Author(s): PARADISIS, G., KOUTSODONTI, M., GKIKA, N., ZACHAROGIANNIS, E. , Institution: NATIONAL & KAPODISTRIAN UNIVERSITY OF ATHENS, Country: GREECE, Abstract-ID: 893

INTRODUCTION:
Agility ladder training is widely used as both a warm-up and training tool to improve running speed and its characteristics in many sports. Exercising in agility ladders requires athletes to move their feet as quickly as possible in a precise and specified motion. Although there are some data indicating the beneficial effect of training on this specific mode (1), there are no data regarding the post activation effect (PAP) of the exercises on agility ladders in the subsequent sprinting performance. So, the aim of this study was to investigate the PAP of agility ladder exercises on the 30 m maximum speed effort.
METHODS:
Eleven young sprinters (17 ± 3.50 y, 64.85 ± 8.31 kg, and 1.72 ± 0.08 m). performed an experimental and a control condition with a difference of one week. The experimental condition included three sets of four agility ladder exercises (ladder one step, ladder sidestep, side straddle hop and 2 in 2 out), while the control condition included active recovery (walking) of the same duration as the exercises in the experimental condition. Five minutes before and 5 minutes after each condition, participants performed a maximal effort sprint of 30 m. A standardized warmup routine was performed before the 30 m pre sprint. All sprinting bouts were video recorded (300 fps) and after kinematic analysis time of 30 m sprint as well as the split times (every 5 m) and average speed per 5 m were calculated for each participant. A two-way (condition x time) repeated measures ANOVA (α < 0.05) was used to identify any potential differences.
RESULTS:
The results showed that in the experimental condition there was no statistically significant difference in 30 m performance (4.58 ± 0.30 s vs 4.58 ± 0.30 s) as well as in all split times and average speeds per 5 m before and after the intervention. In contrast, in the control condition, statistically significant increases in time were observed at 20 m (3.53 ± 0.26 s vs 3.62 ± 0.29 s, Δ post-pre %: 2.3%), 25 m (4.14 ± 0.29 s vs 4.23 ± 0.32 s, Δ post-pre %: 2.1%) and 30 m (4.74 ± 0.33 s vs 4.84 ± 0.34 s, Δ post-pre%: 2.1%) and a statistically significant decrease in speed at 15-20 m, 20-25 m and 25-30 m (Δ post-pre%: -1.5%, -0.9% and -2.2% respectively).
CONCLUSION:
The agility ladder intervention in the experimental condition maintained performance at the same levels between pre-post. In contrast, 30 m performance showed a statistically significant decrease between pre-post in the control condition suggesting that the intervention protocol in the experimental condition was beneficial and that the agility ladder exercises helped the participants to maintain the same performance before and after the intervention. It can be concluded that agility ladder exercises could be incorporated as a PAP exercise during the warmup when the subsequent performance included sprinting performance.
REFERENCES:
1) Pratama et al., IOSR-JSPE, 2018.