Body composition and athletic performance -
However, regardless of competition class and percentile rank, the relationships between measures of body composition and performance would be the same. To examine differences in and relationships between body composition and HIFT performance across sex, skill level, and competition class, recreationally active adults with at least 6 months of HIFT experience were recruited for this study.
Additionally, its expected duration approximately 2—9 min consistently appears in HIFT Feito et al. Following enrollment, participants were then scheduled to complete all body composition assessments via dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry DXA.
Comparisons were initially made between competition classes and percentile ranks for all body composition variables. Following a description of all study procedures, a convenience sample of ninety-five adults [ Based on previously reported differences among competition classes Mangine et al.
All participants provided their personal best score i. For each round the thruster load remains the same [Men: 95 lbs. Each set of thrusters begins with the loaded barbell on the floor. The athlete must pick up the barbell into the front rack position and descend to a full squat.
The crease of the hip must clearly pass below the top of the knees in this position. The athlete must return to the starting position and immediately progress into an overhead press. A repetition is considered complete when the knees, hips, and arms are at full extension with the barbell overhead.
For pull-ups, each repetition begins with the athlete hanging from a standard pull-up bar with their arms extended and feet off the ground. Athletes must pull themselves vertically so that their chin breaks the horizontal plane of the bar before returning to the start position.
Repetitions are discounted and must immediately be repeated before progressing through the remaining workload if technical standards are not met. All participants completed the workout at their normal training facility under the supervision of a Level 1 certified coach prior to enrollment in this study.
The Participants arrived at the Exercise Physiology Laboratory after having fasted for 4 h and having avoided caffeine and vigorous exercise for at least 12 h to complete body composition assessments. Initially, anthropometric measures were collected using an electronic scale Tanita WB , Arlington Heights, IL to measure height ±0.
Anthropometric measures were completed with participants standing barefoot, feet together, on the scale while wearing athletic clothing.
Subsequently, participants were further assessed by DXA Lunar iDXA, Lunar Corporation, Madison, WI performed by the same researcher using standardized positioning procedures. Quality assurance was assessed by daily calibrations performed prior to all scans using a calibration block provided by the manufacturer.
In addition to total PBF ±0. The Shapiro-Wilks test indicated that most variables were not normally distributed.
Therefore, data was logarithmically transformed to satisfy this assumption prior to assessing differences and relationships. All between group differences were also evaluated using effect sizes η 2 P : Partial eta squared at the following levels: small effect 0.
All statistical analyses were performed using JASP 0. All data is presented, untransformed, as mean ± SD. The results of each ANOVA are presented in Table 1. No significant interactions between competition class and percentile rank were noted for any variable. TABLE 1. Main effects and interactions between competition classes and percentile ranks.
Main effects for competition class were observed for all variables except fat mass and the percentage of android fat. No other differences were found between competition classes. Significant differences between competition classes are presented in Table 2. TABLE 2.
Significant differences between competition classes, regardless of percentile rank [mean ± SD range ]. Those ranking above the 75th percentile also possessed a greater FFMI than those below the 25th percentile.
No other differences were seen between percentiles. The differences between percentiles for measures of body composition are illustrated in Figure 1.
FIGURE 1. Significant differences between percentiles in measures of A body fat percentage, B body mass and fat-free mass index, C fat and non-bone lean mass, and D skeletal mass characteristics mean ± SD. These relationships were altered when the analysis was repeated after splitting the sample by competition class.
TABLE 3. When the analysis was repeated with the sample split by percentile rank groupings, different combinations of significant relationships were seen within each grouping. Likewise, all body composition variables, except those relating to fat distribution [i. FIGURE 2. FIGURE 3. FIGURE 4.
FIGURE 5. One limited relationships to simply height and body mass Butcher et al. The strength of their reported relationships, including whether they were significant, also depended on the specific workout being used to define HIFT performance.
Across all studies Butcher et al. More importantly, and relevant to this study, none of the studies considered the influence of competition class and percentile rank on these relationships. Here, we built upon past work Butcher et al. In healthy, athletic populations, men are well-known to possess more muscle and less fat than women, and these differences may help explain why men typically perform better Tseng et al.
HIFT programming tries to account for the known physiological differences between men and women by scaling workouts. The rationale for why pull-up prescription is the same for men and women is not clear. Body mass and lean mass have been previously associated negatively with pull-up performance Johnson et al.
On average, body mass and composition, particularly when considering its distribution, are not the same between men and women Tseng et al. Being heavier, men should have a more difficult time performing consecutive pull-ups.
However, because men typically possess more upper-body lean mass, they have more relevant, functional mass to devote to pull-ups. Even when normalizing for body mass and lean mass i.
