Content uploaded by Ertugrul Gelen
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Ertugrul Gelen on Jun 20, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
ACUTE EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT WARM-UP METHODS
ON SPRINT,SLALOM DRIBBLING,AND PENALTY KICK
PERFORMANCE IN SOCCER PLAYERS
ERTUGRUL GELEN
Sakarya University, School of Physical Education and Sport, Sakarya, Turkey
ABSTRACT
Gelen, E. Acute effects of different warm-up methods on sprint,
slalom dribbling, and penalty kick performance in soccer
players. JStrengthCondRes24(4): 950–956, 2010—Although
pre-event static stretching is an accepted practice in most
athletics program, pre-event dynamic exercise is becoming
popular. The purpose of this study was to compare the acute
effects of different warm-up methods on soccer performance.
Twenty-six professional soccer players (23.3 63.2 years,
178.2 66.1 cm, and 73.0 66.5 kg) performed 4 different
warm-up routines in random order on nonconsecutive days. The
warm-up methods consisted of only 5 minutes of jogging
(Method A), 5 minutes of jogging and static stretching (Method
B), 5 minutes of jogging and dynamic exercise (Method C), and
5 minutes of jogging and a combination of static stretching and
dynamic exercise (Method D). After each warm-up session,
subjects were tested on the sprint, slalom dribbling, and penalty
kick performance. Methods A–D were compared by repeated-
measures analyses of variance and post hoc comparisons. In
this study, existence of a significant drop in sprint, slalom
dribbling, and penalty kick performances of Method C has been
determined in comparison with that of Method A (p,0.05).
Again for sprint, slalom dribbling, and penalty kick perform-
ances of Method A in comparison with those of Method A, the
existence of a significant increase has been determined (p,
0.05). In Method D in comparison with Method A, for sprint,
slalom dribbling, and penalty kick performances, existence of no
significant difference has been determined (p.0.05). The
results of this study suggest that it may be desirable for soccer
players to perform dynamic exercises before the performance of
activities that require a high power output.
KEY WORDS soccer, static stretching, dynamic exercise, power,
potentiation
INTRODUCTION
Soccer is a sport that is based on explosive actions
such as kicking, dribbling, jumping, and sprinting
(26). Players do warm-up exercises before sportive
loading to improve motor performance and avoid
injuries. The main goal of warm-up is to increase muscle heat,
blood circulation, and physiological response (17). Static
stretching is usually done during the warm-up period. For
warm-up, players traditionally do static stretching exercises
after a few minutes of moderate aerobic exercise (jogging). It
is determined that static stretching increases muscle–skeleton
flexibility by affecting both mechanical (21) and neurological
(15) characteristics of the muscle–tendon unit (MTU). But
the belief about the significance of static stretching exercise
before the event has started to be interrogated in recent years
(3,6,8,23,29).
Recent studies show that static stretching exercises can
inhibit the performance by decreasing the production of
power and speed instead of being useful to athletes
(3,6,7,18,23,30). The most-accepted explanation about the
decrease in performance is that static stretching exercises
soften the MTU and decrease muscle stiffness. The decrease
in MTU stiffness causes acute neural inhibition and decreases
the production of power and speed by leading to a reduction
in stimulus that goes to the muscles (2,19,21,27).
Recently, compared with static stretching, practicing
warm-up exercises has attracted the attention of many
researchers, trainers, and sports experts (7,9,12,31). Hops,
skips, and jumps, which aim at upper and lower extremities,
constitute the heart of dynamic warm-up exercises. Dynamic
warm-up exercises include plyometrics, heavy-load resis-
tance exercise, or maximum voluntary contractions (MVC).
Previous research studies suggested that voluntary moderate-
to high-intensity contractions, such as warm-ups, which are
performed before practicing an athletic activity, increase
power production and performance by activating neuromus-
cular functions (5,9,14,23,31). This phenomenon is called
‘‘postactivation potentiation’’ (PAP). Postactivation potenti-
ation is defined as the temporary increase in the contractile
ability of muscles after previous contraction sessions (28).
Although a more effective interaction between actin and
myosin resulting from phosphorylation of light chain myosin
Address correspondence to Ertugrul Gelen, gelen@sakarya.edu.tr.
24(4)/950–956
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Ó2010 National Strength and Conditioning Association
950
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
is considered as one of the main mechanisms responsible for
PAP, another mechanism is neural excitability (13,28).
