SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 214
CHAPTER-V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONSAND RECOMMENDATONS 5.1 SUMMARY All players need speed particularly in sport like badminton where the first player up and down the court can mean the difference in winning or losing a game. In the world of sports, the fastest, quickest athletes are usually the most successful. But exactly what kind of speed and quickness is best for badminton. Badminton is an extremely demanding sport. At an elite level, players are often required to perform at their limits of speed, agility, flexibility, endurance and strength. The varied potential stresses of competitive play are considerable. It is therefore essential that everyone involved with modern games ought to be familiar with the fitness (physiological) requirements of the game and how badminton fitness can be enhanced. Badminton requires the performance of work in the nature of sprints, stops and starts, jumps, leaps, lunges, rapid changes of direction, twists and turns and a variety of strokes. Badminton players must have great physical capacity, especially speed and aerobic strength and power. Speed and agility are quite closely linked to strength. Speed in particular is usually improved when strength and power are enhanced. Both speed and agility are vital to badminton performance. A successful player must move quickly whenever necessary but changes in direction are equally important in the game due to the nature of the movements required in a rally. 215
While some people seem to be naturally fast and agile, these are both skills that can be acquired. It is important to remember that speed and agility will not be improved if a player is taking training while tired. So, badminton is a combination of speed (anaerobic fitness) in rallies and endurance (aerobic fitness). All team sports, speed and power dominant rely on solid strength and power development. Understanding the mechanics and physics of resistance training and incorporating those principles into the training programme will give players a competitive edge. Strength and power are improved through resistance training. This means that the muscles are put under a load (resistance) which results in their becoming stronger, larger, more efficient when loaded and they develop a greater resistance to fatigue. Resistance training, however, is not simply for adults looking to develop strength and power. The theory and science behind resistance training also applies to younger children under the age of sixteen years. Regular participation in weight-bearing physical activities, such as resistance exercise, will likely have a favourable influence on bone growth and development during childhood and adolescence. A well planned and well executed resistance training programme can bring numerous health benefits to a person s wellbeing. A resistance programme does not focus entirely on building muscle to improve the performance-related aspects of health and fitness, such as strength, speed and 216
power. It also develops a balanced body to enable efficient movement and response to everyday demands such as gardening, work and physical play. According to the principle of reversibility, training induced physiological adaptations are transitory and may disappear when the training load is not sufficient. The reasons for such a scenario are numerous in an athlete s life: illness, injury, post-season break of training load adaptation to recover from a state of overreaching. The consequences on endurance performance may vary according to the way training load is altered: training reduction, training cessation or bed rest confinement. Detraining reflects the fact that if a training stimulus is insufficient, or removed entirely, then the aspect of physiological conditioning to which it relates begins to decline. In other words, the individual begins to lose fitness. Moreover, little work exists about the appropriate time-course for regaining physiological conditioning after a lay-off. Clearly though, it a long road back and these findings suggest that the time course for regaining toplevel condition should not be guessed at, but rather assessed through regular monitoring and testing. Because practical realities make this difficult, careful planning and restriction of time off may be required. If variables such as speed parameters and physiological parameters improved, resistance training may be the most important of these tools. Maximizing resistance training program effectiveness and preventing injuries depends on the logical progression of exercise intensity. Therefore, the goal of this investigation was to provide information about the intensity of resistance 217
training, detraining and retraining exercises, as well as to offer some general guidelines for resistance training program design. Many research studies have been carried out on the individual effect of resistance training. This study was designed to find out the combination of resistance training, detraining and retraining effects on speed and physiological parameters of junior male badminton players. To fulfil the purpose of the study forty junior male badminton players were randomly selected from Y.R.T.V. School, Sivakasi and Sivakasi Lions Matriculation Higher Secondary School in Virudhunagar District of TamilNadu state during the year 2011-12, their age ranged between 14 and 16 years. The selected subjects were divided into two equal groups consisting of twenty each. No attempt was made to equate the groups. Experimental group (n = 20) underwent resistance training, detraining and retraining for a period of 12 weeks each. Control group (n = 20) were not engaged in any training programme other than their regular work. The influence of resistance training, detraining and retraining on speed parameters and physiological parameters of junior male badminton players was assessed. The following dependent variables were assessed by using standard tests. SPEED PARAMETERS Acceleration speed was assessed by using 20 m acceleration sprint and the unit of measurement was in seconds. 218