Women only equaled men when the load was perfectly equated i. There were nearly three times as many younger participants as those who were older than age 35 years.
Despite this year range, appreciable changes to physiology, particularly in physically-active, resistance-trained adults, are less common than they are with similarly aged, sedentary adults McGregor et al. Thus, for the time being, these findings should be viewed as preliminary.
Meanwhile, no differences were seen among the lower percentile groups or with any measure of bone health. The size, architecture, and quality of skeletal muscle reflect its ability to produce force Lieber and Fridén, ; Stock et al.
The mass and density of bone are also thought to contribute to force production by providing a stable structure through which force may transfer and elicit human movement. However, there is less evidence available documenting an advantage from exercise-induced gains in bone size Schipilow et al.
Interestingly, PBF measures were only relevant to those ranking within the interquartile range i. Together, these could prolong the onset of fatigue and better facilitate sustained movement during extended-duration exercise. For the lowest-ranking participants in this study, the need to improve lean mass appears to supersede all other needs physiological and technical.
Their average times ranged between 7. Within the context of this workout, being unable to lift the assigned thruster load for multiple repetitions, or perform pull-ups sequentially, would seem to be the most likely explanations.
Meanwhile, the highest-ranked individuals, who also possessed the healthiest body composition, may have reached a point where continued focus on PBF reduction was either unnecessary or unhealthy.
Instead, continuing to improve lean mass to further force production capabilities, and possibly perfecting technique may prove more beneficial.
Despite the compositional differences seen between men and women, relationships to performance were similar for each sex. A more deliberate effort in recruiting sufficient participants within each competitive class will help to clarify this disagreement.
Including assessments of muscular strength in the thruster exercise and maximal pull-up repetitions using all relevant styles would have helped to better explain the practical importance of NBLM to performance. Nevertheless, this appears to be the first study to examine the influence of competition class and percentile rank on relationships between any physiological measure and HIFT performance.
Though the reasons for this are unknown, it may imply a greater reliance on movement efficiency rather than strength to complete workout tasks. Still, it may be prudent to assume that this was the consequence of reduced power. By improving NBLM, strength is presumably increased, and this would reduce the relative intensity of the fixed loads prescribed for this workout.
Meanwhile, attention to PBF and fat mass reduction only appears to be relevant for moderately ranked individuals. More skilled participants possessed the healthiest fat-to-lean mass ratio, and this seems to suggest that a threshold exists where continued focus on this goal has no additional benefit.
This may reflect a need to improve strength, technique, pacing strategy, or possibly all three. Any concerted effort to reduce fat mass at this stage seems to be premature. The raw data supporting the conclusion of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by Kennesaw State University Institutional Review Board. All authors listed have made a substantial, direct, and intellectual contribution to the work and approved it for publication. The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Bellar D. The Relationship of Aerobic Capacity, Anaerobic Peak Power and Experience to Performance in HIT Exercise. Sport 32 4 , — PubMed Abstract CrossRef Full Text Google Scholar.
Brenner J. Sports Specialization and Intensive Training in Young Athletes. Pediatrics 3. Butcher S. Oajsm 6, Carreker J. Physiological Predictors of Performance on the CrossFit "Murph" Challenge. Sports 8 7 , Cohen J. Google Scholar. CrossFit Athlete Profile [Online]. CrossFit Games.
Dervis S. A Comparison of Thermoregulatory Responses to Exercise between Mass-Matched Groups with Large Differences in Body Fat. Physiology 6 , — CrossRef Full Text Google Scholar. Dexheimer J.
Physiological Performance Measures as Indicators of CrossFit Performance. Sports 7 4 , Feito Y. Repeated Anaerobic Tests Predict Performance Among a Group of Advanced CrossFit-Trained Athletes.
High-Intensity Functional Training HIFT : Definition and Research Implications for Improved Fitness. Sports 6 3 , Fernandez-Fernandez J.
Acute Physiological Responses during CrossFit Workouts. Flanagan S. Training College-Age Women to Perform the Pull-Up Exercise. This will also help you to either lose or gain weight depending on the needs of your sport.
While some foods may help build more muscle and others can contribute to fat mass, the most important thing to remember is maintaining a proper daily calorie intake. This means that if you want to stay in the same physical shape, you should eat the same amount of calories you use on a daily basis.
Eating too much or too little can result in significant negative health effects. If you want to change your body composition, you should try to maintain a gradual kcal surplus or deficit per day over a long period of time. Most importantly, you must remember that food is not just the calories that you consume.