Although there are studies documenting the detrimental
effects of static stretching and useful effects of dynamic
exercises, up to the present, no studies have researched on the
acute effects of different warm-up exercises on sprint, slalom
dribbling, and penalty kick performances in soccer. Notwith-
standing that sprint, slalom dribbling, and penalty kick are
very important for soccer and are often applied in competition
and training. The first hypothesis of this study is about
performances of sprint, slalom dribbling, and penalty kick to
be reduced by static stretching, besides performance to be
increased by dynamic exercises. Another important matter is
the requirement of sportsmen to apply static stretching before
training or competition for not to be spoiled. The main
objective in static stretching before activity is to reduce risk of
spoiling by increasing the range of motion of muscles. But
there is an accurate balance between the reduction of
performance in applying static stretching and the increasing
of spoiling risk in nonapplication of it. The second hypothesis
of this study is about application of static stretching and
dynamic exercise combination that can reduce the detrimen-
tal effects of static stretching on sprint, slalom dribbling, and
penalty kick performances. Therefore, the purpose of this
study was to compare the acute effects of static stretching,
dynamic exercise, and combined static stretching and
dynamic exercise on sprint, slalom dribbling, and penalty
kick performance in professional soccer players.
METHODS
Experimental Approach to the Problem
A within-subject, balanced, randomized repeated-measures
design was used to test the experimental hypotheses. Twenty-
six professional soccer players were familiarized with all
experimental tests before baseline performance was de-
termined. The study consisted of 4 experimental sessions. At
each session, subjects performed 1 of 4 different warm-up
methods (i.e., neither stretching nor dynamic exercise
[control], static stretching, dynamic exercise warm-up, and
combined static stretching and dynamic exercise warm-up)
after a standardized 5-minute jogging warm-up and then
completed the soccer performance tests. The performance
tests consisted of sprint, slalom dribbling, and penalty kick.
Three trials were performed for each test. For each variable,
the highest value of the 3 attempts was used for analysis.
Subjects
The study has been conducted on 26 healthy male volunteer
professional soccer players who play in the third soccer
league of Turkey (mean [SD]: 23.3 [3.2] years, 178.2 [6.1] cm,
and 73.0 [6.5] kg). Players have a training experience of 9.6
(2.1) years. All subjects indicated had no significant history of
recent musculoskeletal injury. Before participating in the
study, subjects were informed of the potential risks and
benefits and provided written informed consent to participate
in accordance with the policies and procedures of the
University of Sakarya’s Human Research Ethics Committee
for use of human subjects in research. Tests were performed
in the fourth week of a 16-week season. During the season,
the subjects practiced 16 times per week and played 1
professional match, with no additional weight training being
undertaken. During resting, ranges of motion of all soccer
players were measured using a goniometer, and it was
determined that they were within normal limits. The subjects
were asked to refrain from caffeine intake on each testing day
and to avoid food consumption in the 2 hours before testing.
Procedures
Before data collection, all subjects participated in 2 in-
troductory sessions during which they practiced all warm-up
procedures and soccer fitness tests. This introductory period
was designed to reduce the influence of any learning effects
caused solely by the mechanics of performing study
protocols. All warm-up exercises were carried out by a team
trainer in 10-person groups, at the same hours (11.00 AM).
Each of 4 warm-up methods was carried out on non-
consecutive and random days. It was started with 5 minutes
of jogging with low intensity warm-up methods. All Subjects
relaxed actively for 2 minutes before applying any warm-up
methods after 5 minutes of jogging (by walking). After this
relaxed walking, warm-up methods were applied. Subjects
had relaxed for 4–5 minutes after completion until
application of the first test. All subjects rested at least
3 minutes between tests and completed the soccer test
battery in about 15–20 minutes. All study procedures were
completed within 11 days. A summary of experimental and
testing procedures is shown in Figure 1. For ease of
discussion, the 4 warm-up methods will be referred to as
Method A, Method B, Method C, and Method D.
Method A consisted of low-intensity aerobic jogging for
5 minutes. Subjects were made to run around the soccer
ground for 5 minutes with such an intensity that their heart
rate was 140 times per minute. In each group of 10 people,
3 subjects selected randomly were made to wear a heart rate
monitor (810i Polar Electro Inc., Kempele, Finland) to measure
warm-up intensity. After 5 minutes of jogging, not applying
any stretching or dynamic exercises, 4–5 minutes later, sprint,
slalom dribbling, and penalty kick tests had been applied.
Method A is a warm-up application used in all sports.
Method B consisted of low-intensity aerobic jogging
(Method A) and static stretching intended for lower
extremity muscles for 10 minutes (active stretching). Subjects
performed 5 stretches in a slow, deliberate manner with
proper body alignment. Subjects held each stretch for
20 seconds at a point of mild discomfort, relaxed for 10 seconds,
then repeated the same stretch for another 30 seconds before
progressing to the opposite extremity (when necessary). The
static stretching exercises intended for specific muscle groups
were performed in accordance with the method suggested by
Alter (1) (calf #21, quadriceps #91, adductor #64, hamstring
VOLUME 24 | NUMBER 4 | APRIL 2010 | 951
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
|
www.nsca-jscr.org
#46, and hip rotator #118) (Table 1). The team trainer
monitored the subjects during each stretch to ensure that the
stretch was performed correctly. Four to five minutes later,
Method B was applied to sprint, slalom dribbling, and penalty
kick tests.
Method C consisted of low-intensity aerobic jogging
(Method A) and 12 dynamic warm-up exercises for
10 minutes (Table 2). Subjects performed each dynamic
exercise for 15 m, rested about 10 seconds, and then repeated
the same exercise for 15 m as they returned to the starting
point. Subjects were continually instructed to maintain
proper form and technique during the performance of each
dynamic movement. This method was designed similar to
warm-up protocols typically used to prepare athletes for
sports participation (7,8). Four
to five minutes later, Method C
was applied to sprint, slalom
dribbling, and penalty kick tests.
Method D consisted of a com-
bination of Method B and
Method C. After low-intensity
aerobic jogging for 5 minutes,
subjects performed static
stretching designed for lower
extremity muscles (Method B)
first and then dynamic warm-
up exercises (Method C). Four
to five minutes later, Method D
was applied to sprint, slalom
dribbling, and penalty kick
tests.
Soccer-Specific Tests
The subjects performed 3 skill
tests, a sprint test, a slalom
dribble test, and penalty kick
test. For the sprint test, subjects
ran between 2 lines, the distance of which was 30 m, by using
their maximum strength with upright start at any time they
wished. For the slalom dribbling test, they performed
dribbling by zigzagging between 4 cones, which were
installed at intervals of 2 m along a straight line of 10 m.
Electronic timing lights (NewTest 2000, Oulu, Finland) were
used to measure the time taken for the 30-m sprint and slalom
dribbling test. Sprint and slalom dribbling tests were
performed by the subjects 3 times, and the best values were
used for analysis. Penalty kick test was performed from the
penalty point having a distance of 11 m from the goal line with
maximal speed. For standardization of shoots, the subjects
performing the penalty shoot kick had been asked to shoot by
targeting exactly the plastic man placed in the middle of the
Figure 1. A summary of the experimental method.
TABLE 1. Static stretching exercises.
Calf stretch. The subject stands straight on both feet at a 2-step distance from a wall, 1 leg is stretched in its place
while taking a step forward with the other leg, using both hands on the wall for balance. Care must be taken not to
lift the heels of the stretched foot off the ground. The same process is then repeated for the other leg (#21).
Quadriceps stretch. The subject stands and touches a wall or stationary object for balance. The top ankle or forefoot
is grasped from behind and then pulled toward the buttocks. The hip is then straightened by moving the knee
backward and held in this position. The same is repeated for the opposite side (#91).
Adductor stretch. While being seated on the ground the subject bends both legs putting both feet together. The
knees are then lowered sideways as far as possible with the help of the elbows (#64).
Hamstring stretch. The subject sits on the ground with both legs straight out in front, and bends forward while
keeping the back straight (#46).
Hip rotator stretch. The subject lies on his/her back, with both knees bent and feet flat on the floor. The ankle bone
of the left leg is rested on the right thigh just above the knee. The left knee is pushed downward until a stretch
is felt in the hip. The same procedure is repeated for the opposite leg (#118).
952
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
Effects of Warm-up in Soccer Players
goal between the goal line and goal net without requiring a hit.
The radar gun used for measuring the speed of the ball
(SportsRadar 3600, Astro Products, Ontario, CA, USA) had
been installed on a tripod with an angle of 10°5 m behind the
player performing the penalty kick and on the side of his
dominant leg. To make the maximal effort, the feedback of the
speed had been given to the subjects. For data analysis, the
fastest (km?h
21
) of the 3 penalty kicks performed by the
player at the maximal speed had been analyzed and
determined as maximal penalty kick speed (V
max
). All testing
sessions were performed with identical equipment, position-
ing, technique, and test order.
Statistical Analyses
Descriptive statistics (mean 6SD) were formulated for the
variables age, height, body weight, sprint, slalom dribbling,
and penalty kick. Data obtained for each of the 4 warm-up
methods are analyzed using repeated-measures analyses of
variance. Methods B–D were used for the study group,
whereas Method A was designed for the control group.
When a significant Fvalue was achieved, post hoc
comparisons were accomplished via a least significant
difference test to identify specific differences between trials.
An intraclass correlation (ICC R
s
) was calculated for each
test measure after each of the 4 warm-up methods to examine
the reliability of each test.
RESULTS
The mean scores for the sprint, slalom dribbling, and penalty
kick performance measures after using the different warm-up
methods are presented in Table 3. In terms of sprint
performances, a 0.39-second difference (% 8.5) between
Method A and Method B, a 0.19-second difference (% 4.1)
between Method A and Method C were found to be
significant in terms of statistics (p,0.01 and p,0.03,
respectively). In terms of slalom dribbling performances,
a 0.24-second difference (% 4.1) between Method A and
Method B, a 0.30-second difference (% 5.1) between Method
A and Method C were found to be significant in terms of
statistics (p,0.02 and p,0.01, respectively). In terms of
penalty kick performances, a 2.09 kmh
21
difference (% 2.1)
between Method A and Method B, a 3.31 kmh
21
difference
TABLE 2. Dynamic warm-up exercises.
Light skip. While running with a slight skip, the knees are raised slowly, with arms swinging in rhythm.
High knee pull. While walking, each knee is pulled toward the chest with the help of both hands.
Light butt kicks. While running, the heels are raised to touch the buttocks, with arms swinging in rhythm.
Light high knees. While running, the knees are raised slightly with every step, with the arms swinging in rhythm.
Walking lunge. While walking hands behind head, with every step forward, the body is lowered by flexing the knee
and hip until the knee of the other leg is in contact with the floor. The same is repeated with the opposite leg.
Straight leg kick. While walking with both arms outstretched forward, each leg is raised up straight until toes
touch palms.
High glute pull. While walking, each leg is pulled toward the chest from the ankle using both hands.
A-skip. While running, with every skip as each knee goes up, the opposite hand goes up, and the elbows remain
bent, swinging in rhythm with the legs.
B-skip. The same as the A-skip with legs kicked forward after the knee is raised.
Rapid high knees. The subject pulls knees toward the chest as fast as possible while running.
Carioca. The subject runs sideways while crossing both feet in front of each other. This is repeated in both directions.
Power skip. The subject jumps pulling his knees toward his chest while running, with arms moving in rhythm.
TABLE 3. Sprint, slalom dribbling, and penalty kick performance after different warm-up methods (n= 26).
Method A Method B Method C Method D
Sprint (s) 4.58 (0.2) 4.97 (0.3)* 4.39 (0.2)* 4.47 (0.1)
Slalom dribbling (s) 5.84 (0.2) 6.08 (0.3)* 5.54 (0.3)* 5.74 (0.2)
Penalty kick (kmh
21
) 98.63 (3.1) 96.54 (2.6)* 101.94 (2.2)* 99.38 (2.4)
Note. All data are presented as mean 6(SD). *p,0.05 vs. Method A.
Method A = only 5 minutes of jogging; Method B = static stretching; Method C = dynamic exercise; and Method D = combined static
stretching and dynamic exercise.
VOLUME 24 | NUMBER 4 | APRIL 2010 | 953
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
|
www.nsca-jscr.org
(% 3.3) between Method A and Method C were found to be
significant in terms of statistics (p,0.01 and p,0.03,
respectively). It has also been found that combined static
stretching and dynamic exercises have no effect on sprint,
slalom dribbling, and penalty kick (p.0.05). Reliability ICC
R
s
for the dependent variables were 0.87–0.91. In conclusion,
static stretching exercises performed after low-intensity
aerobics type jogging affect sprint, slalom dribbling, and
penalty kick performances negatively. Besides, dynamic
warm-up exercise applications affect sprint, slalom dribbling,
and penalty kick performances positively.
DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study was to compare the acute effects of
static stretching, dynamic exercise, and combined static
stretching and dynamic exercise on sprint, slalom dribbling,
and penalty kick performance in professional soccer players.
The most striking result of this study is that despite there
being a marked decrease in sprint, slalom dribbling, and
penalty kick performance when static stretching is combined
with warm-up, there occurs an increase in the aforemen-
tioned performances when dynamic exercises are used.
Results of this study support the hypothesis that static
stretching reduces sprint, slalom dribbling, and penalty kick
performances, besides dynamic warm-up exercises increasing
the performance. Besides, combined static stretching and
dynamic exercises have no statistical effect on sprint, slalom
dribbling, and penalty kick performance. This conclusion
supports the hypothesis that a combination of static
stretching and dynamic warm-up exercises can reduce the
detrimental effects of static stretching on sprint, slalom
dribbling, and penalty kick performances. With this study,
evidence relating to dynamic warm-up exercises is superior
than static stretching applications for preparing activities that
required high power production such as sprint, slalom
dribbling, and penalty kick. Besides, it has been observed
that known detrimental effects of static stretching application
can be reduced partially with combined static stretching and
dynamic exercise (Method D).
In this study, as a result of sprint, slalom dribbling, and
penalty kick test performed after 5-minute jogging and the
static stretching exercises performed after this warm-up
practice, there occurred a decrease of 8.5, 4.1, and 2.1%,
respectively. This result supports those of the previousstudies
showing that static stretching exercises decrease the power
and speed performance (11,18,22,24,29).
Siatras et al. (29) asserted that static stretching practice
performed before the activities requiring maximal power
performance decreases peak torque by 8.5–16%. Holt and
Lambourne (18) showed the negative effects of static
stretching practice performed after general warm-up on
vertical jump performance in their study carried out on 64
football players. In the same vein of this study, Little and
Williams (22) investigated the acute effects of different warm-
up protocols including static stretching exercises on high-
speed motor capacities in professional soccer players and
observed meaningful decreases in sprint performance after
static stretching practice. Similar findings showing that static
stretching exercises decrease sprint performance were
asserted by Nelson et al. (24) in their study conducted on
track athletics and by Fletcher and Jones (11) in their study
conducted on rugby union players. On the other hand, in
regard to maximum power production, the researchers asserted
that static stretching prevents one-repetition maximum
(1 RM) knee extension and flexion (20), maximum isokinetic
torque moment (25,36), and vertical jump performance (4,31).
The mechanism responsible for the acute decrease in
power and speed observed after static stretching exercises is
still indefinite. But researchers have tried to explain the
negative acute effect of static stretching on performance with
the changes in the neuromuscular transmission and bio-
mechanical characteristics of muscle (2,20,21,34). Kubo et al.
(21) suggested that static stretching makes the muscle tendon
more compliant by changing its biomechanical structure and
therefore causes delays in muscle activation by decreasing
power production. This change of muscle stiffness is very
important for techniques such as sprint, slalom dribbling, and
penalty kick used in this study. Kokkonen et al. (20) asserted
that when compared with a compliant MTU, a stiff MTU
leads to a better transmission of the power produced during
muscle contraction. Wallmann et al. (32) and Avela et al. (2)
supported this point by documenting the decrease in
electromyography excitability during muscle contraction
after static stretching practice. Wilson et al. (34) proposed
that for concentric muscle activities, a stiffer system
optimizes the properties of its contractible components such
as muscle length and contraction rate, increases the power
production capacity and specifically places them in a better
position on power–speed and power–length curves in muscle
contraction in terms of power production. In this study, static
stretching exercises performed by soccer players after general
warm-up may have negatively affected sprint, slalom
dribbling, and penalty kick performance by preventing lower
extremity muscle groups from working when they are in
a suitable position on power–speed and power–length
curves.
One of the probable mechanisms is that after stretching in
joint proprioceptors (golgi tendon organs), muscles may form
inhabitation as reflex on muscles and synergists. Knudson
et al. (19) state that parallel to the results of this study, static
stretching practice affects vertical jumping performance
negatively. Because they could not determine expressive
differences in movement kinematics after static stretching
practice, they suggested that the negative effect observed in
vertical jump performance depends on the decrease in neural
transmission. They bring to a conclusion of acute neural
transmission inhibition caused by, in other sense, neural
excitation that goes to the muscles decrease. According to
Rosenbaum and Henning’s (27) studies, there may be
a relationship between the decrease in observed power
954
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
Effects of Warm-up in Soccer Players
production after static stretching and neuromuscular factors.
This symptom supports the neurological definition of
performance decrease caused by stretching. These findings
support the neurological explanation of the performance
decrease caused by stretching.
The findings of this study shows that dynamic exercises
performed after 5 minutes of jogging positively affect sprint,
slalom dribbling, and penalty kick performances and thereby
power performance. In our study, it is found that as a result of
sprint, slalom dribbling, and penalty kick tests performed after
jogging and of the static stretching exercises performed after
this warm-up practice, there occurred a difference of 4.4, 5.1,
and 3.3%, respectively (p,0.05). This result supports those
in previous studies showing that dynamic exercise increases
the power and speed performance (8,11,31). Faigenbaum
et al. (8) investigated the acute effects of different warm-up
protocols on anaerobic performances of the teenage athletes
on whom the study was conducted. They stated that
dynamic warm-up and combined static stretching and
dynamic warm-up practice positively affect sprint, medi-
cine-ball toss, and vertical jump performance. Thompsen
et al. (31) indicated that for jumping performance, the use of
warm-up exercises is more exercisable by sportsmen because
of their positive effects when compared with cycling and
static stretching exercises. Faigenbaum et al. (7) documented
as a result of their study in which they evaluated the acute
effects of different warm-up protocols on fitness perform-
ances that moderate- to high-intensity dynamic warm-up
exercises activate high power performance. Again, Faigen-
baum et al. (9) encountered no meaningful association in
medicine-ball toss or 10-yd sprint performances although
they documented that warm-up exercises increase vertical
jump and broad jump in female high-school athletes.
Although more researchis needed in this field, it can be said
that dynamic exercise performed for warm-up purposes may
increase explosive-power production increasing neuromus-
cular functionality. This phenomenon is called ‘‘postactiva-
tion potentiation’’ (PAP) (28). Despite the mechanisms
initiating PAP still being under examination, the existing
theories show that there may occur chemical, neuromuscu-
lar, and mechanical changes that may temporarily help
contractile properties of muscular tissue (13,14,28). Besides
the mechanisms behind potentiation, the previous studies
showed that the particulars of the person, such as training
status or fibril type distribution, may determine the ability of
PAP to appear (14,16,28). In addition, certain research studies
showed that fast-twitch muscles affect certain activities such
as sprint because fast-twitch muscles show higher potenti-
ation than do slow-twitch muscles (14,16). Young et al. (35)
used 1 set of 5 RM squat loading in their studies and found
that there occurred an increase of 2.8% in jump height.
Gu¨llich and Schidtbleicher (14) reported that as a result of
pretest high-intensity MVC, there occurred an increase of
3.3% in vertical jump height. Gourgoulis et al. (12) found that
as a result of many increasing intensity half squats, the
jumping performance improved by 2.4%. In the aforemen-
tioned studies, they asserted that dynamic loading contrac-
tions performed before activities requiring high power such
as vertical jump stimulate the central nervous system and
these exercises allow an explosive effort to be made.
It can be suggested that as used by us in our study, the
dynamic warm-up exercises performed after 5 minutes of
jogging increase the excitability of speed-contracted units of
target muscles and thereby make these units ready to play an
important role during certain activities such as sprint, slalom
dribbling, and penalty kick.
