Effect of Core Stability Training On Throwing.19

EFFECT OF CORE STABILITY TRAINING ON THROWING
VELOCITY IN FEMALE HANDBALL PLAYERS

Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCyw
ATLE H. SAETERBAKKEN,1 ROLAND VAN DEN TILLAAR,1,2 AND STEPHEN SEILER3

1
Faculty of Teacher Education and Sport, Sogn og Fjordane University College, Norway; 2Research Center for Sport, Health and
Human Development, Villa Real, Portugal; and 3Institute of Public Health, Sport and Nutrition, University of Agder, Norway
CX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC1y0abggQZXdtwnfKZBYtws= on 07/20/2023
ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION
T
Saeterbakken, AH, van den Tillaar, R, and Seiler, S. Effect of he lumbopelvic-hip complex has been referred to
core stability training on throwing velocity in female handball as the core, and it connects the upper and lower
players. J Strength Cond Res 25(3): 712–718, 2011—The extremities (7). Specific core stability training
purpose was to study the effect of a sling exercise training (CST) has been evaluated in several studies related
to low back pain and injury prevention (4,20,26,27). Core
(SET)–based core stability program on maximal throwing
endurance with low loads, multiple repetition, isometric
velocity among female handball players. Twenty-four female
exercises, balance training, and isolated training of local
high-school handball players (16.6 6 0.3 years, 63 6 6 kg, and
muscle stabilizations of the lumbopelvic-hip complex has
169 6 7 cm) participated and were initially divided into a SET been used as training approach (9,15,24). However, using the
training group (n = 14) and a control group (CON, n = 10). same training approach among athletes to improve sport
Both groups performed their regular handball training for performance has resulted in contradictive results. Schibek
6 weeks. In addition, twice a week, the SET group performed (21) and Stanton et al. (23) used a Swiss ball–based CST
a progressive core stability-training program consisting of program that showed significant improvements in core
6 unstable closed kinetic chain exercises. Maximal throwing stability. However, they found no improvements in swim-
velocity was measured before and after the training period ming and running performance after the training period.
using photocells. Maximal throwing velocity significantly in- Pedersen et al. (17) and Seiler et al. (22) investigated the effect
creased 4.9% from 17.9 6 0.5 to 18.8 6 0.4 ms21 in the SET of CST with the limb suspended in unstable slings among
competitive soccer players and experienced golfers. After 8
group after the training period (p , 0.01), but was unchanged
and 9 weeks of sling exercise training (SET)–based CST
in the control group (17.1 6 0.4 vs. 16.9 6 0.4 ms21). These
program, both groups significantly improved in maximal
results suggest that core stability training using unstable,
kicking velocity and maximal clubhead velocity. These
closed kinetic chain movements can significantly improve maxi- different results could be explained by the different training
mal throwing velocity. A stronger and more stable lumbopelvic- approaches. Some of the core stability programs did not
hip complex may contribute to higher rotational velocity in follow the principle of specificity, regarding position timing
multisegmental movements. Strength coaches can incorporate and functional specificity (23) and the principle of overload
exercises exposing the joints for destabilization force during (21). Despite, including instability surfaces and exercises, the
training in closed kinetic chain exercises. This may encourage training program had to follow the principles of specificity
an effective neuromuscular pattern and increase force pro- and overload to enhance sports performances.
duction and can improve a highly specific performance task To our knowledge, there are no studies that have attempted
such as throwing. progressive sport-specific exercises using CST exercises using
unstable slings and compared the effect on maximal throwing
KEY WORDS strength, performance, unstable, closed kinetic velocity among experienced female handball players. There-
chain fore, the aim of this study was to quantify the impact of SET-
based core stability program using closed kinetic chain
exercises on maximal throwing velocity in team handball
players. It was hypothesized that SET would increase
maximal throwing velocity.
Address correspondence to A.H. Saeterbakken, atle.saeterbakken@hisf.no.
This study was conducted without any funding from companies or
manufacturers or outside organizations. METHODS
25(3)/712–718 Experimental Approach to the Problem
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research A repeated-measures design with 2 groups (SET group and
Ó 2011 National Strength and Conditioning Association a control group) was used to determine the effectiveness of
the TM
712 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca-jscr.org