In fact, what you eat is even more important than simply filling your daily calorie need. A good rule of thumb is avoiding processed foods that are high in fat and sodium and replacing them with balanced fresh meals instead. Eating an adequate amount of high-quality protein, a wide range of different vegetables, fiber-rich fruits, and whole-grain products are ideal for maintaining a healthy body composition while still keeping you energized for daily activities.
Your training goal should not be in reaching a certain body type. Contrary to popular belief, there is no perfect body type for athletic performance. In fact, the ideal body composition is directly related to the physical demands of your sport. For example, athletes who need both mass and power to perform better in their sport tend to have a higher fat percentage as well as more lean muscle mass.
Greater body mass also increases inertia , making athletes harder to move, which can be extremely beneficial for some sports and playing positions football linemen etc. On the other hand, a lower fat percentage and better strength-to-mass ratio can be vastly more beneficial in sports that rely on power , speed , agility, and jump performance.
These include weight-class sports like martial arts, mixed martial arts, wrestling and boxing, aesthetic sports like gymnastics, cheerleading, dancing and figure skating, as well as gravitational sports such as running, skiing, climbing and jumping.
However, precision sports like darts, bowling, and snooker are less dependent on body composition. Thus, the optimal fat, lean, and total mass values also vary between sports, playing positions, and competitive level. While this sounds intuitive, the scientifically proven optimal values have yet to be determined.
Endurance athletes can also significantly benefit from lower overall body mass. In fact, multiple studies have found a clear connection between lower skin-fold thickness and long-distance performance in 1,m, 10,m, and marathon events. This is also supported by research stating that a higher body mass, be it fat or muscle, negatively affects maximal oxygen uptake VO 2 max and endurance performance.
This means that more muscular athletes are less likely to perform well in longer endurance events. However, sports scientists have suggested that these results may be caused by differences in muscle fiber composition and individual training programs.
Generally speaking, athletes benefit from lower fat percentage and higher lean muscle mass, and elite-level athletes tend to have similar fat ratios regardless of being a speed or an endurance athlete. However, a speed or a jumping athlete naturally has a higher level of lean muscle mass leading to a better strength capacity.
These findings are supported by multiple studies stating that an increase in body fat has a connection to decreased athletic performance. One thing to remember is that your training goal should not be in reaching a certain body type.
The real goal should be in obtaining the optimal sports-specific values of fat and lean muscle mass for the upper body, lower body, and as well as overall body mass. Thus, making sure you have the right amount of muscle without slowing you down.
This should also be the goal of every training and nutritional program. The ideal body composition is not just about overall weight or fat percentage. Research shows that strength training and high-intensity exercises are essential for adapting your body composition.
This is because it increases muscle mass, which also boosts resting metabolism, and eventually reduces overall body fat. Endurance exercises also help maintain a healthy body composition — or even improve it due to increased energy use.
The biggest benefit of this is that low-intensity exercises are far easier to keep up, meaning you can maintain an elevated heart rate for an extended amount of time. Your body also adapts to these exercises by improving your ability to utilize fat for fuel.
However, it is important to remember that these kinds of exercises do not significantly increase muscle mass. With this in mind, every sports-specific training method will ultimately adapt your body to meet the physical demands of your sport.
The ideal body composition is not just about weight or body fat. In fact, there is no optimal one-size-fits-all body type for every person out there.
It all depends on what you aim to do. Simply trying to look like a successful athlete may only perpetuate unhealthy thinking and eating habits, which can do more harm than good in the long run.
With this in mind, there is no specific diet for that either. For athletes, the most important factor is to maintain adequate energy intake and ensure you eat enough protein.
This will provide your body with enough nutrients to recover and maintain an anabolic muscle building state. For most people, maintaining a good body composition is a matter of lifelong health and fitness. This is achieved via a balance between proper diet, exercise, and sufficient rest.
Not only does this achieve a favorable balance between fat and muscle mass, but it also promotes bone health and even good hydration. All these factors are closely tied to better heart health with a lower risk of diabetes, lower cholesterol, and blood pressure while maintaining a lower overall weight.
Small adjustments are usually the best way to make lasting lifestyle changes. It is worth it, because even a slight improvement can significantly improve your physical and mental health. As for athletes, make sure you maintain a balance between training , proper nutrition , and recovery to ensure your workouts are as effective as possible.
The way you train will determine the optimal body composition for you. Show me. Stay informed about the latest in sports science and physical performance. Subscribe to our mailing list for the latest updates, posts, products and much more.
After graduating from the University of Jyväskylä in , Daniel worked nearly a decade within the world-renowned Finnish educational system as a physical education and health science teacher. Since , Daniel has worked as a Lecturer at the Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences. by Daniel Kiikka. Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
We use cookies from third party services to offer you a better experience. When you visit any website, it may store or retrieve information through your browser, usually in the form of cookies.
Since we respect your right to privacy, you can choose not to permit data collection from certain types of services. However, not allowing these services may impact your experience and what we are able to offer you.
August 21, In News , Fitness Components , Sports Science , Education 42 Minutes. How Does Body Composition Affect Athletic Performance? By Daniel Kiikka. Introduction What is body composition exactly?
Body composition vs body mass index How is body composition measured? Why should body composition be tracked? Why are athletes built differently?
Genetic factors of body composition Sex differences in body composition Age and body composition Training background and body composition Diet and body composition Benefits of having an optimal body composition for your sport Final thoughts. Introduction Athletic performance is a combination of sports-specific technique, skill, as well as the components of fitness endurance, strength, power, speed, and balance.
What is body composition exactly? Body fat percentage norms. Minimum Essential Fat. Elite Athletes. Healthy and Fit. Body composition vs Body mass index While body composition is often used interchangeably with the body mass index BMI , they have some key differences.
Share this post. How is body composition measured? The most common body composition measuring methods include; Hydrostatic weighing : Also known as underwater weighing or hydrodensitometry, is the most accurate method to measure body composition.
Air displacement plethysmography : Requires a specially made plethysmograph enclosed chamber that calculates how much airflow is displaced when sitting in the chamber. Bioelectrical impedance analysis BIA : Utilizes a weak electric current that flows through the body.
The voltage is measured to calculate the impedance resistance in the body which estimates fat and lean muscle mass. A non-invasive and low-cost alternative to measuring body composition.
Ultrasound : Can be used to measure muscle thickness and subcutaneous under the skin fat thickness Skinfold measurements : Uses calipers to measure fat thickness under the skin in several places on the body. Inexpensive but can also be inaccurate. Circumference measurements : Skeletal protein can be calculated via a mid-arm muscle circumference measurement MAMC.
Genetic factors of body composition Genetic factors have a significant impact on your body composition. Sex differences in body composition Your sex also has a significant impact on body composition, especially when it comes to body fat.
Age and body composition As your metabolism slows down as you grow older, your body composition will naturally go through some physiological changes. Training background and body composition Aside from genetic factors and diet, it is well known that body composition changes due to physical activity, making it one of the major components of fitness and overall health.
Diet and body composition While your age, sex, and training background have some clear effects on your body composition, none of them affects it more than your diet.
Benefits of having an optimal body composition for your sport Contrary to popular belief, there is no perfect body type for athletic performance. How to train for the ideal body type Research shows that strength training and high-intensity exercises are essential for adapting your body composition.
How to train. Final thoughts The ideal body composition is not just about weight or body fat. Did you learn anything new about body composition? Let us know in the comments. Ackland, T. Medical Commission. Sports Medicine.
Volume 42, Issue 3 , pp. Ahmetov, I. Medicine and Sport Science. Volume 61, pp. Advances in clinical chemistry. Volume 70, pp. Baker, J. Volume 53, Issue 1 , pp. Bredella, M.
In: Mauvais-Jarvis F. eds Sex and Gender Factors Affecting Metabolic Homeostasis, Diabetes and Obesity. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, Volume , pp. Springer, Cham. Brodie, D. Volume 5, Issue 2 , pp. Di Pasquale, M.
Journal of Dietary Supplements. Volume 6, Issue 2 , pp. Fahey, T. Journal of Applied Physiology. Volume 39, Number 4 , pp. Guth, L. Current Opinion in Pediatrics. Volume 25, Issue 6 , pp.
Heyward, V. Advanced fitness assessment and exercise prescription 7th ed. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Jackson, A. The Physician and Sportsmedicine. Volume 13, Issue 5 , pp. Volume 12, Issue 3 , pp. British Journal of Nutrition.
Volume 40, Issue 3 , pp. Janssen, I. Volume 89, Issue 1 , pp. Kumar, M. International Journal of Academic Research and Development.
Volume 1, Issue 11 , pp. Maciejczyk, M. PLoS One. Volume 9, Issue 4. Published April Mazić, S. Medicinski Pregled. Volume 67, Issue , pp. McArdle, W.
I never Satiety benefits how important getting athletoc is Dehydration and health BCAA for reducing exercise-induced muscle damage afhletic until I learned the information in Atheltic article. With a lower body fat percentage, your athletic performance athldtic improve significantly. This past weekend I attended a lecture by Penn State exercise professor Dr. Todd Miller entitled:. As I was waiting for his presentation to begin, I thought Dr. Todd began his presentation describing his quest to learn how athletic performance can be maintained for the in-season power athlete. When he became a Strength Coach at Penn State several years ago, Dr.
0 thoughts on “Body composition and athletic performance”