Summary:
The response of a skeletal muscle in various stimuli (electrical or deliberate) is determined from its physiological characteristics, as well as its preceded activity. Ergo, the muscle performance could be either increased or decreased, in response to the preceding exercise. Such a phenomenon occurs due to the ability of each muscular activity for activating both the biomechanics of the post-activation potentiation (PAP), and the biomechanics of muscular fatigue. Post-activation potentiation refers to shortterm improvement in performance. PAP normally occurs as a subsequent of dynamic or maximal isometric contractions, which could be identified as activation drills. Such drills of primary importance are jumps, resistance exercises, and plyometric exercises. Several coaches have been using various conditioning methods, aiming to increase the athletes’ explosive performance, especially since speed, power and strength are decisive factors of sprint performance. The optimization of these factors during training, or under competitive circumstances, could be enhanced through proper warm-up exercises. Hitherto, multiple studies have been examining the PAP protocols in sprints. Yet, only a few of those have studied the alternate -leg bounding or leg bounding, in resulting to the improvement in sprint performance. For accumulating its results, this study examined the performance improvement of seven young athletes after implementing the aforementioned protocols during their warm-up, which included three sets of five repetitions of horizontal single-leg bounding for each leg (intervention group), and active rehabilitation (control group). The athletes’ average age was fifteen years old, whist the prerequisite training experience was equal with, or greater than two years. Another prerequisite factor was that the athletes should have been actively training, and at least of a moderate level of physical condition. The seven athletes performed two different protocols in random and different order, which were held at least 72 hours apart. The results have not identified any significant interaction (statistically) between the intervention group and the time results in sprints, neither in the total sprint length timings, nor the split five-meter timing measurements.
