[quote author="Jeremy Richmond" date="1231171398"][quote author="Mike Young" date="1231154406"]Can you expand on the study…I’m not really following what you’re saying. Did the athletes test on 20m sprint time, and the balance tests?
I wouldn’t call them athletes only recreational athletes. They were likely just regular college sports participants. (20m times of approx 3.7s with the first stride contact being the starting point)
Balance tests: number of ground contacts with a wobble board. Only static balance group improved but…
static balance training consisted of training on a wobble board. Thesis students have a great sense of humour no?
Dynamic balance group: Zigzag bound and stick, 30cm depth jump and stick, Single box jump to 20cm and stick, Lateral box jump to 20cm height and stick, and…simulated straight running stride with a stick landing. And guess what- 30% drop out rate (high) with injruy as one of the main causes.
Very small effect size (0.12s improvement with a standard deviation of 0.35 or so) so I wouldn’t bet my life on this particular method just yet. Need better research first.[/quote]
Not so surprising about the dropout rate using 20 cm jumps to boxes but 30cm for depth jumps that seems a bit backwards to the way I approach those to exercises. I wonder if they were overtrained/fatigued in the dynamic group and this lead to the high SD? Did the thesis have an explanation a possible cause for variance such as injury rate and dropouts affecting sample size disparity between groups along with possible fatigue?[/quote]
For your eyes only :coolsmile: