.03 4.96 257
5.08 229 5.21 5.00 5.04 5.03 222
5.22 203 5.30 5.18 5.22 5.23 224
5.35 228 5.21 5.44 5.41 5.30 247
5.31 196 5.37 5.28 5.29 5.30 219
5.03 219 5.11 4.99 5.06 5.05 231
4.76 221 5.01 4.83 4.79 4.91 227
5.26 232 5.22 5.31 5.34 5.29 229
5.17 237 5.27 5.19 5.15 5.30 253
5.13 201 5.23 5.17 5.11 5.17 211
5.08 217 5.10 5.04 5.06 5.08 239
5.03 222 5.00 5.20 5.00 5.08 218

5.01 185 5.08 5.04 5.00 5.07 191

 

’\
\db
gs

. . .. on?

Ifl'fifm esourco: Gnu
RICKSON HALL

6.

cm STATE UNIVERSITY
QT LAN‘ING. MICHIGAN 18823

 

A .- S75 P819 e
M .A.

“71968