Does Upper Body Strength and Power Influence Upper Body Wingate Performance in Men and Women?

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the influence of muscular strength and power on upper body Wingate performance in men and women. Muscular strength (1 repetition maximum bench press), muscular power (bench throws) and upper body anaerobic performance (Wingate Anaerobic Test (WAnT)) was assessed in 24 men and 16 women. Men had significantly (P<0.001) higher absolute and relative peak and mean power and blood lactate concentration during the WAnT compared to their female counterparts. Men also produced significantly (P<0.001) higher strength and absolute and relative peak and mean power during the bench press and throw, respectively, compared to the female participants. For men body mass and mean power produced during the bench throw explained approximately 84% and 87% of the variance in Wingate peak (P<0.001 and P=0.039, respectively) and mean (P<0.001 and P=0.028, respectively) power. For women mean power produced during the bench throw explained approximately 72% and 52% of the variance in Wingate peak (P=0.002) and mean (P=0.017) power, respectively. For men body mass and to a lesser extent muscular power best predicts upper body Wingate performance while for women only muscular power predicts upper body Wingate performance.

anaerobic performance - gender differences - Wingate

References

• 1 Alway SE, Stray-Gundersen J, Grumbt WH, Gonyea WJ. Muscle cross-sectional area and torque in resistance-trained subjects.  Eur J Appl Physiol. 1990;  60 86-90
• 2 Arslan C. Relationship between the 30-s Wingate Test and characteristics of isometric and explosive leg strength in young subjects.  J Strength Cond Res. 2005;  19 658-666
• 3 Bell DG, Jacobs I. Electro-mechanical response times and rate of force development in males and females.  Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1986;  18 31-36
• 4 Beneke R, Hutler M, Jung M, Leithauser RM. Modeling the blood lactate kinetics at maximal short-term exercise conditions in children, adolescents, and adults.  J Appl Physiol. 2005;  99 499-504
• 5 Bernardi M, Quattrini FM, Rodio A, Fontana G, Madaffari A, Brugnoli M, Marchetti M. Physiological characteristics of Americaâs Cup sailors.  J Sports Sci. 2007;  25 1141-1152
• 6 Calbet JA, Holmberg HC, Rosdahl H, van Hall G, Jensen-Urstad M, Saltin B. Why do arms extract less oxygen than legs during exercise?.  Am J Physiol. 2005;  289 R1448-R1458
• 7 Dotan R. The Wingate Anaerobic Testâs past and future and the compatibility of mechanically versus electro-magnetically braked cycle-ergometers.  Eur J Appl Physiol. 2006;  98 113-116
• 8 Dotan R, Bar-Or O. Load optimization for the Wingate Anaerobic Test.  Eur J Appl Physiol. 1983;  51 409-417
• 9 Drinkwater EJ, Galna B, McKenna MJ, Hunt PH, Pyne DB. Validation of an optical encoder during free weight resistance movements and analysis of bench press sticking point power during fatigue.  J Strength Cond Res. 2007;  21 510-517
• 10 Esbjornsson-Liljedahl M, Sundberg CJ, Norman B, Jansson E. Metabolic response in type I and type II muscle fibers during a 30-s cycle sprint in men and women.  J Appl Physiol. 1999;  87 1326-1332
• 11 Esbjornsson M, Sylven C, Holm I, Jansson E. Fast twitch fibres may predict anaerobic performance in both females and males.  Int J Sports Med. 1993;  14 257-263
• 12 Garcia-Pallares J, Lopez-Gullon JM, Muriel X, Diaz A, Izquierdo M. Physical fitness factors to predict male Olympic wrestling performance.  Eur J Appl Physiol. 2011;  [Epub ahead of print]
• 13 Gore CJ. Australian Sports Commission. Physiological tests for elite athletes.. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2000. xiv, 465
• 14 Gratas-Delamarche A, Le Cam R, Delamarche P, Monnier M, Koubi H. Lactate and catecholamine responses in male and female sprinters during a Wingate test.  Eur J Appl Physiol. 1994;  68 362-366
• 15 Harriss DJ, Atkinson G. International Journal of Sports Medicine – Ethical Standards in Sport and Exercise Science Research.  Int J Sports Med. 2009;  30 701-702
