Journal of Human Kinetics volume 86/2023, 217–234 DOI: 10.

5114/jhk/159654 217
Section III – Sports and Physical Activity

Effects of a Velocity-Based Complex Training Program

in Young Female Artistic Roller Skating Athletes

by
André Rebelo 1,2,*, João R. Pereira 1,2,3, Diogo V. Martinho 1,3,4,
João Valente-dos-Santos 1,2,3

Complex training consists of a near maximal strength effort followed by a biomechanically similar explosive
exercise. One of many complex training methods that have been proposed is the French Contrast Method. The aim of this
study was to analyze the effects of the French Contrast Method on maximal strength and power of young female artistic
roller skating athletes with the help of velocity-based training to prescribe the intervention program. Eighteen female
artistic roller skating athletes, divided into an experimental group (EG) and a control group (CG), participated in this
study. The EG performed complex training via the French Contrast Method. The CG did not perform any additional
training besides their regular roller skating practices. All participants were tested on the 1-RM back squat and hip thrust,
the load-velocity profile assessment of both exercises previously stated, the countermovement jump, and the drop jump.
A significant increase in mean concentric velocity (MCV) of the hip thrust exercise from 10 to 60% of 1-RM in the EG
was observed. Significant differences between groups were observed for the MCV of the hip thrust from 10 to 90% of 1-
RM. There were also significant increases in the 1-RM back squat and 1-RM hip thrust over time in the EG. For the
vertical jump variables, there were significant differences between groups for both contact time and the reactive strength
index with and without an arm swing. The results of this study suggest that a 6-week training intervention with the use
of the French Contrast Method can significantly improve maximal strength and power.
Keywords: French Contrast Method; explosive strength; reactive strength index; load-velocity profile; figure skating;
postactivation performance enhancement

Introduction (Pantoja et al., 2014). To be able to do jumps with

three rotations in the air, not only skaters need to
Artistic roller skating consists of seven rotate faster, but also jump higher (King, 2005).
distinct disciplines: figures, freestyle, pairs, couple Therefore, striving to achieve the optimal jumping
dance, solo dance, show, and precision. Athletes technique, by using different strength training
must perform different types of elements such as modes for various leg muscles seems to be a crucial
spins, jumps, lifts, and throws accordingly with element of the artistic skaters’ training process.
their discipline (Rebelo et al., 2022b). The In mechanical terms, power can be defined
neuromuscular activity of the lower limb muscles as the force applied multiplied by the velocity of
is greater during jumps with a larger number of movement (Knuttgen and Kraemer, 1987). The
rotations in the air and the activity of some muscle ability to produce high muscular power is
groups, such as the gluteus maximus, vary considered one of the most important factors in
depending on the type of the jump performed different sports (Baker and Nance, 1999), including

1 CIDEFES, Centro de Investigação em Desporto, Educação Física e Exercício e Saúde, Universidade Lusófona, Lisboa, Portugal.
2 COD, Center of Sports Optimization, Sporting Clube de Portugal, Lisbon, Portugal.
3 Research Unity in Sport and Physical Activity (CIDAF, UID/DTP/04213/2020), Faculty of Sport Sciences and Physical

Education, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.

4 Polytechnic of Coimbra, Coimbra Health School, Dietetics and Nutrition, Coimbra, Portugal.

* Correspondence: andre.gomes.rebelo@ulusofona.pt

Accepted for publishing in the Journal of Human Kinetics vol. 86/2023 in January 2023.
218 Complex Training Program in Artistic Skating

artistic roller skating (Rebelo et al., 2022a). Thus, with the help of the velocity variable (Weakley et
optimizing either of these components (i.e., force or al., 2021). According to previous research, velocity-
velocity) can lead to increased power production. based resistance training seems to be an adequate
For this reason, there are many studies analyzing method to improve physical performance in young
the effects of different training methods on power, athletes (González-Badillo et al., 2015).
such as plyometric training (Markovic, 2007), Nevertheless, strength and conditioning
resistance training (Channell and Barfield, 2008), or coaches need to be aware of the factors that affect
the combination of both (Fatouros et al., 2000). maturation and interact with different training
An advanced training strategy for stimuli. The types of measures of maturity
improving powerful performance (e.g., power), generally match the biological system under
particularly in young and high-level athletes, is to consideration and the most common measure of
combine maximal or near-maximal resistance biological maturation includes somatic age
exercises followed by plyometric or ballistic (Tanner, 1990). The age at the maximum rate of
exercises (Prieske et al., 2020). This approach is growth is the most used marker of somatic
utilized in what is known as complex training maturity and centered around peak height velocity
(Ebben, 2002) and has shown positive results on (PHV) (i.e., the time when children grow the fastest
the power and agility development of young during their adolescent growth spurt) (Lloyd and
female athletes (Chaabene et al., 2021; Hammami Oliver, 2012). In girls, the age of peak height
et al., 2021). The improvements in maximal velocity (APHV) occurs around the age of 11–12
voluntary strength and power following complex (Tanner, 1990) and there appear to be certain
training have been attributed to the postactivation periods in which young athletes are more sensitive
performance enhancement (PAPE) (Cuenca- to particular types of training (Ford et al., 2011).
Fernández et al., 2017). Thus, it is important to evaluate the APHV of
One of many complex training methods young athletes so that practitioners can understand
that have been proposed to maximize the PAPE the physical consequences of the interaction of
phenomenon is the French Contrast Method which training and maturation.
consists of four consecutive exercises (Dietz and To the authors’ knowledge, no study has
Peterson, 2012): 1. resistance exercise with the evaluated the impact of the combination of
maximal load; 2. plyometric exercise; 3. resistance complex training and VBT in young female
exercise maximizing power production; 4. athletes. Thus, given the lack of literature on the
accelerated or assisted short ground contact effects of the aforementioned topic, the aim of the
plyometric exercise. Training loads for exercises present study was to analyze the effects of the
one and three are usually between 85–95% and 30– French Contrast Method on maximal strength and
40% of 1-repetition maximum (1-RM), respectively power of young female artistic roller skating
(Dietz and Peterson, 2012). This approach, using a athletes with the help of VBT. The authors
percentage of 1-RM, is often referred to the hypothesized that the combination of VBT with the
“percentage-based” approach to calculate training French Contrast Method would result in an
intensities (Flanagan and Jovanović, 2014). improvement of various lower-body strength
However, this method becomes very problematic variables, such as maximal strength and power, in
when we consider the day-to-day fluctuations in young female athletes.
strength, which have been shown to be as large as
18% above and below the previously tested 1-RM
Methods
(Flanagan and Jovanović, 2014). Therefore, Experimental Approach to the Problem
alternative methods such as velocity-based The study was designed to assess the
training (VBT) have been developed to provide effects of complex training on maximal strength
accurate and objective data to support the and power development of young female artistic
prescription of resistance training (Weakley et al., roller skating athletes. Two groups, i.e., an
2021). This training method can be implemented experimental group (EG) and a control group (CG),
across various facets of resistance training were selected for this purpose. The EG performed
programming and support the prescription of complex training via the French Contrast Method,
training loads, sets and the number of repetitions twice a week, for 6 weeks, along with their regular

Journal of Human Kinetics, volume 86/2023 http://www.johk.pl

by André Rebelo et al. 219

artistic roller skating training. The CG did not estimated 1-RM for 3–5 repetitions, and finally
perform any additional training besides their ≈90% estimated 1-RM for a single repetition. At this
regular artistic roller skating practices. All athletes stage, the researcher dictated load increases, until
were tested on the 1-RM barbell back squat, 1-RM 1-RM was achieved using correct technique,
barbell hip thrust, the load-velocity profile (LVP) through a full range of motion, within three to five
assessment of both exercises previously stated, the attempts. The barbell back squat was performed
countermovement jump (CMJ), and the drop-jump with the bar secured across the upper trapezius
(DJ) from a 25-cm box (DJ25). musculature. For the lift to be valid, during the
Participants eccentric phase, the hips should have descended
Eighteen female artistic roller skating lower than the knees (i.e., below parallel). For the
athletes participated in this study. All athletes had hip thrust, the barbell was positioned around
a minimum of 4 years' experience competing in shoulder width apart and the bench placed under
their respective sport and a minimum of 2 years of the shoulder blades (Contreras et al., 2011). From
resistance training experience. Participants were the previous position, the barbell was raised off the
randomly assigned to the EG (n = 9: age, 14.0 ± 1.1 ground via a powerful contraction from the hip
years; APHV, 12.4 ± 0.3 years; maturity offset, +1.6 extensors, and not from the lumbopelvic region,
± 1.0 years; body mass, 50.5 ± 7.9 kg; body height, until the torso was parallel with the ground and a
156.7 ± 6.6 cm) or the CG (n = 9: age, 14.3 ± 1.4 years; hip neutral position was reached (Contreras et al.,
APHV, 12.4 ± 0.3 years; maturity offset, +1.8 ± 1.2 2011). Two-minute passive rest was allowed
years; body mass, 53.2 ± 6.2 kg; body height, 157.9 between the warm-up and three to four minutes
± 5.4 cm). The biological age of all participants was between 1-RM attempts. There were five minutes
estimated using the maturity offset method (Moore of rest between exercises and the total duration of
et al., 2015). Athletes, parents, and coaches were the session, with the warm-up included, was 45
informed about the purpose of the study, and minutes.
informed consent was obtained from all subjects Session Two: Load-Velocity Profile of the Back
and parents before the study started. All Squat and the Hip Thrust
procedures were approved by the ethics committee Following the warm-up and the technique
of the Lusófona University of Humanities and for both the back squat and the hip thrust stated,
Technologies, and were conducted in accordance all participants were assessed for the load-velocity
with the declaration of Helsinki for human studies (L-V) profile accordingly with previous
of the World Medical Association (World Medical recommendations (Weakley et al., 2021). Briefly,
Association, 2013). athletes completed three repetitions with 20%,
Testing Procedures 40%, and 60% of 1-RM and one repetition with 80%
One week before and one week and 90% of 1-RM. For sets that involved three
immediately after the intervention, all participants repetitions (i.e., loads 20–60%), the repetition with
were submitted to testing sessions. These sessions the fastest mean concentric velocity (MCV) was
were distributed into three days, with a 48-h recorded. For sets that involved only one repetition
interval in between. (i.e., loads 80–90%), the MCV of that repetition was
Session One: 1-Repetition Maximum of the Back kept for analysis. The individualized L-V profiles
Squat and the Hip Thrust were designed by plotting the MCV against the
Prior to the 1-RM assessment, participants relative load and then applying a line of the best fit
performed a warm-up consisting of four minutes to the data (Microsoft Excel 2019, Microsoft,
of jogging, three minutes of dynamic stretching Redmond, Washington, USA). A linear regression
and mobility (e.g., world’s greatest stretch, ankle equation was then calculated and used to modify
mobilizations, arm circles), and three minutes of the training load in the L-V profile experimental
glute and core activation exercises (e.g., hip session. For both assessments the FLEX device was
abductions, side plank, bird-dog). Participants used (Kinetic, Canberra, Australia), which uses
then commenced the 1-RM assessment and optic lasers to quantify displacement and,
completed an initial set of 5–10 repetitions with the therefore, compute velocity. The FLEX device has
empty bar; followed by 5–6 repetitions at ≈50% already been shown to be accurate and reliable
estimated 1-RM. This was increased to ≈70% (Weakley et al., 2021).

Articles published in the Journal of Human Kinetics are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0
license.
220 Complex Training Program in Artistic Skating

Session Three: Countermovement Jump and the were prescribed a velocity range, which varied by
Drop Jump ±0.05 m·s-1, with the external load being altered to
Each participant’s CMJ and DJ was meet this targeted velocity, but always with the
calculated from flight time (Bosco et al., 2004) with intend to move the heaviest load possible. A
a contact mat system (ChronojumpBoscoSystem®, velocity loss (VL) threshold of 20% was used to
Barcelona, Spain). Acceptable reliability has guide set termination. During subsequent sets, if
previously been reported for this contact mat initial repetition velocity was greater than ±0.06
(Pueo et al., 2020). In any type of the artistic skating m·s-1 of targeted velocity, an additional 30-s
jump, upward motion of the free limbs affects the recovery period was provided, and the external
forces applied during take-off and has the potential load was adjusted by 4–5% of 1-RM. This method
to increase the impulse generated during this enables the construction of a reliable and accurate
phase (King, 2005). For reasons related with sport training program (Weakley et al., 2021). In
specificity, the authors decided to include both addition, all participants were verbally encouraged
jumping tests with an arm swing as well as without to perform each repetition with maximal effort.
an arm swing (i.e., hands akimbo). Peak power for Statistical Analysis
CMJ tests was calculated through Sayers et al.’s Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs)
equation (1999). were calculated to determine the reliability of all
For the DJ test, athletes dropped from a testing variables within sessions. Interpretation of
box of 25-cm height, which was placed 5 cm behind these values was conducted using Portney and
the contact mat. Athletes were instructed to take- Watkins ranges (Portney and Watkins, 2009),
off with 2 feet, land with both feet on the mat, and whereby values > 0.75 indicate good reliability,
jump as quickly and high as possible, minimizing values ranging from 0.5 to 0.75 imply moderate
the ground contact time. For both tests, the best of reliability and values < 0.5 suggest poor reliability.
three trials was recorded with a minimum of 90 s Variability in the data was assessed via the
rest interval between subsequent trials. Variables calculation of coefficients of variation (CoVs); this
such as contact time (CT), measured in seconds, analysis of absolute reliability provides
jumping height (JH), measured in centimetres, and information regarding within-trial variability
reactive strength index (RSI), calculated as JH, in expressed as a percentage. Descriptive data are
meters, divided by the CT, in seconds were presented as means and standard deviations (SD).
analysed. Independent samples t-tests were used to
Complex Training Protocol determine differences in baseline testing variables
After testing sessions, the EG completed 6 and the normal distribution of the data was
weeks (twice a week on nonconsecutive days) of confirmed by the Shapiro-Wilk’s test. Repeated
complex training, following the French Contrast measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used
Method. All training sessions were monitored and to determine the improvements in various tests
supervised by at least one experienced researcher between groups. When statistically significant
to ensure the correct form. The training program is differences existed in baseline values, one-way
described in detail in Table 1. analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was employed,
Briefly, a standardized warm-up routine using the baseline value as the covariate and
like the testing sessions explained earlier, was change of the score as the dependent variable.
used. The rest period between each training set Change scores were calculated by subtracting the
was three to four minutes, the time between baseline value from the posttest value. The
repetitions within a set was approximately 2 s, and goodness of fit of the L-V relationships was
the rest interval between exercises was 20 s (e.g., assessed through the Pearson’s multivariate
back squat – DJ – barbell CMJ – band-assisted jump coefficient of determination (R2). The differences in
– rest of three to four minutes before the next set). the L-V profile (i.e., slope of the load-velocity
All back squat and hip thrust repetitions were profile, y-intercept and MCV from 10% of 1-RM to
performed with a self-selected, controlled eccentric 100% of 1-RM in 10% increments) were also
velocity and the concentric phase was performed assessed with the effect size (ES) (Cohen’s d) and
with maximal effort immediately after the its 95% confidence interval (Hopkins et al., 2009).
eccentric phase. Using the FLEX device, athletes For between-group effects, estimates of ES were

Journal of Human Kinetics, volume 86/2023 http://www.johk.pl

by André Rebelo et al. 221

calculated using standardized differences in mean strong for both the back squat (R2 = 0.98 [0.92–1.00];
values (Comprehensive Meta-Analysis, Biostat, R2 = 0.97 [0.94–1.00]) and the hip-thrust (R2 = 0.99
Englewood, NJ, USA), whereas the independent- [0.92–1.00]; R2 = 0.96 [0.92–1.00]), for the EG and for
group ES was used for within-group effects as the CG, respectively. These relationships are
suggested by Morris and DeShon (2002). Effect depicted in Figure 1.
sizes were interpreted via within-subject analyses Results for MCV derived from L-V
as <0.3, 0.9, 1.6, 2.5, and >4.0 for trivial, small, profiling are presented in Table 2. Significant
moderate, large, very large, and extremely large group effects were found for MCV for the barbell
effects, respectively (Hopkins et al., 2009). hip thrust exercise at 10% 1-RM to 90% 1-RM with
Regarding the between-subject analyses, ES was significant group by time interactions found at 10%
interpreted as <0.2, 0.6, 1.2, 2.0, and >4.0 for small, 1-RM to 60% 1-RM, but with no significant time
moderate, large, very large, and extremely large interactions found at any relative load. No
effects, respectively (Hopkins et al., 2009). All significant time, group and group by time
analyses were performed using Statistical Package interactions were found for the MCV for the back
for Social Science (V. 27.0, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, squat exercise.
USA) and statistical significance was set at an The one-repetition maximum back squat
alpha level of 0.05. improved after the 6-week intervention in the EG
with small ES (d = 0.44) (Table 3). Similarly, the 1-
Results RM hip thrust improved in the EG with a small ES
Results for the Shapiro-Wilk’s tests of (d = 0.61). Jumping variables, such as the CMJ (d =
normality are depicted in Table S1 and Table S2 of 0.003), CT without (p = 0.047) and with (p = 0.015)
the Supplemental File. All within-session measures an arm swing, JH without an arm swing (p = 0.003),
of reliability are reported in Table S3 of the and RSI without (p < 0.001) and with (p = 0.023) an
Supplemental File. All variables demonstrated arm swing significantly improved in the EG over
good within-session reliability, ranging from 0.89 the 6-week intervention period. In the CG, CT
to 0.99 for all variables. Of all jumping metrics, the without (d = 0.78) and with an arm swing (d = 0.97),
RSI from a DJ25 with an arm swing demonstrated decreased with a small and moderate ES,
the greatest variability within trials (CoV = 6.34%). respectively. Significant group by time interactions
In the L-V testing session, the relative load at 90% were found for the 1-RM back squat (p < 0.001), 1-
of 1-RM for the back squat demonstrated the RM hip-thrust (p = 0.001), and RSI without (p <
greatest variability (CoV = 7.31%). 0.001) and with (p = 0.006) an arm swing. Between-
There were differences in CT from the DJ group ES showed large effects for the 1-RM back
without an arm swing (EG: 0.21 ± 0.03 s; CG: 0.24 ± squat (d = 1.85), 1-RM hip thrust (d = 1.47), CT
0.03 s; t = −2.4 [df = 16]; p = 0.03) and from the DJ without (d = 1.29) and with (d = 1.28) an arm swing,
with an arm swing (EG: 0.23 ± 0.03 s; CG: 0.26 ± 0.02 and RSI with an arm swing (d = 1.40). Very large
s; t = −2.4 [df = 16], p = 0.03) between the EG and CG effects were observed for the RSI without an arm
at baseline. There were no differences between swing (d = 2.17). The countermovement jump
groups in any other testing variables at baseline. without (d = 0.81) and with (d = 0.81) an arm swing
The independent samples t-tests used to determine and JH without (d = 0.84) and with (d = 0.86) an arm
differences in baseline values can be seen in Table swing had a moderate ES between groups.
S4 of the Supplemental File.
Discussion
For the EG, the individualized L-V
relationships showed a strong linearity for both the The present study aimed to assess the
back squat (R2 = 0.99 [0.98–1.00]) and the hip-thrust effects of a complex training program on maximal
(R2 = 0.96 [0.93–0.98]) during the pre-intervention and explosive strength development of young
period. Also, during the same period, the strength female artistic roller skating athletes which had a
of the individualized L-V relationships was very minimum of 2 years of resistance training
strong for both the back squat (R2 = 0.99 [0.94–1.00]) experience. The results of this study showed a
and the hip-thrust (R2 = 0.98 [0.93–1.00]), for the significant increase in MCV of the hip thrust
CG. After the intervention phase, the strength of exercise from 10 to 60% of 1-RM in the EG.
the individualized L-V relationships was very Significant differences between groups were

Articles published in the Journal of Human Kinetics are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0
license.
222 Complex Training Program in Artistic Skating

observed for the MCV of the hip thrust from 10 to performance, measured with the CMJ without an
90% of 1-RM. There were no significant differences arm swing, seems to improve after the
in the MCV of the back squat exercise for both implementation of this type of complex training in
groups. There were significant increases in the 1- adult recreational athletes (Hernández-Preciado et
RM back squat and 1-RM hip thrust over time in al., 2018) and in female college athletes (Elbadry et
the EG. For the vertical jump variables, there were al., 2019). Thus, the results of this study are in line
significant increases in the JH and RSI from a DJ of with the current literature and confirm that the
25-cm without an arm swing in the EG. No adverse French Contrast Method is effective in improving
effects were observed or reported during the vertical jumping ability in adolescent female
intervention period. athletes. Moreover, this study adds new evidence
Evidence has suggested that adolescents by showing that CT, JH, and RSI from a DJ of a 25-
respond more favourably to muscle hypertrophy cm box significantly improved after a 6-week
training than preadolescents due to the higher French Contrast Method intervention. Greater
concentrations of certain hormones such as uptake of muscle slack and the buildup of high
testosterone and growth hormone (Viru et al., stimulation during the countermovement are the
1999). Furthermore, research shows that two main factors why the CMJ produces higher
adolescents respond better to training which jumping heights (compared to jumps without
targets both neural and structural development countermovement) (Van Hooren and Zolotarjova,
(e.g., strength training and plyometrics) (Viru et 2017). Although, the storage and utilization of
al., 1999). Since all subjects of this study had elastic energy may also have a small contribution
already experienced the PHV, it was somewhat to the enhanced CMJ performance, this depends on
expected that this sample of female athletes would several factors such as the amplitude of the
improve their lower body maximal strength and countermovement and the capability of the
vertical jumping ability. individual to reduce muscle slack and quickly
Some studies have been conducted to increase stimulation (Van Hooren and Zolotarjova,
examine the chronic effectiveness of the French 2017).
Contrast Method. For example, vertical jump

Table 1. Complex training protocol across the intervention phase.

Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6
Exercise Sets x Sets x Sets x % 1- Sets x % 1- Sets x % 1- Sets x
% 1-RM % 1-RM % 1-RM
Reps Reps Reps RM Reps RM Reps RM Reps
Day 1

Back Squat 3x? ≈ 85 3x? ≈ 87.5 3x? ≈ 90 3x? ≈ 85 3x? ≈ 87.5 3x? ≈ 90

Drop Jump 3x4 N/A 3x5 N/A 3x6 N/A 4x4 N/A 4x5 N/A 4x6 N/A
Barbell CMJ 3x4 30 3x5 35 3x6 40 4x4 30 4x5 35 4x6 40
Band-Assisted
3x4 N/A 3x5 N/A 3x6 N/A 4x4 N/A 4x5 N/A 4x6 N/A
Vertical Jump
Day 2

Hip Thrust 3x? ≈ 85 3x? ≈ 87.5 3x? ≈ 90 3x? ≈ 85 3x? ≈ 87.5 3x? ≈ 90

Broad Jump
3x4 N/A 3x5 N/A 3x6 N/A 4x4 N/A 4x5 N/A 4x6 N/A
Bound
Band-Resisted
3x4 N/A 3x5 N/A 3x6 N/A 4x4 N/A 4x5 N/A 4x6 N/A
KB Swing
Accelerated
3x 3x 3x 4x 4x 4x
Alternating N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
4/side 5/side 6/side 4/side 5/side 6/side
Bound
*CMJ = countermovement jump; KB = kettlebell; Reps = repetitions; ? = number of repetitions according to
athlete’s velocity prescription

Journal of Human Kinetics, volume 86/2023 http://www.johk.pl

by André Rebelo et al. 223

Table 2. Changes in the mean concentric velocity (m·s-1) attained at each relative load
(%1-RM) from pre-intervention to post-intervention for the experimental group (EG) and
the control group (CG) during the barbell back squat and the barbell hip thrust
exercises.*†
EG (n = 9) CG (n = 9) ANOVA (p)
Between-
Load (%1-RM)
Pre Post ES Pre Post ES T G G×T group ES

Back Squat

1.23 ± 0.07 1.25 ± 0.12 0.22 1.22 ± 0.13 1.22 ± 0.13 0.00 0.511 0.645 0.511 0.31
10 (m·s-1)

1.13 ± 0.07 1.15 ± 0.10 0.19 1.12 ± 0.11 1.11 ± 0.11 −0.04 0.679 0.594 0.477 0.33
20 (m·s-1)

1.03 ± 0.05 1.04 ± 0.09 0.24 1.02 ± 0.09 1.01 ± 0.09 −0.05 0.581 0.551 0.362 0.42
30 (m·s-1)

0.93 ± 0.04 0.94 ± 0.07 0.26 0.91 ± 0.07 0.91 ± 0.07 −0.10 0.669 0.451 0.293 0.48
40 (m·s-1)

0.82 ± 0.03 0.84 ± 0.06 0.30 0.81 ± 0.05 0.80 ± 0.06 −0.17 0.760 0.346 0.211 0.58
50 (m·s-1)

0.72 ± 0.03 0.73 ± 0.05 0.28 0.71 ± 0.04 0.70 ± 0.04 −0.29 0.948 0.208 0.185 0.64
60 (m·s-1)

0.62 ± 0.03 0.63 ± 0.04 0.26 0.61 ± 0.04 0.59 ± 0.04 −0.34 0.794 0.144 0.202 0.64
70 (m·s-1)

0.52 ± 0.04 0.52 ± 0.04 0.14 0.51 ± 0.05 0.49 ± 0.05 −0.38 0.571 0.231 0.265 0.57
80 (m·s-1)

0.42 ± 0.05 0.42 ± 0.04 0.13 0.41 ± 0.07 0.39 ± 0.07 −0.27 0.593 0.405 0.313 0.48
90 (m·s-1)

0.31 ± 0.07 0.32 ± 0.04 0.06 0.31 ± 0.08 0.28 ± 0.08 −0.25 0.523 0.546 0.382 0.41
100 (m·s-1)

Hip Thrust

0.94 ± 0.13 1.15 ± 0.11 1.79 0.99 ± 0.14 0.85 ± 0.14 −1.01 0.480 0.004‡ 0.002‡ 1.69
10 (m·s-1)

0.87 ± 0.12 1.06 ± 0.09 1.75 0.91 ± 0.13 0.79 ± 0.12 −0.96 0.481 0.004‡ 0.003‡ 1.65
20 (m·s-1)

0.80 ± 0.10 0.96 ± 0.08 1.70 0.83 ± 0.12 0.73 ± 0.11 −0.88 0.460 0.003‡ 0.004‡ 1.59
30 (m·s-1)

0.74 ± 0.10 0.87 ± 0.07 1.57 0.75 ± 0.10 0.67 ± 0.09 −0.83 0.495 0.003‡ 0.006‡ 1.51
40 (m·s-1)

0.67 ± 0.08 0.77 ± 0.05 1.46 0.67 ± 0.09 0.61 ± 0.08 −0.74 0.513 0.003‡ 0.010‡ 1.42
50 (m·s-1)

0.60 ± 0.07 0.68 ± 0.05 1.23 0.59 ± 0.08 0.55 ± 0.07 −0.60 0.531 0.003‡ 0.025‡ 1.23
60 (m·s-1)

0.54 ± 0.06 0.58 ± 0.04 0.82 0.51 ± 0.07 0.49 ± 0.06 −0.36 0.635 0.005‡ 0.127 0.83
70 (m·s-1)

0.47 ± 0.06 0.49 ± 0.05 0.35 0.43 ± 0.07 0.43 ± 0.05 −0.02 0.669 0.010‡ 0.628 0.26
80 (m·s-1)

0.40 ± 0.05 0.39 ± 0.05 −0.17 0.35 ± 0.07 0.36 ± 0.04 0.31 0.817 0.029‡ 0.489 0.36
90 (m·s-1)

0.33 ± 0.05 0.30 ± 0.07 −0.66 0.27 ± 0.07 0.30 ± 0.05 0.58 0.936 0.115 0.097 0.83
100 (m·s-1)

*ANOVA = analysis of variance; ES = effect size; Pre = pre-intervention/baseline testing; Post = post-
intervention testing; T = time effect; G = group effect; G×T = group by time interaction; 1-RM = 1-
repetition maximum.
† Data presented as mean ± SD. ‡ Significant (<0.05).

Articles published in the Journal of Human Kinetics are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0
license.
224 Complex Training Program in Artistic Skating

Table 3. Changes in the one-repetition maximum (1-RM) back squat and hip thrust,
countermovement jump (CMJ) and drop jump variables from pre-intervention to post-
intervention for the experimental group (EG) and the control group (CG).*†
EG (n = 9) CG (n = 9) ANOVA (p)

Between-
Testing variable Δ Δ
group ES
Pre Post (Post- ES Pre Post (Post- ES T G G×T
Pre) Pre)

7.22 ± 60.28 ± −1.94 −0.11 1.85

70.56 ± 77.78 ± 3.17 62.22 ± 17.34 ± 3.49
1-RM BS (kg) 0.44 0.004‡ 0.122 <0.001‡
15.95 17.11 16.93

17.22 ± 127.22 126.67 −0.56 −0.02 1.47

132.22 149.44 12.53 ± 28.41 ± 28.17 ± 1.67
1-RM HT (kg) 0.61 0.001‡ 0.305 0.001‡
± 26.82 ± 29.20

1.44 ± 28.84 ± 28.88 ± 0.03 ± 0.01 0.81

31.62 ± 33.06 ± 1.04 4.37 4.69 2.28
CMJ (cm) 0.29 0.097 0.131 0.112
4.65 5.15

0.90 ± 32.71 ± 31.21 ± −1.50 −0.26 0.81

35.64 ± 36.53 ± 1.21 5.56 6.05 ± 3.93
CMJas (cm) 0.18 0.669 0.111 0.100
5.24 4.61

0.21 ± 0.19 ± −0.01 ± 0.24 ± 0.28 ± 0.04 ± 0.78 1.29

0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.06 0.06
DJ25 CT (s)a −0.48 - 0.030‡ -

26.19 ± 29.40 ± 3.21 ± 24.57 ± 25.23 ± 0.66 ± −0.12 0.84

4.13 4.63 2.32 4.62 6.16 3.51
DJ25 JH (cm) 0.73 0.014‡ 0.211 0.088

1.30 ± 1.56 ± 0.26 ± 1.04 ± 0.95 ± −0.09 −0.32 2.17

0.33 0.39 0.13 0.21 0.32 ± 0.17
DJ25 RSI (m/s) 0.72 0.028‡ 0.010‡ <0.001‡

0.23 ± 0.22 ± −0.01 ± 0.26 ± 0.30 ± 0.04 ± 0.97 1.28

0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.06 0.05
DJ25as CT (s)a −0.23 - 0.041‡ -

30.69 ± 34.13 ± 3.44 ± 28.89 ± 28.72 ± −0.17 −0.02 0.86

6.49 7.26 3.35 7.57 6.70 ± 4.38
DJ25as JH (cm) 0.50 0.094 0.274 0.067

1.36 ± 1.52 ± 0.16 ± 1.11 ± 1.00 ± −0.12 −0.37 1.40

0.35 0.27 0.17 0.28 0.35 ± 0.20
DJ25as RSI (m/s) 0.49 0.665 0.017‡ 0.006‡

*ANOVA = analysis of variance; Pre = pre-intervention/baseline testing; Post = post-intervention

testing; ES = effect size; T = time effect; G = group effect; G×T = group by time interaction; BS = back
squat; HT = hip thrust; CMJas = countermovement jump with an arm swing; DJ25 = drop jump from 25
cm; CT = contact time; JH = jump height; RSI = reactive strength index; DJ25as = drop jump from 25 cm
with an arm swing.
† Data presented as mean ± SD.‡ Significant (<0.05). a One-way ANCOVA using pre-test performance
as a covariate

Journal of Human Kinetics, volume 86/2023 http://www.johk.pl

by André Rebelo et al. 225

Figure 1. Relationship between the relative load (% 1-RM) and mean concentric velocity
(MCV) in the pre-intervention experimental group (blue line), pre-intervention control
group (orange line), post-intervention experimental group (grey line), and post-
intervention control group (green line), for the back squat (upper graphic) and the hip
thrust (lower graphic). R2, Pearson’s multivariate coefficient of determination.

Therefore, it can be hypothesized that the This study used a novel approach by
French Contrast Method is effective in increasing combining both contrast training methods with the
the uptake of muscle slack and the buildup of high VBT to prescribe the main exercises (i.e., the back
stimulation during the countermovement. Another squat and the hip thrust) loads and repetitions.
exercise used during the intervention program was There is a linear relationship between velocity and
the band-assisted jump. This exercise improves the % 1-RM (Conceição et al., 2016), and with the
rate of muscle shortening, which through a accumulation of fatigue, exercise velocity
decrease in antagonist co-activation (Osternig et decreases (González-Badillo et al., 2017). These
al., 1986) or an increase in cross-bridge cycling concepts have been used to justify the application
rates (Fitts, 2008), may promote an improvement in of velocity prescription of external loads and
the jumping height ability. This is in line with the volumes irrespective of fluctuations in fatigue and
results of a study that showed that coaches can athletes’ readiness. Results from the present study
utilize assisted jumps to improve the jump height followed these tendencies and showed an almost
of male volleyball players (Sheppard et al., 2011). perfect linear relationship between MCV and

Articles published in the Journal of Human Kinetics are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0
license.
by André Rebelo et al. 227

intensity (measured as % of 1-RM) in both the back diminish the differences between athletes’
squat and hip thrust exercises. This supports the physiological status. As maximal strength is
use of MCV to prescribe the % 1-RM in the back considered a critical attribute for success in sports
squat and hip thrust exercises in young female (Suchomel et al., 2016), including artistic roller
artistic roller skating athletes. In fact, the goodness skating (Rebelo et al., 2022a), this study indicates
of fit of the individual L-V relationships obtained that the French Contrast Method using the VBT to
in the present study (R2 = 0.96 to 0.99) was similar prescribe training intensity is effective in
to previously reported data for the squat exercise improving the 1-RM of both the back squat and the
(Pérez-Castilla et al., 2020). This high linearity hip thrust in young female athletes. In the back
supports the use of the linear regression model. To squat, since there were no differences in velocity in
the best of our knowledge, the present study the EG after the intervention period, changes in
addressed for the first time the full back squat and muscular power after the application of the French
the hip thrust LVP in a sample of young female Contrast Method were influenced by muscular
athletes. This is important since an individual L-V strength development. This is in line with previous
relationship should be used instead of generalized research that showed that changes in movement
group equations for a more accurate prescription velocity did not dictate the variations in muscular
of the % 1-RM (Torrejón et al., 2019). According to power (de Vos et al., 2008). The results of the
the findings of the present study, the EG showed current study can help artistic roller skating
higher velocities after the intervention for the hip athletes better cope with their sport demands.
thrust at lower intensities (i.e., <70% 1-RM). Increases in muscular strength achieved through
However, no differences were observed in the physical training can modify subjects’ force-time
velocities of the back squat exercise. This could be characteristics which, in the end, will determine
explained by the fact that this sample of athletes the magnitude of the impulse achieved during
were already very proficient in the back squat jumping tasks (Suchomel et al., 2016), like those
technique, whereas their pre-intervention hip observed in freestyle artistic roller skating athletes.
thrust velocities were lower than what is reported Although positive results were observed in
in the literature (de Hoyo et al., 2021). Therefore, it most testing variables, it should be noted that all
can be hypothesized that this group of young jumping tests were performed on a contact mat
female athletes was not used to perform the barbell instead of a force plate. Even though contact mats
hip thrust with maximum concentric velocity in are cheaper and easier to use than force plates
each repetition during the pre-testing period. (Glatthorn et al., 2011), researchers should be
Additionally, when individuals’ 1-RM is modified, warned that the flight times predicted from contact
previous investigations have confirmed that the mats are not always consistent when compared to
relationship between movement velocity and the the flight times predicted from force plates
relative load remains the same (Davies et al., 2020). (Whitmer et al., 2015). Although the FLEX device
This study also showed that 6-week detraining provides an accurate alternative to more
from the usual resistance training regimen is not commonly used velocity measuring tools, the
sufficient to induce statistically significant linear position transducers are still considered the
differences in the MCV for both the back squat and best options when assessing barbell velocities
the hip thrust. (Weakley et al., 2020). Finally, the 6-week training
According to the results of the present duration for the current study is at the lower end
study, the prescription of mean set velocities is of the minimum training duration threshold (i.e.,
effective in inducing changes in maximal strength 6–8 weeks) for neuromuscular adaptations
of young female athletes. After extrapolating the (Folland and Williams, 2007). It is possible that
regression equation, strength and conditioning results could have differed with longer duration.
coaches can create a velocity table in which each Future research should evaluate the
MCV corresponds to a percentage of 1-RM impact of the French Contrast Method in female
(Weakley et al., 2021). The training program adult athletes to understand what modifications
carried out during this study used a fixed number can occur with older participants. Moreover, other
of sets, however, the number of repetitions complex training methods exist and it could be
performed was flexible with the intention to interesting to assess the physical impact of other

Articles published in the Journal of Human Kinetics are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0
license.
228 Complex Training Program in Artistic Skating

training modalities in youth athletes. Lastly, in any the lower body force-velocity curve should be
type of the artistic skating jump, upward motion of implemented regularly.
the free limbs affects the forces applied during Conclusions
take-off. Considering that, future studies should Maximizing athletic performance through
analyze the impact of this type of training strength and conditioning is the main goal of
methodology on upper body strength and power. physical coaches. Consequently, coaches should
Strength and conditioning coaches must be implement an off-rink strength training program
aware that athletes should always move the load that aims to improve various zones of the lower
with maximum intention, without sacrificing body force-velocity curve to help artistic roller
exercise technique, regardless of training loads skating athletes better cope with the demands of
used in order to enhance muscular power (Young this sport. Applying VBT is an effective way to
and Bilby, 1993). As the hip and knee concentric prescribe training loads and repetitions and can be
extensions are present during the take-off of useful to enhance female athletes’ maximal
artistic roller skating jumps, coaches should be strength and power. The results of this study
conscious of possible training interventions to suggest that a 6-week training intervention
strengthen these muscles in artistic roller skating applying the French Contrast Method with VBT to
athletes. Therefore, an off-rink strength training prescribe the number of repetitions can improve
program that aims to improve the various zones of the RSI, jump height, the 1-RM back squat and hip
thrust.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization: A.R.; methodology: A.R.; software: A.R. and J.R.P.; validation: A.R.,
J.R.P., D.V.M. and J.V.-d.-S.; formal analysis: A.R. and D.V.M.; investigation: A.R.; resources: A.R.; data
curation: A.R. and J.R.P.; writing—original draft preparation: A.R.; writing—review & editing: A.R., J.R.P. and
J.V.-d.-S.; visualization: A.R.; supervision: J.V.-d.-S.; project administration: A.R. All authors have read and
agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

ORCID iD:
André Rebelo: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2441-9167
João R. Pereira: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5491-4316
Diogo V. Martinho: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0825-4032
João Valente-dos-Santos: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0980-0269

Funding Information: This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement: This study was conducted following the principles of the Declaration
of Helsinki, and approved by the Ethics Committee of the Lusófona University.

Informed Consent: Informed consent was obtained from all participants included in the study.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
Baker, D. G., & Nance, S. (1999). The Relation Between Strength and Power in Professional Rugby League
Players. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 13, 224–229.
Bosco, C., Luhtanen, P., & Komi, P. (2004). A simple method for measurement of mechanical power in jumping.
European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology, 50, 273–282.
Chaabene, H., Negra, Y., Sammoud, S., Moran, J., Ramirez-Campillo, R., Granacher, U., & Prieske, O. (2021).
The Effects of Combined Balance and Complex Training Versus Complex Training Only on Measures
of Physical Fitness in Young Female Handball Players. International Journal of Sports Physiology and
Performance, 16(10), 1439–1446. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2020-0765

Journal of Human Kinetics, volume 86/2023 http://www.johk.pl

228 Complex Training Program in Artistic Skating

Channell, B. T., & Barfield, J. P. (2008). Effect of Olympic and traditional resistance training on vertical jump
improvement in high school boys. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 22(5), 1522–1527.
https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e318181a3d0
Conceição, F., Fernandes, J., Lewis, M., Gonzaléz-Badillo, J. J., & Jimenéz-Reyes, P. (2016). Movement velocity
as a measure of exercise intensity in three lower limb exercises. Journal of Sports Sciences, 34(12), 1099–
1106. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2015.1090010
Contreras, B., Cronin, J., & Schoenfeld, B. (2011). Barbell Hip Thrust. Strength & Conditioning Journal, 33, 58–61.
https://doi.org/10.1519/SSC.0b013e31822fa09d
Cuenca-Fernández, F., Smith, I. C., Jordan, M. J., MacIntosh, B. R., López-Contreras, G., Arellano, R., & Herzog,
W. (2017). Nonlocalized postactivation performance enhancement (PAPE) effects in trained athletes:
a pilot study. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism, 42(10), 1122–1125.
https://doi.org/10.1139/apnm-2017-0217
Davies, T. B., Halaki, M., Orr, R., Helms, E. R., & Hackett, D. A. (2020). Changes in Bench Press Velocity and
Power After 8 Weeks of High-Load Cluster- or Traditional-Set Structures. Journal of Strength and
Conditioning Research, 34(10), 2734–2742. https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0000000000003166
de Hoyo, M., Núñez, F. J., Sañudo, B., Gonzalo-Skok, O., Muñoz-López, A., Romero-Boza, S., Otero-Esquina,
C., Sánchez, H., & Nimphius, S. (2021). Predicting Loading Intensity Measuring Velocity in Barbell
Hip Thrust Exercise. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 35(8), 2075–2081.
https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0000000000003159
de Vos, N. J., Singh, N. A., Ross, D. A., Stavrinos, T. M., Orr, R., & Fiatarone Singh, M. A. (2008). Effect of
power–training intensity on the contribution of force and velocity to peak power in older adults.
Journal of Aging and Physical Activity, 16(4), 393–407. https://doi.org/10.1123/japa.16.4.393
Dietz, C., & Peterson, B. (2012). Triphasic training: A systematic approach to elite speed and explosive strength
performance. Bye Dietz Sport Enterprise.
Ebben, W. P. (2002). Complex training: a brief review. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, 1(2), 42–46.
Elbadry, N., Hamza, A., Pietraszewski, P., Alexe, D. I., & Lupu, G. (2019). Effect of the French Contrast Method
on Explosive Strength and Kinematic Parameters of the Triple Jump Among Female College Athletes.
Journal of Human Kinetics, 69, 225–230. https://doi.org/10.2478/hukin-2019-0047
Fatouros, I., Jamurtas, T., Leontsini, D., Taxildaris, K., Aggeloussis, N., Kostopoulos, N., & Buckenmeyer, P.
(2000). Evaluation of Plyometric Exercise Training, Weight Training, and Their Combination on
Vertical Jumping Performance and Leg Strength. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 14.
https://doi.org/10.1519/00124278-200011000-00016
Fitts, R. H. (2008). The cross-bridge cycle and skeletal muscle fatigue. Journal of Applied Physiology, 104(2), 551–
558. https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.01200.2007
Flanagan, E., & Jovanović, M. (2014). Researched Applications of Velocity Based Strength Training. Journal of
Australian Strength and Conditioning, 22, 58–69.
Folland, J. P., & Williams, A. G. (2007). The adaptations to strength training : morphological and neurological
contributions to increased strength. Sports Medicine, 37(2), 145–168. https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256–
200737020–00004
Ford, P., De Ste Croix, M., Lloyd, R., Meyers, R., Moosavi, M., Oliver, J., Till, K., & Williams, C. (2011). The
long–term athlete development model: physiological evidence and application. Journal of Sports
Sciences, 29(4), 389–402. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2010.536849
Glatthorn, J. F., Gouge, S., Nussbaumer, S., Stauffacher, S., Impellizzeri, F. M., & Maffiuletti, N. A. (2011).
Validity and reliability of Optojump photoelectric cells for estimating vertical jump height. Journal of
Strength and Conditioning Research, 25(2), 556–560. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181ccb18d
González-Badillo, J. J., Pareja-Blanco, F., Rodríguez-Rosell, D., Abad-Herencia, J. L., Del Ojo–López, J. J., &
Sánchez-Medina, L. (2015). Effects of velocity–based resistance training on young soccer players of
different ages. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 29(5), 1329–1338.
https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0000000000000764
González-Badillo, J. J., Yañez-García, J. M., Mora-Custodio, R., & Rodríguez-Rosell, D. (2017). Velocity Loss as
a Variable for Monitoring Resistance Exercise. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 38(3), 217–225.
https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-120324

Journal of Human Kinetics, volume 86/2023 http://www.johk.pl

by André Rebelo et al. 229

Hammami, M., Gaamouri, N., Cherni, Y., Gaied, S., Chelly, M. S., Hill, L., Nikolaidis, P. T., & Knechtle, B.
(2021). Effects of complex strength training with elastic band program on repeated change of direction
in young female handball players: Randomized control trial. International Journal of Sports Science and
Coaching, 17479541211062152. https://doi.org/10.1177/17479541211062152
Hernández-Preciado, J. A., Baz, E., Balsalobre-Fernández, C., Marchante, D., & Santos–Concejero, J. (2018).
Potentiation Effects of the French Contrast Method on Vertical Jumping Ability. Journal of Strength and
Conditioning Research, 32(7), 1909–1914. https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0000000000002437
Hopkins, W. G., Marshall, S. W., Batterham, A. M., & Hanin, J. (2009). Progressive Statistics for Studies in
Sports Medicine and Exercise Science. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 41(1), 3–12.
https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0b013e31818cb278
King, D. L. (2005). Performing triple and quadruple figure skating jumps: implications for training. Canadian
Journal of Applied Physiology, 30(6), 743–753.
Knuttgen, H. G., & Kraemer, W. J. (1987). Terminology and Measurement in Exercise Performance. Journal of
Strength and Conditioning Research, 1(1), 1–10. https://journals.lww.com/nsca-
jscr/Fulltext/1987/02000/Terminology_and_Measurement_in_Exercise.1.aspx
Lloyd, R. S., & Oliver, J. L. (2012). The Youth Physical Development Model: A New Approach to Long-Term
Athletic Development. Strength & Conditioning Journal, 34(3), 61–72.
https://doi.org/10.1519/SSC.0b013e31825760ea
Markovic, G. (2007). Does plyometric training improve vertical jump height? A meta-analytical review. British
Journal of Sports Medicine, 41(6), 349–355; discussion 355. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.2007.035113
Moore, S. A., McKay, H. A., Macdonald, H., Nettlefold, L., Baxter-Jones, A. D., Cameron, N., & Brasher, P. M.
(2015). Enhancing a Somatic Maturity Prediction Model. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 47(8),
1755–1764. https://doi.org/10.1249/mss.0000000000000588
Morris, S. B., & DeShon, R. P. (2002). Combining effect size estimates in meta–analysis with repeated measures
and independent-groups designs. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 105–125. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-
989x.7.1.105
Osternig, L. R., Hamill, J., Lander, J. E., & Robertson, R. (1986). Co-activation of sprinter and distance runner
muscles in isokinetic exercise. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 18(4), 431–435.
Pantoja, P. D., Mello, A., Liedtke, G. V., Kanitz, A. C., Cadore, E. L., Pinto, S. S., Alberton, C. L., & Kruel, L. F.
M. (2014). Neuromuscular responses of elite skaters during different roller figure skating jumps.
Journal of Human Kinetics, 41, 23–32. https://doi.org/10.2478/hukin-2014-0029
Pérez-Castilla, A., García-Ramos, A., Padial, P., Morales-Artacho, A. J., & Feriche, B. (2020). Load–Velocity
Relationship in Variations of the Half–Squat Exercise: Influence of Execution Technique. Journal of
Strength and Conditioning Research, 34(4), 1024–1031. https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0000000000002072
Portney, L. G., & Watkins, M. P. (2009). Foundations of clinical research: applications to practice (Vol. 892).
Pearson/Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Prieske, O., Behrens, M., Chaabene, H., Granacher, U., & Maffiuletti, N. A. (2020). Time to Differentiate
Postactivation “Potentiation” from “Performance Enhancement” in the Strength and Conditioning
Community. Sports Medicine, 50(9), 1559–1565. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-020-01300-0
Pueo, B., Penichet-Tomas, A., & Jimenez-Olmedo, J. M. (2020). Reliability and validity of the Chronojump
open–source jump mat system. Biology of Sport, 37(3), 255–259.
https://doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2020.95636
Rebelo, A., Valamatos, M. J., Franco, S., & Tavares, F. (2022a). Physical and Physiological Characteristics of
Female Artistic Roller Skaters Based on Discipline and Level of Expertise. Polish Journal of Sport and
Tourism, 29(1), 30–38. https://doi.org/doi:10.2478/pjst-2022-0006
Rebelo, A., Valamatos, M. J., & Tavares, F. (2022b). Anthropometric characteristics and physical qualities of
artistic roller and figure skaters: A narrative review. Science & Sports.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scispo.2021.06.007
Sayers, S. P., Harackiewicz, D. V., Harman, E. A., Frykman, P. N., & Rosenstein, M. T. (1999). Cross-validation
of three jump power equations. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 31(4), 572–577.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00005768-199904000-00013

Articles published in the Journal of Human Kinetics are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0
license.
230 Complex Training Program in Artistic Skating

Sheppard, J. M., Dingley, A. A., Janssen, I., Spratford, W., Chapman, D. W., & Newton, R. U. (2011). The effect
of assisted jumping on vertical jump height in high–performance volleyball players. Journal of Science
and Medicine in Sport, 14(1), 85–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2010.07.006
Suchomel, T. J., Nimphius, S., & Stone, M. H. (2016). The Importance of Muscular Strength in Athletic
Performance. Sports Medicine, 46(10), 1419–1449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-016-0486-0
Tanner, J. M. (1990). Foetus into Man: Physical Growth from Conception to Maturity. Harvard University Press.
Torrejón, A., Balsalobre–Fernández, C., Haff, G. G., & García–Ramos, A. (2019). The load–velocity profile
differs more between men and women than between individuals with different strength levels. Sports
Biomechanics, 18(3), 245–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/14763141.2018.1433872
Van Hooren, B., & Zolotarjova, J. (2017). The Difference Between Countermovement and Squat Jump
Performances: A Review of Underlying Mechanisms With Practical Applications. Journal of Strength
and Conditioning Research, 31(7), 2011–2020. https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0000000000001913
Viru, A., Loko, J., Harro, M., Volver, A., Laaneots, L., & Viru, M. (1999). Critical Periods in the Development
of Performance Capacity During Childhood and Adolescence. European Journal of Physical Education,
4(1), 75–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/1740898990040106
Weakley, J., Chalkley, D., Johnston, R., García-Ramos, A., Townshend, A., Dorrell, H., Pearson, M., Morrison,
M., & Cole, M. (2020). Criterion Validity, and Interunit and Between–Day Reliability of the FLEX for
Measuring Barbell Velocity During Commonly Used Resistance Training Exercises. Journal of Strength
and Conditioning Research, 34, 1. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000003592
Weakley, J., Mann, B., Banyard, H., McLaren, S., Scott, T., & Garcia-Ramos, A. (2021). Velocity-Based Training:
From Theory to Application. Strength & Conditioning Journal, 43(2), 31–49.
https://doi.org/10.1519/ssc.0000000000000560
Whitmer, T. D., Fry, A. C., Forsythe, C. M., Andre, M. J., Lane, M. T., Hudy, A., & Honnold, D. E. (2015).
Accuracy of a vertical jump contact mat for determining jump height and flight time. Journal of Strength
and Conditioning Research, 29(4), 877–881. https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0000000000000542
WorldMedicalAssociation. (2013). World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for
Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. Journal of the American Medical Association, 310(20), 2191–
2194. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.281053
Young, W. B., & Bilby, G. E. (1993). The Effect of Voluntary Effort to Influence Speed of Contraction on
Strength, Muscular Power, and Hypertrophy Development. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research,
7(3), 172–178.

Journal of Human Kinetics, volume 86/2023 http://www.johk.pl

by André Rebelo et al. 231

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
CONTENTS
Table S1. Shapiro-Wilk’s tests of normality of the pre-intervention measurements.
Table S2. Shapiro-Wilk’s tests of normality of the post-intervention measurements.
Table S3. Within-session reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC] and coefficients of variation [CoV])
obtained from all trials of all testing variables.
Table S4. Differences in baseline testing variables using independent samples t-tests

Table S1a. Shapiro-Wilk’s tests of normality of the pre-intervention measurements of the 1-

RM and jumping tests.
Shapiro-Wilk
Factor Group
Statistic df. Sig.

EG 0.867 9 0.115
1-RM BS
CG 0.918 9 0.376

EG 0.897 9 0.233
1-RM HT
CG 0.919 9 0.385

EG 0.967 9 0.867
CMJ
CG 0.946 9 0.643

EG 0.910 9 0.318
CMJas
CG 0.958 9 0.772

EG 0.914 9 0.342
DJ25 CT
CG 0.894 9 0.221

EG 0.956 9 0.758
DJ25 JH
CG 0.942 9 0.606

EG 0.939 9 0.572
DJ25 RSI
CG 0.944 9 0.624

EG 0.974 9 0.927
DJ25as CT
CG 0.916 9 0.364

EG 0.878 9 0.151
DJ25as JH
CG 0.892 9 0.208

EG 0.968 9 0.880
DJ25as RSI
CG 0.956 9 0.751

Articles published in the Journal of Human Kinetics are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0
license.
232 Complex Training Program in Artistic Skating