SET on throwing velocity in female handball players during The study was conducted during the middle of the
a 6-week training program. competitive handball season from January to March, and
the subjects played weekly matches. All subjects played for
Subjects 2 leading age-group club teams in the same highest regional
Twenty-eight female-team handball players (age: 16.6 6 0.3 division and had an average of 8.0 (61.4) years of handball
years, mass: 63 6 6 kg, and height: 1.69 6 0.07 m) from 2 teams experience. The CON group continued their normal handball
were recruited and initially stratified according to team divided training and performed their normal club-based training
into a SET group (SET, n = 16) and a control group (CON, n program during the intervention period. None of the CON
= 12). Ethics approval was obtained from the local research group used SET before or during the intervention. The
ethics committee and with current Norwegian law and subjects in the SET group all attended the same sports high
regulation. Before participating in the study, the subjects, school, located adjacent to the training facility used in the
parents, or guardians were fully informed about the protocol, investigation. The SET group replaced 2 technical handball
and a written informed consent was obtained before all testing sessions of their normal weekly training with 2 supervised
from each subject and their parents or guardians. SET sessions. For the 6-week duration of the study, they were
A questionnaire regarding medical history, age, height, allowed to perform the SET program as a group in the daily
weight, training characteristics, injury history, team handball school schedule.
experience, and performance level was completed before
participation. Entry criteria for the study included being free Procedures
of injuries, training for competitive handball during the study, After a general warm-up of 15 minutes (jogging and throwing
and at least 5 years of team handball experience. In addition, 4 drills), throwing performance was tested using a stand-on-
subjects were excluded (2 in the SET group and 2 the in CON the-spot throw (a penalty throw in team handball). A
group) because of failed inclusion criteria or illness. Fourteen standard handball for women (weight: ;360 g and circum-
subjects of the SET group and 10 in the control group ference: 54 cm) was used. The subjects performed 10 standing
participated in the study. To control for potential confounding throws from a 7-m distance toward a shock absorbing
factors, self-report information regarding total training hours mattress target (Figure 1). Before the pretest, the subjects
of handball bouts, strength training bouts, and other form of were familiarized with the test procedure. This activity was
physical training, such as jogging, aerobics, swimming, undertaken to avoid a learning effect. The subjects were told
between the pre and posttest was collected. The subjects to throw as fast and as straightforward as possible. Groups of
trained on average before the intervention period 11.9 (63.8) 3 subjects were tested in rotation with a 60-second rest
hwk21. The training included 7.5 (6 3.2) hours for handball between each of the 10 attempts. The average of the 3 best
bouts, and 1.2 (6 0.3) hours were for general strength training, throws was used in further analyses. The pre and posttests
which was performed at the end of some handball sessions. were conducted the week before starting the intervention
Both teams had the same amount of this strength training in period and 1 week after ending it.
which the subjects performed only sit-ups, push-ups, dips, Throwing velocity was determined by using 2 photocell
squat jumps, etc. arrays (Newtest 2000 Sprint Timing System, BY, Finland)
Figure 1. The setup for the Newtest 2000 Sprint Timing System for measuring the throwing velocity.
VOLUME 25 | NUMBER 3 | MARCH 2011 | 713
Core Stability Training and Overarm Throwing
placed across the flight path of the ball (Figure 1). The kinetic chain (Figures 2 and 3). Four sets of 4–6 repetition
accuracy of the photocells arrays was 60.001 second. The maximum (RM) were performed for each exercise, with 1–2
distance between photocell arrays (3.00 m) and angle minutes of rest between sets. A rotation was performed in
between the tripods and the floor (90°) were standardized supine abduction exercise (Figure 2A) when the leg was fully
with a purpose-built frame. The first photocell tripod con- abducted to better load trunk rotators involved in a throw.
tained 7 photocells, and the second contained 8 photocells An experienced expert in SET was present during every
separated by a distance that allowed 2 photocells to be training session to make sure the exercises were performed
triggered simultaneously by the ball. The distance to the correctly. The training progression incorporated 3 levels of
first photocell array was 1.00 m from ball release ([20,26]; difficulty by increasing the instability using a balance
Figure 1). pillow or by increasing the length of the resistance arm