• 16 Hill DW, Smith JC. Gender difference in anaerobic capacity: role of aerobic contribution.  Br J Sports Med. 1993;  27 45-48
• 17 Hubal MJ, Gordish-Dressman H, Thompson PD, Price TB, Hoffman EP, Angelopoulos TJ, Gordon PM, Moyna NM, Pescatello LS, Visich PS, ­Zoeller RF, Seip RL, Clarkson PM. Variability in muscle size and strength gain after unilateral resistance training.  Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2005;  37 964-972
• 18 Hubner-Wozniak E, Kosmol A, Lutoslawska G, Bem EZ. Anaerobic performance of arms and legs in male and female free style wrestlers.  J Sci Med Sport. 2004;  7 473-480
• 19 Hutzler Y, Ochana S, Bolotin R, Kalina E. Aerobic and anaerobic arm-cranking power outputs of males with lower limb impairments: relationship with sport participation intensity, age, impairment and functional classification.  Spinal Cord. 1998;  36 205-212
• 20 Ichinose Y, Kanehisa H, Ito M, Kawakami Y, Fukunaga T. Morphological and functional differences in the elbow extensor muscle between highly trained male and female athletes.  Eur J Appl Physiol. 1998;  78 109-114
• 21 Inbar O, Bar-Or O, Skinner JS. The Wingate Anaerobic Test.. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 1996. viii, 110
• 22 Levinger I, Goodman C, Hare DL, Jerums G, Toia D, Selig S. The reliability of the 1RM strength test for untrained middle-aged individuals.  J Sci Med Sport. 2009;  12 310-316
• 23 Maud PJ, Shultz BB. Gender comparisons in anaerobic power and anaerobic capacity tests.  Br J Sports Med. 1986;  20 51-54
• 24 Mercier B, Granier P, Mercier J, Trouquet J, Prefaut C. Anaerobic and aerobic components during arm-crank exercise in sprint and middle-distance swimmers.  Eur J Appl Physiol. 1993;  66 461-466
• 25 Metter EJ, Talbot LA, Schrager M, Conwit RA. Arm-cranking muscle power and arm isometric muscle strength are independent predictors of all-cause mortality in men.  J Appl Physiol. 2004;  96 814-821
• 26 Miller AE, MacDougall JD, Tarnopolsky MA, Sale DG. Gender differences in strength and muscle fiber characteristics.  Eur J Appl Physiol. 1993;  66 254-262
• 27 Murphy MM, Patton JF, Frederick FA. Comparative anaerobic power of men and women.  Aviat Space Environ Med. 1986;  57 636-641
• 28 Nindl BC, Mahar MT, Harman EA, Patton JF. Lower and upper body anaerobic performance in male and female adolescent athletes.  Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1995;  27 235-241
• 29 Pearson SN, Hume PA, Cronin JB, Slyfield D. Strength and power determinants of grinding performance in Americaâs Cup sailors.  J Strength Cond Res. 2009;  23 1883-1889
• 30 Robbins DW, Young WB, Behm DG, Payne WR. Effects of agonist-antagonist complex resistance training on upper body strength and power development.  J Sports Sci. 2009;  27 1617-1625
• 31 Russ DW, Lanza IR, Rothman D, Kent-Braun JA. Sex differences in glycolysis during brief, intense isometric contractions.  Muscle Nerve. 2005;  32 647-655
• 32 Sanchis-Moysi J, Idoate F, Olmedillas H, Guadalupe-Grau A, Alayon S, Carreras A, Dorado C, Calbet JA. The upper extremity of the professional tennis player: muscle volumes, fiber-type distribution and muscle strength.  Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2010;  20 524-534
• 33 Santos EL, Novaes JS, Reis VM, Giannella-Neto A. Low sampling rates bias outcomes from the Wingate Test.  Int J Sports Med. 2010;  31 784-789
• 34 Sawka MN. Physiology of upper body exercise.  Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 1986;  14 175-211
• 35 Siegel JA, Gilders RM, Staron RS, Hagerman FC. Human muscle power output during upper- and lower-body exercises.  J Strength Cond Res. 2002;  16 173-178
• 36 Smith PM, Chapman ML, Hazlehurst KE, Goss-Sampson MA. The influence of crank configuration on muscle activity and torque production during arm crank ergometry.  J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2008;  18 598-605
• 37 Weber CL, Chia M, Inbar O. Gender differences in anaerobic power of the arms and legs – a scaling issue.  Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006;  38 129-137

Correspondence