Maximum speed was assessed by using 40 m sprint and the unit of measurement was in seconds. Multiple speed was assessed by using 6x40 m sprint and the unit of measurement was in seconds. Stride length was assessed by using 10 stride tests and the unit of measurement was in centimetres. Speed endurance was assessed by using 150 m run and the unit of measurement was in seconds. PHYSIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS VO 2 max was assessed by using bench step and Astrand Nomogram and the unit of measurement was in liters/ kilogram /minutes. Anaerobic power was assessed by using Margaria-kalamen test and the unit of measurement was in Kilogram/meter/seconds. Breath holding time was assessed by using breath holding test and the unit of measurement was in seconds. Cardiac frequency was assessed by using biomonitor and the unit of measurement was in beats/minutes. The subjects were trained 3 day per week and the training programme for each session lasted for 55-60 minutes approximately, this included 5 minutes warm up and 5 minutes relaxation procedure. Training was performed for a period of 12 weeks. The test was conducted on all the variables before and after 12 weeks of training, detraining and retraining period. 219
After initial measurements, the subjects were divided into two equal groups, the control group (n=20) and the experimental group (n=20). The control group did not undergo any training. The experimental group was trained for 12 weeks, three days per week. Before initiation of the training periods, the subjects of both groups were instructed about proper execution of all exercises to be used during the training period for the training regimens. None of the subjects has used resistance training before. The subjects agreeing to participate signed an institutionally approved consent form. A twelve week resistance training programme was developed using three sessions per week. The training programme was based on the recommendation of intensity and volume from (Piper and Erdman, 1998). Three days per week and perfectly acceptable given that there are no competition days at the end of each weekly cycle training (Chu, 1998).Resistance training was performed thrice a week to allow for sufficient recovery between workouts as recommended by researchers (Adam et al., 1992). The subjects in the experimental group were trained with 12 weeks of resistance training. After the training period, the subjects were post tested. 13 th to 24 th week the detraining period was given. During this detraining period the subjects did not perform any exercise. After the detraining period, the subjects were post tested, in order to find out the detraining effect. The retraining started with 25 th week. Again the subjects were post tested on selected variables to express the retraining. 220
The experimental design used in this study was 2x4 factorial designs. The obtained data were statistically analysed by using two way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the mean gain scores of each dependent variables. Whenever, the obtained F ratios for interaction was significant, simple effects tests was used to find out whether there exist significant differences among the dependent variables, for groups and treatments. Since the experiment consists of two groups in each cell, the scheff s post hoc test was not applied even though the F ratio for simple effect test was significant. 5.2 CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of the present study the following conclusions have been drawn. 1. Within the limitation and on the basis of findings, it was very clear that 12 weeks of resistance training produced significant improvement over speed parameters of acceleration speed, maximum speed, multiple speed, stride length and speed endurance and physiological variables of VO 2 max, anaerobic power, breath holding time and cardiac frequency of junior male badminton players. 2. The detraining for a period of 12 weeks resulted with significant decrease apparently not below pre training level in speed and physiological parameters of junior male badminton players. 3. The result of retraining effects confirm positively and significantly the effects of retraining on speed and physiological parameters of junior male badminton players. 221
4. The improvement (gains) obtained during training period for 12 weeks was lost completely after cessation training for the same length of period. 5. The magnitude of loss occurred during the detraining period was regained to the trained value only after retraining for the same length of 12 weeks period. 6. The peak level performance can be maintained with only by performing limited amount of training during detraining period. 7. To prevent or minimize the changes that result from period of physical inactivity, the athletes and players should participate in physical activities during the detraining period. 8. Finally, the fitness benefits are completely lost after 12 weeks of detraining. Therefore, the duration of transition phase (off-season) should be carefully monitored and reevaluated especially in team sports. 5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations have been made based on the results of the present study, 1. The resistance training, detraining and retraining is the appropriate training protocol to produce significant changes over speed and physiological parameters of junior male badminton players. 2. Similar study may also be conducted for female students. 222
3. Studies of similar nature may also be conducted by changing the dependent variables. 4. Similar study may be conducted using resistance training, detraining and retraining by employing more experimental groups. 5. Fitness experts, health consultants and conditioning experts can use resistance training for preparing various training programmes. 6. It is recommended that a similar study can be conducted on a wide age sample and for longer duration. 7. More work needs to be undertaken to clear the speed and physiological relationship and the effect on this type of training. 8. To maintain the fitness level a mild physical activity may be done during the training cessation periods. 223