(Figure 4).
Training Procedures. The SET group performed the CST Exercise selection and intensity gradation were determined
program twice a week for 6 consecutive weeks. Each session from a pilot study and experience with similar subjects. The
began with a general warm-up of 15 minutes and consisted of first level of each exercise was performed for the first 4 training
5 exercises in the slings and one on a balance pillow. The total sessions. The second level was performed from the fifth to
duration of a training session was 75 minutes. There was eighth session. After 8 sessions, subjects who completed the
no less than 48 hours between each session. A dedicated exercises correctly were progressed to a third difficulty level.
system of adjustable slings (Redcord AS, Arendal, Norway, A fourth intensity level was introduced to the dynamic crunch
www.redcord.com) was used instead of a Swiss ball, wobble and push-up exercises (Figures 2C and 3C) by applying
board, or foam roller. The SET program consisted of 6 specific manual resistance during the concentric phase. All exercises
core and rotational stability exercises performed in a closed were performed in a slow and controlled motion except for
Figure 2. Core stability exercises with their different levels. (A) Spine abduction exercise: Only the scapula and the head touch the floor while the rest of the body
was fixated. The height of the sling was 20 cm from the floor. One foot was abducted in a 45° angle before performing an explosive medial rotation of the hip like
a throw. The subjects returned controlled in the 45° angle before returning to the starting position. (B) Side-lying Plank with foot and arm abduction: The height of
the sling was 20 cm from the floor, and both legs were placed in it. Only one arm was in contact with the floor. The arm and foot were abducted to a maximal joint
angle while not being in contact with the sling ropes. The position was held for 2 seconds before returning to the starting position. (C) Dynamic crunch: The height
of the sling was 20 cm. The arms were placed forward and were not in contact with each other. The rest of the body was fixated in a horizontal position for 2
seconds before a new contraction.
the TM
the TM

Figure 3. Core stability exercises with their different levels. (A) Superman: The heights of the slings were identical as that of the chin. The subjects sat on their
knees with a fixated body at all times. The subjects leant forward as far as possible without buckling in the core. (B) One-leg squat: A one-leg squat performed with
a 90° flexion in the knee. The position was held for 2 seconds before quickly returning to the starting position without falling. (C) Push-ups: For push-ups in the
slings, the body was fixated in a horizontal position.
the concentric phase of the push-up exercise and the one-leg throwing velocity was the dependent variable and by
squat. This was done to stress the neuromuscular system to estimating ES = 4.97 and a = 0.05 for single-sided results
stabilize the core by adjusting to the external loads (26). in pairwise analyses, our sample size (n = 24) yielded
a calculated power of 0.867. Alpha was set at p = 0.05 to
Statistical Analyses
determine statistical significance.
To compare the effects of training on throwing velocity,
a 2 (training group) 3 2 (test time point) factor analysis of
variance with repeated measures for the factor time point was
used. The throwing velocity had an intraclass correlation RESULTS
coefficient of 0.994 and a coefficient of variation of 2.5%. There was no difference in maximal throwing velocity
Statistical power equations to determine a minimum study between the SET and CON groups at pretest (p = 0.364).
population at the p # 0.05 level with a power of 0.8 revealed After training, the SET group demonstrated a significant
a sample of minimum of 6 subjects in each group. The increase in throwing velocity (4.9%; p = 0.01), although the
throwing velocity of CON was

statistically unchanged (p =
0.418; Figure 5).
Thirteen of the 14 subjects
performed all 6 exercises at level
3 at the end of the training
period. The subjects that were

not able to train at level 3,
trained at level 2 in the Super-
man exercise and the Push-up

exercise (Figures 3A, C) after
ending the training period. The
rest of the exercises were per-
formed at level 3. At the end of
the training period, 7 subjects
Figure 4. The different levels of each exercise were progressed in difficulty by increasing the instability using performed the Dynamic Crunch
balance pillows and by increasing the resistance arm.
exercise at level 4 and 5 subjects
the Push-up exercise at this
level. The subjects performing
the exercises at level 4 were not
significantly different in change
in throwing velocity after the
training period compared with
others from the SET group
(Push-ups, p = 0.38 and Dy-
namic Crunch, p = 0.09).
DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study was to
determine the effect of a SET-
based core stability program on
maximal throwing velocity
among handball players. The
main result of this study sup-
ports our hypotheses. Closed
kinetic chain exercises in un-
stable slings improved maximal
Figure 5. Average throwing velocity for both groups at the pre and posttest with their SEM. (*) Indicates significant throwing velocity among 16-
main effect of training for the sling exercise training group (p , 0.05).
year-old female handball play-
ers. The SET group showed
a ;5% improvement in maximal
throwing velocity, whereas the
control group did not change.
The performance enhancement
TABLE 1. Anthropometrics and handball experience averaged per group and observed in the present study is
averaged overall. consistent with other studies
involving more specific training
SET (n = 14) CON (n = 10) Average (n = 24)
of the shoulder girdle and tradi-
Age (y) 16.6 (63.1) 16.5 (63.9) 16.6 (63.1) tional high-intensity strength
Weight (kg) 63 (63.4) 63 (68.1) 63 (65.9) training. Barata (3), Ettema
Height (m) 1.69 (65.6) 1.69 (68.4) 1.69 (67.3) et al. (10), and Gorostiaga (12)
Handball experience (y) 8.1 (61.4) 8.1 (61.5) 8.1 (61.4) used general strength training
SET = sling exercise training. programs (3 3 6RM, 8–12RM
and pyramid training) on young
handball players. After a 6- to
the TM
the TM
9-week training period, the increase in throwing velocity was preventing injury have suggested the use of low load and high
between 1.4 and 6.9% (3,10,12). Prokopy et al. (18) recently repetitions or holding time (2). However, the goal of the
also employed closed-kinetic chain exercise–based training exercise selection and muscular load range in the present
methods in slings and reported a 3.4% of throwing velocity study was to improve performance in a movement requiring
among NCAA division I softball players. Considering the short very high levels of muscle recruitment. Therefore, a low-
intervention period, the magnitude of the improvement volume, high-intensity core-training regime was employed. It
observed suggests performance benefits comparable to or is unclear whether a more traditional low-load, high-
better than other investigated training modalities. repetition training core-training program would elicit the
The increase in throwing velocity of the SET group might same transfer to performance. Another important aspect of
be explained by an increase lumbopelvic rotational stability the specificity of a training program is the plane of movement
and strength. Thirteen of the 14 subjects in the SET group and axis of rotation. Several recommended core-training
progressed from the first level to the third level of all of the exercises are only performed in 1 or 2 planes of motion and
exercises during the training period. The third level required without rotational instability. In sport performance such as
greater stability and strength to be performed correctly than throwing, kicking, serving, etc., the rotation of the core along
the first level. It is therefore likely that the SET group the vertical axis is a critical part of the motion (13,15,25). An
improved their core strength and/or improved the neuro- advantage of the present training program may be the 3D
muscular coordination of the core. The core receives, adds, instability created by the sling environment.
and transfers energy from the proximal segments to the distal Difficulty in progression of core exercises might be another
segments (14,15). Many factors such as proximal segment reason why others have not demonstrated any effect on sport
force production, proximal-to-distal force production (11,19), performance (21,23). By increasing the instability and
segmental decelerative capacity (11), segmental function, and resistance arm, the difficulties of the exercises were
postural stability affect throwing velocity. Exercises causing progressed and provided a sufficient overload to the core
both strength and stability of the core might affect an musculature during the training period. By using slings and
athlete’s ability to activate the muscles in a more coordinated the balance pillows, the exercises became unstable. By doing
way or generate more force (28). Changes in coordination, so, we tried to activate the local stabilizing muscle of the core
increased force generation, or both might improve rotational in an independent co-contraction of the global muscles
