【作者】 王超；

【导师】 毕学翠；

【作者基本信息】 首都体育学院 ， 运动训练（专业学位）， 2022， 硕士

【摘要】 研究目的:通过不同强度的单、双腿负重半蹲训练,观察双腿负重半蹲训练组1、双腿负重半蹲训练组2、单腿负重半蹲训练组1和单腿负重半蹲训练组2对下肢力量发展的影响。分析骑行过程中下肢主要发力肌的肌电变化,根据肌电变化讨论,在平衡和协调左、右腿骑行蹬踏提拉发力上,单腿负重半蹲训练是否优于双腿负重半蹲训练。探索不同强度单、双腿负重训练后骑行的功率变化,讨论单腿负重半蹲训练在提升骑行功率上是否优于双腿负重半蹲训练,据此分析研究不同强度的单、双腿负重半蹲训练对10s功率自行车全力骑行运动表现的影响。丰富自行车运动员发展下肢力量方法,为不同半蹲训练的选择提供理论和数据参考。研究方法:本研究采用了文献资料法、实验法和数理统计等研究方法。选取了首都体育学院在读男性大学生24名作为实验受试者(平均年龄:21.54±1.79岁,平均身高:177.88±6.80cm,平均体重:73.13±10.56kg)。24名受试者随机分为4组:双腿负重半蹲训练组1(n=6)、双腿负重半蹲训练组2(n=6)、单腿负重半蹲训练组1(n=6)和单腿负重半蹲训练组2(n=6)。四组受试者均进行为期6周的负重半蹲训练,每周训练3次,每次训练间隔48小时。双腿负重半蹲训练组1进行85%1RM双腿负重半蹲训练,双腿负重半蹲训练组2进行50%1RM双腿负重半蹲训练,单腿负重半蹲训练组1进行85%1RM单腿负重半蹲训练,单腿负重半蹲训练组2进行50%1RM单腿负重半蹲训练。85%1RM单、双腿负重半蹲训练每次训练4组,每组进行4次负重半蹲练习,组间间歇5分钟。50%1RM单、双腿负重半蹲训练每次训练2组,每组进行20次负重半蹲练习,组间间歇5分钟。四个实验组在训练前和训练后分别进行10s功率自行车全力骑行的测试,记录10s功率自行车全力骑行过程中的功率数据及左、右腿主要发力肌表面肌电(s EMG)数据。本实验所有数据均以平均值±标准差(Mean±SD)表示,利用spss25.0软件对所得数据进行数据统计分析。组内训练前、后的数据采用配对样本t检验的统计方法,训练后的组间数据采用多变量方差分析的统计方法。研究结果:1.双腿负重半蹲训练组1和双腿负重半蹲训练组2,训练前、后双腿1RM值组内存在显著性差异(P<0.05)。单腿负重半蹲训练组1和单腿负重半蹲训练组2训练前、后双腿1RM值组内存在极显著性差异(P<0.01)。单腿负重半蹲训练组1训练前、后左右腿1RM值组内存在极显著性差异(P<0.01)。单腿负重半蹲训练组2训练前、后右腿1RM值组内存在显著性差异(P<0.05)。2.单腿负重半蹲训练组1左腿股直肌训练前、后i EMG骑行贡献百分比组内存在显著性差异(P<0.05)。四组受试者负重半蹲训练后左、右腿i EMG骑行贡献百分比差值显示:双腿负重半蹲训练组1>双腿负重半蹲训练组2>单腿负重半蹲训练组1>单腿负重半蹲训练组2(1.58%>1.27%>0.86%>0.81%)。四组受试者负重半蹲训练后左、右腿i EMG骑行贡献百分比差值对i EMG骑行贡献百分比差值平均值的离散程度显示:双腿负重半蹲训练组1>双腿负重半蹲训练组2>单腿负重半蹲训练组2>单腿负重半蹲训练组1(0.89%>0.67%>0.48%>0.32%)。3.双腿负重半蹲训练组2与单腿负重半蹲训练组1,10s功率自行车全力骑行平均功率组间存在显著性差异(P<0.05)。双腿负重半蹲训练组2与单腿负重半蹲训练组2,10s功率自行车全力骑行平均功率组间存在显著性差异(P<0.05)。双腿负重半蹲训练组1训练前、后平均功率和峰值功率组内均存在显著性差异(P<0.05)。单腿负重半蹲训练组1训练前、后平均功率组内存在显著性差异(P<0.05),峰值功率组内存在极显著性差异(P<0.01)。单腿负重半蹲训练组2训练前、后平均功率组内存在极显著性差异(P<0.01),峰值功率组内存在显著性差异(P<0.05)。各组的平均功率变化率显示:单腿负重半蹲训练组2骑行平均功率变化率>单腿负重半蹲训练组1骑行平均功率变化率>双腿负重半蹲训练组1骑行平均功率变化率>双腿负重半蹲训练组2骑行平均功率变化率(12.02%>11.39%>6.96%>4.77%)。各组的峰值功率变化率显示:单腿负重半蹲训练组1骑行峰值功率变化率>双腿负重半蹲训练组1骑行峰值功率变化率>单腿负重半蹲训练组2骑行峰值功率变化率>双腿负重半蹲训练组2骑行峰值功率变化率(16.05%>13.05%>11.81%>4.99%)。研究结论:1.单腿负重半蹲训练在发展下肢单、双腿1RM和10秒功率自行车全力骑行运动表现上要优于双腿负重半蹲训练。在协调10秒功率自行车全力骑行过程中,左、右腿主要发力肌发力上,单腿负重半蹲训练表现出更好的效果。2.85%1RM单腿负重半蹲训练相对于50%1RM单腿负重半蹲训练,在发展单、双腿1RM,协调10秒功率自行车全力骑行过程中左、右腿主要发力肌发力和10秒功率自行车全力骑行的峰值功率上,表现出了更好的效果。而在发展10秒功率自行车全力骑行的平均功率上,50%1RM单腿负重半蹲训练要优于85%1RM单腿负重半蹲训练。3.85%1RM双腿负重半蹲训练相对于50%1RM双腿负重半蹲训练,在发展单、双腿1RM和10秒功率自行车全力骑行运动表现上,表现出更好的效果。而在优化10秒功率自行车全力骑行时左、右腿主要发力肌发力上,50%1RM双腿负重半蹲训练表现出了更好的效果。4.通过负重半蹲训练发展10秒功率自行车全力骑行的峰值功率表现时,训练的负重强度是影响骑行峰值功率的主要因素。更多还原

【Abstract】 Purposes: Through single and double-leg half-squat training with different intensities,observe the double-leg half-squat training group 1,the double-leg half-squat training group 2,the single-leg half-squat training group 1 and the single-leg half-squat training group 2 pairs Effects of lower extremity strength development.Analyze the EMG changes of the main force-producing muscles of the lower limbs during cycling,and discuss according to the EMG changes whether single-leg weight-bearing semisquat training is better than double-legged training in terms of balancing and coordinating the left and right legs to ride,pedal,and pull.Weighted half squat training.Explore the power changes of cycling after single-leg and double-leg weight-bearing training at different intensities,and discuss whether single-leg weight-bearing halfsquat training is better than double-leg weight-bearing half-squat training in improving cycling power.Combined with the development of lower extremity strength,the changes of myoelectricity of the main force-producing muscles of the lower extremities and the changes of cycling power during cycling,the effects of single-and double-leg weight-bearing half-squat training of different intensities on the performance of 10 s power bicycles in all-out cycling were analyzed.To enrich the methods of developing lower body strength for cyclists,and to provide theoretical and data references for the selection of different half-squat training.Methods: In this study,the literature method,experimental method and mathematical statistics were used.Twenty-four male college students in Capital Institute of Physical Education were selected as experimental subjects(average age:21.54±1.79 years,average height: 177.88±6.80 cm,average weight: 73.13±10.56kg).Twenty-four subjects were divided into 4 groups according to their body shape and their own 1RM weights of single-leg half-squatting: double-leg weight-bearing half-squat training group 1(n=6),double-leg weight-bearing half-squat training group 2(n= 6),single-leg weight-bearing half squat training group 1(n=6)and single-leg weightbearing half squat training group 2(n=6).All four groups of subjects underwent 6-week weight-bearing half-squat training,3 times a week,with a 48-hour interval between each training session.Double-leg weight-bearing half squat training group 1 performed85% 1RM double-leg weight-bearing half-squat training,double-leg weight-bearing half-squat training group 2 performed 50% 1RM double-leg weight-bearing half-squat training,and single-leg weight-bearing half squat training group 1 performed 85% 1RM Single-leg weight-bearing half squat training,single-leg weight-bearing half-squat training group 2 performed 50% 1RM single-leg weight-bearing half squat training.85%1RM single and double leg weight-bearing half squat training 4 groups per training,4weight-bearing half squat training for each group,5 minutes rest between groups.50%1RM single and double leg weight-bearing half squat training 2 groups per training,20weight-bearing half squat training for each group,with a 5-minute interval between groups.The four experimental groups were tested for 10 s power cycling before and after training,respectively,and the power data and the surface electromyography(s EMG)data of the left and right leg main force muscles during the 10 s power cycling process were recorded.All data in this experiment are expressed as mean ± standard deviation,and statistical analysis was performed on the obtained data using spss25.0software.The data before and after training within the group were analyzed using the statistical method of paired sample t test,and the statistical method of multivariate analysis of variance was used for the data between groups after training.Result:1.There was a significant difference between the two-leg half-squat training group1 and the two-leg half-squat training group 2 before and after training(P<0.05).There was a significant difference in the 1RM value of both legs before and after training in the single-leg half-squat training group 1 and the single-leg half-squat training group 2(P<0.01).There was a very significant difference in the 1RM value of the left and right legs before and after the single-leg weight-bearing half-squat training group 1(P<0.01).There was a significant difference in the 1RM value of the right leg before and after the single-leg weight-bearing half-squat training group 2(P<0.05).2.There was a significant difference in the percentage of i EMG cycling contribution between left leg rectus femoris training group 1 before and after training(P<0.05).The difference in the percentage of i EMG cycling contribution of the left and right legs after the weight-bearing half-squat training of the four groups of subjects shows: double-leg weight-bearing half-squat training group 1 > double-leg weightbearing half-squat training group 2 > single-leg weight-bearing half-squat training group 1 > Single-leg weight-bearing half squat training group 2(1.58%>1.27%>0.86%>0.81%).The dispersion degree of the difference between the i EMG cycling contribution percentage difference between the left and right legs and the average i EMG cycling contribution percentage difference after the weight-bearing half-squat training of the subjects in the four groups shows: double-leg weight-bearing half-squat training group 1 > double-leg weight-bearing half-squat Training group 2>single-leg weight-bearing half-squat training group 2> single-leg weight-bearing halfsquat training group 1(0.89%>0.67%>0.48%>0.32%).3.There were significant differences between the double-leg weight-bearing halfsquat training group 2 and the single-leg weight-bearing half-squat training group 1,and the average power of the 10 s power bicycle full-force cycling group(P<0.05).There was a significant difference between the two-leg weight-bearing semi-squat training group 2 and the single-leg weight-bearing semi-squat training group 2,and the average power of the 10 s power bicycle full cycling group(P<0.05).There were significant differences in average power and peak power before and after training in double-leg half-squat training group 1(P<0.05).Single-leg weight-bearing half-squat training group 1 had a significant difference between the average power group before and after training(P<0.05),and there was a very significant difference in the peak power group(P<0.01).Single-leg weight-bearing half-squat training group 2 had extremely significant differences in the average power group before and after training(P<0.01),and there was a significant difference in the peak power group(P<0.05).The average power change rate of each group shows: single-leg weight-bearing semi-squat training group 2 average cycling power change rate > single-leg weight-bearing semisquat training group 1 cycling average power change rate > double-leg weight-bearing semi-squat training group 1 cycling average The rate of change of power > the average rate of change of cycling power in double-leg half-squat training group 2(12.02% >11.39% > 6.96% > 4.77%).The peak power change rate of each group shows: singleleg weight-bearing half-squat training group 1 cycling peak power change rate >double-leg weight-bearing half-squat training group 1 cycling peak power change rate >single-leg weight-bearing half squat training group 2 cycling peak The power change rate> the double-leg weight-bearing half squat training group 2 was the cycling peak power change rate(16.05%>13.05%>11.81%>4.99%).Conclusion:1.Single-leg weight-bearing half-squat training is better than double-leg weightbearing half-squat training in developing single-leg,double-leg 1RM and 10-second power bicycle full-scale cycling performance.During the coordinated 10-second power cycling process,the main force-generating muscles of the left and right legs exerted force,and the single-leg weight-bearing half-squat training showed better results.2.Compared with 50% 1RM single-leg half squat training,85% 1RM single-leg weight-bearing half squat training,in the development of single-leg and double-leg1 RM,coordinated 10-second power cycling process,the main force-producing muscles of the left and right legs are developed Force and 10-second power bikes show better results on peak power during full cycling.In terms of developing the average power of a 10-second power bike full-speed cycling,50% 1RM single-leg half squat training is better than 85% 1RM single-leg half squat training.3.Compared with 50% 1RM double-leg semi-squat training,85% 1RM doubleleg semi-squat training shows better results in developing single-and double-leg 1RM and 10-second power cycling performance.When optimizing the power of the 10-second power bicycle to ride the main force muscles of the left and right legs,the 50%1RM double-leg half-squat training showed better results.4.When developing the peak power performance of a 10-second power bicycle full-speed cycling through weight-bearing half-squat training,the weight-bearing intensity of the training is the main factor affecting the peak power of cycling.更多还原