Table S1b. Shapiro-Wilk’s tests of normality of the pre-intervention measurements of the velocity
assessments.
EG 0.932 9 0.500
BS 10% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.953 9 0.718
EG 0.950 9 0.686
BS 20% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.959 9 0.785
EG 0.959 9 0.793
BS 30% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.966 9 0.857
EG 0.948 9 0.664
BS 40% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.972 9 0.915
EG 0.964 9 0.835
BS 50% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.975 9 0.932
EG 0.940 9 0.581
BS 60% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.877 9 0.148
EG 0.936 9 0.543
BS 70% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.916 9 0.360
EG 0.858 9 0.091
BS 80% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.889 9 0.193
EG 0.841 9 0.059
BS 90% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.848 9 0.071
EG 0.851 9 0.076
BS 100% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.918 9 0.372
EG 0.939 9 0.572
HT 10% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.918 9 0.378
EG 0.929 9 0.476
HT 20% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.911 9 0.323
EG 0.940 9 0.582
HT 30% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.894 9 0.218
EG 0.922 9 0.406
HT 40% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.874 9 0.136
EG 0.908 9 0.301
HT 50% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.894 9 0.220
EG 0.878 9 0.151
HT 60% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.936 9 0.541
EG 0.851 9 0.055
HT 70% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.948 9 0.668
EG 0.853 9 0.058
HT 80% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.955 9 0.745
EG 0.852 9 0.078
HT 90% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.947 9 0.658
EG 0.931 9 0.489
HT 100% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.970 9 0.898
BS = back squat; HT = hip thrust; CMJ = countermovement jump; CMJas = countermovement jump with an arm
swing; DJ25 = drop jump from 25 cm; CT = contact time; JH = jump height; RSI = reactive strength index;
DJ25as = drop jump from 25 cm with an arm swing; MCV = mean concentric velocity; 1-RM = one-repetition
maximum; EG = experimental group; CG = control group.
Table S2a. Shapiro-Wilk’s tests of normality of the post-intervention measurements of the 1-RM and jumping tests.
Shapiro-Wilk
Factor Group
Statistic df. Sig.
EG 0.879 9 0.152
1-RM BS
CG 0.906 9 0.291
EG 0.859 9 0.093
1-RM HT
CG 0.934 9 0.525
EG 0.979 9 0.957
CMJ
CG 0.914 9 0.343
EG 0.956 9 0.754
CMJas
CG 0.894 9 0.221
EG 0.916 9 0.383
DJ25 CT
CG 0.944 9 0.624
EG 0.902 9 0.263
DJ25 JH
CG 0.933 9 0.511
EG 0.975 9 0.935
DJ25 RSI
CG 0.974 9 0.929
EG 0.950 9 0.694
DJ25as CT
CG 0.981 9 0.969
EG 0.989 9 0.995
DJ25as JH
CG 0.897 9 0.233
EG 0.956 9 0.752
DJ25as RSI
CG 0.923 9 0.415

Journal of Human Kinetics, volume 86/2023 http://www.johk.pl

by André Rebelo et al. 233

Table S2a. Shapiro-Wilk’s tests of normality of the post-intervention measurements of the velocity
assessments.
EG 0.929 9 0.468
BS 10% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.950 9 0.691
EG 0.915 9 0.354
BS 20% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.954 9 0.732
EG 0.891 9 0.203
BS 30% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.953 9 0.719
EG 0.889 9 0.196
BS 40% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.954 9 0.730

EG 0.887 9 0.185
BS 50% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.929 9 0.476
EG 0.930 9 0.485
BS 60% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.865 9 0.059
EG 0.908 9 0.302
BS 70% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.856 9 0.086

EG 0.845 9 0.066
BS 80% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.897 9 0.236
EG 0.895 9 0.223
BS 90% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.883 9 0.167
EG 0.969 9 0.890
BS 100% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.934 9 0.524
EG 0.964 9 0.842
HT 10% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.927 9 0.455

EG 0.948 9 0.663
HT 20% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.913 9 0.340
EG 0.918 9 0.376
HT 30% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.912 9 0.331
EG 0.890 9 0.198
HT 40% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.897 9 0.236
EG 0.935 9 0.526
HT 50% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.867 9 0.115

EG 0.936 9 0.540
HT 60% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.845 9 0.059
EG 0.898 9 0.243
HT 70% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.834 9 0.056
EG 0.956 9 0.757
HT 80% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.844 9 0.053
EG 0.982 9 0.975
HT 90% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.877 9 0.145

EG 0.990 9 0.996
HT 100% 1-RM MCV
CG 0.933 9 0.512
BS = back squat; HT = hip thrust; CMJ = countermovement jump; CMJas = countermovement jump with an arm
swing; DJ25 = drop jump from 25 cm; CT = contact time; JH = jump height; RSI = reactive strength index; DJ25as =
drop jump from 25 cm with an arm swing; MCV = mean concentric velocity; 1-RM = one-repetition maximum; EG
= experimental group; CG = control group.

Articles published in the Journal of Human Kinetics are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0
license.
234 Complex Training Program in Artistic Skating

Table S3. Within-session reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC] and coefficients of variation
[CoV]) obtained from all trials of all testing variables.
Testing variable ICC (95% CI) CoV (%)
CMJ 0.99 (0.98-1.00) 1.89
CMJas 0.99 (0.97-1.00) 2.04
DJ25 JH 0.97 (0.93-0.99) 4.07
DJ25 CT 0.92 (0.78-0.97) 5.75
DJ25 RSI 0.97 (0.92-0.99) 6.15
DJ25as JH 0.98 (0.95-0.99) 3.34
DJ25as CT 0.89 (0.70-0.96) 5.51
DJ25as RSI 0.97 (0.91-0.99) 6.34
BS 20% 1-RM MCV 0.96 (0.91-0.98) 2.28
BS 40% 1-RM MCV 0.96 (0.90-0.98) 2.43
BS 60% 1-RM MCV 0.95 (0.89-0.97) 2.36
BS 80% 1-RM MCV 0.86 (0.72-0.94) 5.91
BS 90% 1-RM MCV 0.81 (0.61-0.91) 7.31
HT 20% 1-RM MCV 0.94 (0.89-0.96) 2.45
HT 40% 1-RM MCV 0.95 (0.90-0.97) 2.34
HT 60% 1-RM MCV 0.89 (0.89-0.97) 3.54
HT 80% 1-RM MCV 0.87 (0.73-0.95) 5.06
HT 90% 1-RM MCV 0.83 (0.63-0.93) 6.94
CI = confidence interval; BS = back squat; HT = hip thrust; CMJ = countermovement jump; CMJas =
countermovement jump with an arm swing; DJ25 = drop jump from 25 cm; CT = contact time; JH = jump height;
RSI = reactive strength index; DJ25as = drop jump from 25 cm with an arm swing; MCV = mean concentric velocity;
1-RM = one-repetition maximum.

Table S4. Differences in baseline testing variables using independent samples t-tests.
Independent sample t-test
Testing variable
t df. Sig.
1-RM BS 1.075 16 0.298
1-RM HT 0.384 16 0.706
CMJ 1.307 16 0.210
CMJas 1.149 16 0.267
DJ25 JH 0.783 16 0.445
DJ25 CT -2.427 16 0.027†
DJ25 RSI 1.968 16 0.067
DJ25as JH 0.540 16 0.596
DJ25as CT -2.384 16 0.030†
DJ25as RSI 1.643 16 0.120
BS 20% 1-RM MCV 0.316 16 0.756
BS 40% 1-RM MCV 0.425 16 0.677
BS 60% 1-RM MCV 0.693 16 0.498
BS 80% 1-RM MCV 0.544 16 0.594
BS 90% 1-RM MCV 0.322 16 0.752
HT 20% 1-RM MCV -0.652 16 0.524
HT 40% 1-RM MCV -0.259 16 0.799
HT 60% 1-RM MCV 0.337 16 0.741
HT 80% 1-RM MCV 1.411 16 0.178
HT 90% 1-RM MCV 1.951 16 0.069
BS = back squat; HT = hip thrust; CMJ = countermovement jump; CMJas = countermovement jump with an arm
swing; DJ25 = drop jump from 25 cm; CT = contact time; JH = jump height; RSI = reactive strength index; DJ25as
= drop jump from 25 cm with an arm swing; MCV = mean concentric velocity; 1-RM = one-repetition maximum.
† Significant.

Journal of Human Kinetics, volume 86/2023 http://www.johk.pl