Academia.eduAcademia.edu
European Journal of Physical Education and Sport Science ISSN: 2501 - 1235 ISSN-L: 2501 - 1235 Available on-line at: www.oapub.org/edu doi: 10.5281/zenodo.1101206 Volume 3 │ Issue 12 │ 2017 ACUTE EFFECT OF CIRCUIT AEROBIC AND TRADITIONAL AEROBIC TRAINING ON HAMSTRING FLEXIBILITY IN SEDENTARY WOMEN Yağmur Özer, Özlem Bozdal*i, Zarife Pancar Gaziantep University, Physical Education and Sport Science Department, Gaziantep, Turkey Abstract: The aim of this study is investigation of acute effect of circuit aerobic exercise and traditional aerobic exercise on hamstring muscle flexibility in sedentary women. Forty four sedentary women voluntarily participated in this study as subject. Subjects divided two groups as circuit aerobic training group (n=24), and traditional aerobic training group (n=20). For hamstring flexibility, modified sit and reach test was used. The test was applied three times as: before warm-up (T1), after immediately warm-up (T2), and after immediately exercise (T3). For warm-up intervention, 15 min mild running and static stretching were performed. Traditional aerobic exercise intervention consisted of 30 min moderate interval treadmill running. Circuit aerobic exercise intervention consisted of 30 min, 3x4 station (bench-step, jumping rope, cycling, treadmill running), and all station maintained to 3 min load with 2 min rest. Both training intervention performed at 65-75% HRmax that controlled with chest band. For statistical analysis, 2x3 mixed factor ANOVA and Bonferroni correction were used. Hamstring flexibility determined in the traditional aerobic exercise group as T1 by 13.90±4.22 cm, T2 by 19.90±4.55 cm, T3 by 29.45±6.54 cm; in the circuit aerobic exercise group as T1 by 21.20±6.89 cm, T2 by 24.08±6.67 cm, T3 by 25.62±6.67 cm. Differences between the three measurements of both groups were found statistically significant (p < 0.05). There were significant differences between T3 and T1-T2; and between T2 and T1 in both groups (p < 0.05). Differences in traditional aerobic exercise group were found more significant Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved. © 2015 – 2017 Open Access Publishing Group 268 Yağmur Özer, Özlem Bozdal, Zarife Pancar ACUTE EFFECT OF CIRCUIT AEROBIC AND TRADITIONAL AEROBIC TRAINING ON HAMSTRING FLEXIBILITY IN SEDENTARY WOMEN than circuit aerobic exercise group (p < 0.05). In summary, it could be said that hamstring flexibility increased after aerobic exercise, and at this point, traditional aerobic exercise has one step ahead of circuit aerobic exercise. Keywords: circuit, aerobic, hamstring, flexibility, training 1. Introduction Aerobic energy system covers at least ten minutes exercises. At this point circuit or traditional aerobic exercises included that point (Fox et al., 2012). Recovery, made possible by the high aerobic capacity, is important in sports that a large number of repetitions of a skill is important, or in team sports where there are a large number of running circuits. High aerobic capacity can be positively transferred to the anaerobic capacity. If an athlete improves aerobic capacity, anaerobic capacity will also develop. Because the athlete will be able to function for a long time without getting in the oxygen, cost and will recover in a very short time after entering the oxygen cost (Kuter and Öztürk, 1991). Circuit training has comparatively low loads and low repetitions per sets for developing aerobic performance (Alcaraz et al., 2008). Circuit training creates positive cardiovascular, metabolic, and hormonal responses (Fleck, 1988; Harber et al., 2004; Kreamer et al., 1993; 1991; 1987). The aim of the present study is investigation of acute effect of circuit aerobic exercise and traditional aerobic exercise on hamstring muscle flexibility in sedentary women. For this purpose, circuit and traditional aerobic training protocols performed to two groups produce for effects. For viewing / downloading the full article, please access the following link: https://oapub.org/edu/index.php/ejep/article/view/1267 . European Journal of Physical Education and Sport Science - Volume 3 │ Issue 12 │ 2017 269