force generation and transfer. This may explain the (7,28). Trying to maximize the generated and transferred
significant enhancement in maximal throwing velocity after energy from the core, the muscles had to adjust the force
the training period. This hypothesis is supported by Kibler’s based on feedback provided by the neural system (15,28).
findings (14). All subjects were active, experienced, and well- The neural subsystem continuously had to ensure sufficient
trained handball players in the middle of their competitive stability and desired joint movements (15,28). Therefore, it
handball season. The subjects were tested in the most was important that the exercises were performed correctly
common and easiest technical throw in handball. and in a controlled motion. The qualities of the execution
Four of the 6 exercises were aimed at strengthening the among the exercises were an important part of the
lumbopelvic area (Figures 2 and 3). The push-ups and one- intervention and one of the reasons the SET expert was
leg squat exercises trained the strength and stability of the present during every training session.
shoulder girdle and 3D control of the femur, respectively Whether the changes in throwing performance observed
(Figure 3). These exercises extended the core stabilization here were caused by greater strength of the core and
load from the knee via the hip, to the shoulder. The nature subsequent greater contribution of the hip and trunk to
of the equipment led to improved torso and shoulder segmental velocity summation or a more stable core resulting
stabilization during throwing enhanced by the activation of in a reduced loss of force transfer between the segments
the musculature. The slings are inherently unstable, cannot be determined from the current study.
meaning that the SET group–enhanced activation of the Future research should therefore focus upon what changes
musculature involved the stabilization of the shoulder and during core training and how it affects sport performance
torso. By training the stability and strength of the upper such as throwing, kicking, serving, etc., among elite players.
and lower extremities, an increased stability between each Currently, there is no validated test battery to evaluate core
joint might reduce the loss of energy between the segments stability in athletes and potentially identify athletes that can
(1,4–6,15,18). Training in unstable conditions, as with benefit from targeted training. Therefore, future research
slings and balance pillows, may therefore have reduced this should seek to establish a core stability test battery that
loss of force output (1,4,5). A reduction of force involves dynamic muscle actions.
output might influence the throwing velocity in the In conclusion, a unique functional, 3D, core stability
posttest (13,16,18,25). program consisting of progressively unstable closed kinetic
A challenging aspect of sports training is to maximize chain exercises for hips and torso significantly improves
training transfer to performance (8,23,29). Several core- throwing velocity among handball players. High levels of core
training programs aimed at reducing low back pain and strength and stability may be an important precondition for
generating high rotational velocities in multisegmental 10. Ettema, G, Glosen, T, and van den Tillaar, R. Effect of specific
resistance training on overarm throwing performance. Int J Sports
movements such as throwing.
Phys Perf 3: 164–175, 2008.
11. Fleisig, GS, Barrentine, SW, Escamilla, RF, and Andrews, JR.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS Biomechanics of throwing with implications for injuries. Sports Med
21: 421–437, 1996.
The effectiveness of exercises performed on unstable
12. Gorostiaga, EM, Izquierdo, M, Itrralde, P, Ruasta, M, and Ibanec, J.
equipment has demonstrated the likelihood of reducing Effect of heavy resistance training on maximal and explosive force
injuries. Exposing the joints for destabilization force during production, endurance and serum hormones in adolescent handball
training may encourage an effective neuromuscular pattern players. Eur J Appl Physiol 80: 485–493, 1999.
and increase force production. This study showed that a core- 13. Jöris, HJJ, Edwards van Muyen, AJ, van Ingen Schenau, GJ, and
Kemper, HCG. Force, velocity and energy flow during the overarm
training program of progressively unstable closed kinetic throw in female handball players. J Biomech 18: 409–414, 1985.
chain can improve a highly specific performance task. The 14. Kibler, WB. Clinical biomechanics of the elbow in tennis:
training exercises have to resemble the sport-specific Implications for evaluation and diagnosis. Med Sci Sports Exerc
demands and the core exercises should also focus on the 26: 1203–1206, 1994.
rotation of the core muscles. Thus, the kinetics of throwing 15. Kibler, WB, Press, J, and Sciascia, A. The role of core stability in
are similar to other sports involving segmental summation. It athletic function. Sports Med 36: 189–198, 2006.
is therefore likely that the improvements observed in the 16. Newton, RU and McEvoy, P. Baseball throwing velocity: A