Another finding of this study is that a combination of static
stretching and dynamic exercises performed after 5-minutes
of jogging has neither a positive nor negative effect on sprint,
slalom dribbling, and penalty kick performance. This
conclusion has indicated that known detrimental effects of
static stretching can be reduced partially with a combination
of static stretching and dynamic exercises after 5-minutes of
jogging. When the studies, the research protocol of which
includes a combination of static stretching and dynamic
exercises, are examined, it is seen that the results are actually
conflicting (8,10,33). Wallmann et al. (33) reported, in
a similar vein to our research results, that a combination of
static stretching and dynamic activities applied on gastroc-
nemius muscle has neither a positive nor a negative effect on
vertical jump performance. Fletcher and Anness (10)
documented in their studies that static passive stretch
combined with active dynamic stretch and static dynamic
stretch combined with active dynamic stretch protocols
decrease 50-m sprint performance. Faigenbaum et al. (8)
observed that as a result of a pre-event combination of static
stretching exercises and dynamic exercises, a meaningful
increase in vertical jump, medicine-ball toss, and 10-y sprint
is observed. As is seen, the results of the studies are
conflicting. This conflict is expected to be solved by future
studies on combination of static stretching and dynamic
exercise.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
Data in this study indicate that in soccer players, static
stretching applied to lower extremities after 5-minutes of
jogging reduces sprint, slalom dribbling, and penalty kick
performances. This conclusion does not imply which soccer
players should be removed from fitness programs. Simply, it is
important for soccer trainers to know about the potential
effects of static stretching application before the competition
on performance. In this study, it was observed that in soccer
players power production after 5 minutes of jogging increases
with dynamic exercise. Application of PAP which was caused
by dynamic exercises for increasing the athletic performance
seems to be a potential area for future research. As a reason for
performance reducing the effect of static stretching, the use of
dynamic exercises is recommended before activities such as
sprint, slalom dribbling, and penalty kick. Alternatively, soccer
players can apply both static stretching and dynamic exercises
VOLUME 24 | NUMBER 4 | APRIL 2010 | 955
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
|
www.nsca-jscr.org
during warm-up. It should have been knowledge of detrimental
effects of static stretching for performance, that it could be
partially reduced with dynamic exercise combination of it, but
this combination does not improve the performance. In
conclusion, to succeed in sports based upon maximum power
production, it is recommended not to apply static stretching
exercises intended for the main muscles of a certain movement
before the competition, instead dynamic exercises would result
in being more accurate.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author would like to thank all the dedicated soccer
players and the team trainer for their participation.
REFERENCES
1. Alter, MJ. Science of Stretching. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics,
1988.
2. Avela, J, Kyrolainen, H, and Komi, PV. Altered reflex sensitivity after
repeated and prolonged passive muscle stretching. J Appl Physiol
86: 1283–1291, 1999.
3. Behm, DG, Button, DC, and Butt, JC. Factors affecting force loss
with prolonged stretching. Can J Appl Physiol 26: 262–272,
2001.
4. Bradley, PS, Olsen, PD, and Portas, MD. The effect of static, ballistic,
and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation stretching on vertical
jump performance. J Strength Cond Res 21: 223–226, 2007.
5. Burkett, LN, Phillips, WT, and Ziuratis, J. The best warm-up for the
vertical jump in college-age athletic men. J Strength Cond Res
19: 673–676, 2005.
6. Cornwell, A, Nelson, A, Heise, G, and Sidaway, B. Acute effects of
passive muscle stretching on vertical jump performance. J Hum Mov
Stud 40: 307–324, 2001.
7. Faigenbaum, AD, Bellucci, M, Bernieri, A, Bakker, B, and Hoorens, K.
Acute effects of different warm-up protocols on fitness performance
in children. J Strength Cond Res 19: 376–381, 2005.
8. Faigenbaum, AD, Kang, J, McFarland, J, Bloom, JM, Magnatta, J,
Ratamess, NA, and Hoffman, J. Acute effects of different warm-up
protocols on anaerobic performance in teenage athletes. Pediatr
Exerc Sci 18: 64–75, 2006.
9. Faigenbaum, AD, McFarland, J, Schwerdtman, JA, Ratamess, NA,
Kang, J, and Hoffman, J. Dynamic warm-up protocols, with and
without a weighted vest, and fitness performance in high school
female athletes. J Athl Train 41: 357–363, 2006.
10. Fletcher, IM and Annes, R. The effects of combined static and
dynamic stretch protocols on fifty-meter sprint performance in
track-and-field athletes. J Strength Cond Res 21: 784–787, 2007.
11. Fletcher, IM and Jones, B. The effects of different warm-up stretch
protocols on 20 meters sprint performance in trained rugby union
players. J Strength Cond Res 18: 885–888, 2004.
12. Gourgoulis, V, Aggeloussis, N, Kasimatis, P, Mavromatis, G, and
Garas, A. Effect of submaximal half-squat warm-up program on
vertical jumping ability. J Strength Cond Res 17: 342–344, 2003.
13. Grossen, ER and Sale DG. Effect of postactivation potentiation on
dynamic knee extension performance. Eur J Appl Physiol 83: 524–
530, 2000.
14. Gu¨ illich, A and Schmidtbleichher, D. MVC-induced short-term
potentiation of explosive force. N Stud Athletics 11: 67–81,
1996.
15. Guissard, N, Duchateau, J, and Hainault, K. Mechanisms of
decreased motoneuron excitation during passive muscle stretching.
Exp Brain Res 137: 163–169, 2001.
