Neuromuscular profile of crossFit® athletes: part 1—isometric and ballistic performance
Background: CrossFit® has gained widespread popularity as a high-intensity training modality, yet evidence describing neuromuscular performance characteristics in this population remains limited. This study aimed to evaluate isometric and ballistic strength profiles in trained CrossFit® athletes and...
| Autores: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2026 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad Autónoma de Madrid |
| Repositorio: | Biblos-e Archivo. Repositorio Institucional de la UAM |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:dnet:biblosearchi::810ee59876b352b5a704a629acf2f9c3 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/10486/761740 https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jfmk11010118 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | force plates countermovement jump maximal force strength athletic profiling athletes training neuromuscular assessment Deportes Medicina |
| Sumario: | Background: CrossFit® has gained widespread popularity as a high-intensity training modality, yet evidence describing neuromuscular performance characteristics in this population remains limited. This study aimed to evaluate isometric and ballistic strength profiles in trained CrossFit® athletes and to identify sex-based differences in absolute and relative neuromuscular performance. Methods: Seventy-two athletes participated (41 males and 31 females) participated in the study, completing two maximal isometric mid-thigh pull (IMTP) tests and three countermovement jump (CMJ) tests within a single testing session. Assessments were conducted using a dual force plate system (Hawkin Dynamics, Westbrook, ME, USA). Results: In the IMTP, males exhibited substantially higher absolute isometric force outputs, including peak force (3059 ± 576 vs. 1899 ± 324 N; p < 0.001) and relative peak force (36.34 ± 6.74 vs. 30.99 ± 4.41 N/kg; p < 0.001). Rates of force development were also greater in males for both early (0–50 ms: 7665 ± 5420 vs. 4001 ± 3021 N/s; p < 0.001) and late phases (0–250 ms: 5350 ± 1832 vs. 3035 ± 886 N/s; p < 0.001). However, no significant sex differences were detected in time to peak force (2.31 ± 1.27 vs. 1.94 ± 1.04 s) or dynamic strength index (0.72 ± 0.12 vs. 0.73 ± 0.12 a.u.). In ballistic performance using CMJ, males achieved higher jump height (0.33 ± 0.07 vs. 0.23 ± 0.05 m; p < 0.001), jump momentum (215 ± 27.9 vs. 131 ± 19.1 kg·m/s; p < 0.001), and modified reactive strength index (0.46 ± 0.11 vs. 0.32 ± 0.08 a.u.; p < 0.001). Relative propulsive and braking forces were also moderately greater in males. Notably, sex differences were reduced when variables were normalized to body mass or peak force, indicating comparable relative neuromuscular function across sexes. Conclusions: These findings provide descriptive neuromuscular performance data for CrossFit® athletes and show that sex-based differences primarily reflect disparities in absolute force-production capacity rather than intrinsic neuromuscular efficiency. Such insights may support more precise, evidence-informed, and sex-specific training prescriptions to optimize performance |
|---|