comparison of medicine ball training and weight training. J Strength
study may translate to other sports and improve specific Cond Res 8: 198–203, 1994.
performance tasks. 17. Pedersen, JLS, Magnussen, R, Kuffel, E, and Seiler, S. Sling exercise
training improves balance, kicking velocity and torso stabilization
strength in elite soccer players. Med Sci Sports Exerc 38: 243, 2006.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
18. Prokopy, MP, Ingersoll, CD, Nordenschild, E, and Katch, FI. Closed-
The authors would like to thank the subjects at Gimle High kinetic chain upper-body training improves throwing performance
School for their enthusiastic participation in this study. This of NCAA division I softball players. J Strength Cond Res 22: 1790–
1798, 2008.
work was supported by the Faculty for teachers training and
19. Putnam, CA. Sequential motions of body segments in striking and
sports, Sogn og Fjordane University College, Norway, and throwing skills: Description and explanations. J Biomech 26: 125–
Institute of Public Health, Sport and Nutrition, University of 135, 1993.
Agder, Norway. The results of the present study do not constitute 20. Richardson, CA, Snijders, C, Hides, JA, Damen, L, Pas, MS, and
endorsement of the product by the authors or the NSCA. Storm, J. The relation between the transversus abdominis muscles,
sacroiliac joint mechanics, and low back pain. Spine 27: 399–405,
2002.
REFERENCES 21. Schibek, JS, Guskiewicz, KM, Prentice, WE, Mays, S, and Davis, JM.
1. Anderson, K and Behm, DG. Maintenance of EMG activity and loss The effect of core stabilization training on functional performance in
of force output with instability. J Strength Cond Res 18: 637–640, swimming. J Athl Train 34: 27, 1999.
2004. 22. Seiler, S, Skaanes, PT, and Kirkesola, G. Effects of sling exercise
2. Arokoski, JP, Valta, T, Airaksinen, O, and Kankaanpaa, M. Back and training on maximal clubhead velocity in junior golfers. Med Sci
abdominal muscle function during stabilization exercises. Arch Phys Sports Exerc 38: 286, 2006.
Med Rehabil 82: 1089–1098, 2001. 23. Stanton, R, Reaburn, PR, and Humphries, B. The effect of short-term
3. Barata, J. Changes in ball velocity in handball free throw, induced Swiss ball training on core stability and running economy. J Strength
two different speed-strength training programs. Portug J Human Perf Cond Res 18: 522–528, 2004.
8: 45–55, 1992. 24. Stephenson, J and Swank, AM. Core training: Designing a program
4. Behm, DG and Anderson, KG. The role of instability with resistance for anyone. Strength Cond J 26 34–37, 2004.
training. J Strength Cond Res 20: 716–722, 2006. 25. van den Tillaar, R and Ettema, G. Instructions emphasizing velocity,
5. Behm, DG, Anderson, K, and Curnew, RS. Muscle force and accuracy, or both in performance and kinematics of overarm
neuromuscular activation under stable and unstable conditions. throwing by experienced team handball players. Percept Motor Skills
J Strength Cond Res 16: 416–422, 2002. 97: 731–742, 2003.
6. Behm, DG, Leonard, AM, Young, WB, Bonsey, WAC, and 26. Vera-Garcia, FJ, Grenier, SG, and McGill, SM. Abdominal muscle
Mackinnon, SN. Trunk muscle electromyographic activity with response during curl-ups on both stable and labile surfaces. Phys Ther
unstable and unilateral exercises. J Strength Cond Res 19: 193–201, 80: 564–569, 2000.
2005. 27. Willardson, J. Response: Letter to the editor regarding ‘‘The
7. Bergmark, A. Stability of the lumbar spine. A study in mechanical effectiveness of resistance exercises performed on unstable equipment.’’
engineering. Acta Orthop Scand 230: 1–54, 1989. Strength Cond J 27: 11–13, 2005.
8. Chek, P. Swiss ball exercises for swimming, soccer & basketball. 28. Willardson, JM. Core stability training: Applications to sports
Sports Coach 21: 12–13, 1999. conditioning programs. J Strength Cond Res 21: 979–985, 2007.
9. Dale, B and Lawrence, R. Principles of core stabilization for athletic 29. Willardson, JMT. The effectiveness of resistance exercises
populations. Athl Ther Today 10: 13–18, 2005. performed on unstable equipment. Strength Cond J 26: 70–74, 2004.
the TM

Effect of Core Stability Training On Throwing.19

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Effect of Core Stability Training On Throwing.19

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EFFECT OF CORE STABILITY TRAINING ON THROWING

VELOCITY IN FEMALE HANDBALL PLAYERS

ATLE H. SAETERBAKKEN,1 ROLAND VAN DEN TILLAAR,1,2 AND STEPHEN SEILER3

712 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca-jscr.org

VOLUME 25 | NUMBER 3 | MARCH 2011 | 713

Figure 1). pillow or by increasing the length of the resistance arm

714 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca-jscr.org

VOLUME 25 | NUMBER 3 | MARCH 2011 | 715

throwing velocity of CON was

period. The subjects that were

man exercise and the Push-up

716 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca-jscr.org

VOLUME 25 | NUMBER 3 | MARCH 2011 | 717

718 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

You might also like