16. Hamada, T, Sale, DG, and Macdougall, JD. Postactivation
potentiation, fiber type, and twitch contraction time in human knee
extensor muscles. J Appl Physiol 88: 2131–2144, 2000.
17. Holcomb, WR. Stretching and warm-up. In: Essentials of Strength
Training and Conditioning. Baechle, TR and Earle, RW, eds.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2000. pp. 321–342.
18. Holt, B and Lambourne, K. The impact different warm-up protocols
on vertical jump performance in male collegiate athletes. J Strength
Cond Res 22: 226–229, 2008.
19. Knudson, D, Bennett, K, Corn, R, Leick, D, and Smith, C. Acute
effects of stretching are not evident in the kinematics of the vertical
jump. J Strength Cond Res 15: 98–101, 2001.
20. Kokkonen, J, Nelson, AG, and Cornwell, A. Acute muscle strength
inhibits maximal strength performance. Res Quar Exerc Sport
69: 411–415, 1998.
21. Kubo, K, Kanehisa, H, and Fukunaga, T. Is passive stiffness in human
muscles related to the elasticity of tendon structures? Eur J Appl
Physiol 85: 226–232, 2001.
22. Little, T and Williams, AG. Effects of differential stretching protocols
during warm-ups on high-speed motor capacities in professional
soccer players. J Strength Cond Res 20: 203–207, 2006.
23. McNeal, J and Sands, W. Acute static stretching reduces lower
extremity power in trained children. Pediatr Exerc Sci 15: 139–145,
2003.
24. Nelson, AG, Driscoll, NM, Landin, DK, Young, MA, and
Schexnayder, IC. Acute effects of passive muscle stretching on sprint
performance. J Sports Sci 23: 449–454, 2005.
25. Papadopoulos, G, Siatras, TH, and Kellis, S. The effect of static and
dynamic stretching exercises on the maximal isokinetic strength of
the knee extensors and flexors. Isokinetics Exerc Sci 13: 285–291, 2005.
26. Reilly, T. Football. In: Physiology of Sports. Reilly, T, Secher, N,
Snell, P, and Williams, C, eds. London, United Kingdom:
E&F.N. Spon, 1990. pp. 371–426.
27. Rosenbaum, D and Henning, EM. The influence of stretching and
warm-up exercises on achilles tendon reflex activity. J Sports Sci
13: 481–490, 1995.
28. Sale, DG. Postactivation potentiation: Role in human performance.
Exerc Sport Sci Rev 30: 138–143, 2002.
29. Siatras, T, Mittas, V, Nameletzi, D, and Vamvakoudis, E. The
duration of the inhibitory effects with static stretching on quadriceps
peak torque production. J Strength Cond Res 21: 40–46, 2008.
30. Siatras, T, Papadopoulos, G, Mameletzi, D, Gerodimos, V, and
Kellis, S. Static and dynamic acute stretching effect on gymnasts’
speed in vaulting. Pediatr Exerc Sci 15: 383–391, 2003.
31. Thompsen, AG, Kackley, T, Palumbo, MA, and Faigenbaum, AD.
Acute effects of different warm-up protocols with and without
a weighted vest on jumping performance in athletic women.
J Strength Cond Res 21: 52–56, 2007.
32. Wallmann, HW, Mercer, JA, and Landers, M. Surface electromyo-
graphic assessment of the effect of dynamic activity and dynamic
activity with static stretching of the gastrocnemius on vertical jump
performance. J Strength Cond Res 22: 787–793, 2008.
33. Wallmann, HW, Mercer, JA, and McWhorter, W. Surface electro-
myographic assessment of the effect of static stretching of the
gastrocnemius on vertical jump performance. J Strength Cond Res
19: 684–688, 2005.
34. Wilson, GJ, Murphy, AJ, and Pryor, JF. Musculotendinous stiffness:
Its relationship to eccentric, isometric, and concentric performance.
J Appl Physiol 76: 2714–2719, 1994.
35. Young, W, Jenner, A, and Griffiths, K. Acute enhancement of power
performance from heavy load squats. J Strength Cond Res 12: 82–84,
1998.
36. Zakas, A, Doganis, G, Galazoulas, C, and Vamvakoudis, E. Effect of
acute static stretching duration on isokinetic peak torque in
pubescent soccer players. Pediatr Exerc Sci 18: 252–261, 2006.
956
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
Effects of Warm-up in Soccer Players
