Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Randomized trial assesses explosive strength gains from complex training and ballistic exercise, highlighting performance improvements over time.
Objective To compare the short- and long-term effects of complex training (CT) and ballistic exercise (BE) on lower-limb explosive performance in elite female hockey players and to identify temporal adaptation patterns. Methods Twenty-four athletes were randomized to CT ( n = 8), BE ( n = 8), or control (CG, n = 8). Interventions lasted 8 weeks (3 sessions/week). Performance outcomes included countermovement jump (CMJ), 30-m sprint, and squat 1RM, assessed at baseline, week 4, and week 8. Results At week 4, the BE group improved CMJ ( p < 0.01, d = 1.85), sprint ( p < 0.01, d = 0.90), and 1RM ( p < 0.05, d = 0.39), with no further gains by week 8 ( p > 0.05). The CT group improved sprint ( p < 0.01, d = 0.60) and 1RM ( p < 0.01, d = 0.92) at week 4, while CMJ remained unchanged. By week 8, CT demonstrated significant improvements in CMJ ( p < 0.05, d = 1.24), additional sprint gains ( p < 0.01, d = 0.51), and continued 1RM increases ( p < 0.01, d = 1.72). The CG declined in CMJ ( p < 0.05, d = 0.44) and 1RM ( p < 0.01, d = 1.03), with no sprint changes. Between groups, BE outperformed CG in CMJ at week 4 ( p < 0.05). At week 8, both CT ( p < 0.01) and BE ( p < 0.05) exceeded CG in CMJ; sprint favored CT and BE over CG ( p < 0.05); and 1RM favored CT over BE ( p < 0.05) and CG ( p < 0.01). Conclusion BE induces rapid short-term improvements in jumping and sprinting but plateaus after 4 weeks. CT produces slower yet sustained gains across all indicators by 8 weeks, with superior strength development. BE is suited for pre-competition phases, whereas CT is preferable during preparatory periods for integrated strength–power adaptation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: