速度依循阻力訓練結合反應及視覺回饋策略對菁英跆拳道選手反應性運動表現之影響

The effects of velocity-based resistance training with reaction and visual feedback on reactive performance in elite Taekwondo athletes

緒論：本研究的目的是驗證速度依循阻力訓練結合反應與視覺回饋，是否比自由式阻力訓練及速度依循阻力訓練更能有效提升菁英跆拳道選手的反應性運動表現。方法：以27名菁英跆拳道選手為受試對象，採用分層隨機分配方式，依蹲舉動作最大自發性等長收縮力（maximal voluntary isometric contraction，MVIC）分成自由式阻力訓練組（free -weight resistance training group. FWRTG）、速度依循阻力訓練組（velocity based resistance training group，VBRTG）及結合反應與視覺回饋的速度依循阻力訓練組（VBRT with reaction and feedback group，VBRT-RFG）。各組完成6週、每週3次、每次3-5組、每組9-15次反覆、強度為30-50%1RM的訓練課程。受試者於阻力訓練介入前、後檢測槓鈴推動速度（mean propulsive velocity，MPV）、反向跳、自發性等長收縮之發力率與專項踢擊能力。所得資料以單因子獨立變異數分析（analysis of variance，ANOVA）比較各基準值及組間各依變項進步率，達顯著水準則以Bonferroni進行事後比較。組內增強效果則以相依樣本t檢定考驗訓練前、後各依變項之變化，顯著水準定為α= .05。結果：FWRTG的MPV of 40%1RM及MPV of 50%1RM、反向跳高度、踢擊之總和力量達顯著增強效果（p < .05）。VBRTG的MPV of 30%1RM、MPV of 40%1RM、踢擊之全程時間及總和力量達顯著增強效果（p< .05）。VBRT-RFG的MPV of 30%1RM、MPV of 40%1RM、50毫秒發力率、踢擊之全程時間及總和力量達顯著增強效果（p < .05）。組間比較結果發現，VBRT-RFG在MPV of 30%1RM的增強百分比顯著高於FWRTG（p < .05）。結論：三種訓練法均能增強跆拳道選手的反應性運動表現但具有特殊性；FWRT對較重負荷與較長時間的動作較具優勢，也能強化專項踢擊的力量。VBRT及VBRT-RF對較輕負荷與較短時間的動作有較顯著的增強效果，並同時增強專項踢擊的速度與力量。但三種訓練法中只有VBRT-RF的初始發力能力（50ms RFD）獲得顯著增強效果，同時MPV of 30%1RM的增強效率亦顯著優於FWRT，故推論VBRT-RF可能為在本研究條件下具最廣泛顯著增強效果之訓練法之一。

Introduction: The aim of the present study was to identify which of three training methods leads to the best training effects on reactive performance in elite Taekwondo athletes. Methods: twenty-seven elite Taekwondo athletes were recruited and divided into free-weight resistance training group (FWRTG, n = 9), velocity-based resistance training group (VBRTG, n = 9), VBRT with reaction and feedback group (VBRT-RFG, n = 9). All subjects completing 6 weeks, 3 times a week training program which consisted of 3-5 sets of 9-15repetitions. Intensity was 30-50%1RM. Before and after training, mean propulsive velocity (MPV), countermovement jump (CMJ), RFD of MVIC, and kicking performance were collected for statistical analysis. Analysis of Variance, ANOVA and Bonferroni post hos test were used to compare differences in percentage change among three training methods. The Paired Samples t-Test was used to compare the difference between pre-test and posttest. Result: FWRTG showed significant enhancement effects in MPV of 40%1RM, MPV of 50%1RM, height of CMJ, total force of kicks (p < .05). MPV of 30%1RM, MPV of 40%1RM, whole time and total force of kicks were significantly increasing in VBRTG (p < .05)。MPV of 30%1RM, MPV of 40%1RM, 50ms RFD, whole time and total force of kicks significant progress in VBRTRFG (p < .05). Compared to the percentage of training effects among three groups found that MPV of 30%1RM in VBRTG was significantly higher than that of FWRTG. Conclusion: All three training methods enhance the reactive movement performance of Taekwondo athletes, but each has its own specificity. FWRT is more advantageous for movements involving heavier loads and longer durations, and it also strengthens the force of kicks. VBRT and VBRT-RF show more significant improvements in movements with lighter loads and shorter durations, while simultaneously enhancing both the velocity of kicks. However, among the three training methods, only VBRT-RF demonstrates a significant improvement in 50ms RFD. Additionally, its enhancement efficiency for MPV at 30% 1RM is significantly superior to FWRT. Therefore, it is inferred that VBRT-RF may be the most efficient training method for improving reactive performance.