인터벌트레이닝과 지속훈련이 체력요인에 미치는 효과

The Effect of Interval Training and Continuous Training on Fitness Factor

&nbsp;&nbsp;This Study was under taken to examine the effect of endurance training(interval training, continuous training) in muscular strength of athletes.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;21 Soccer players at K university were divided into two groups, interval training 10, continuous training 11 players each of subjects were practice to the endurance training.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;Measurement and evaluation were made in three steps pre test were before experimental, post 1 were after 8 weeks and post 2 were after 16 weeks.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;The results are as follows;<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;1) As for the growth of girp strength was revealed in 3.00% and 7.06% in interval training group while on the other hand 3.38% and 7.42% in continuous training group after 8 and 16 weeks.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;2) As for the growth of the arm strength was revealed in 7.57% and 18.28% in interval training group while on the other hand 2.72% and 10.30% in continuous training group after 8 and 16 weeks.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;3) As for the growth of the leg strength was revealed in 6.51% and 12.56% in interval training group while on the other hand 6.36% and 10.19% in continuous training groups after 8 and 12 weeks.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;4) As for the growth of the back strength was revealed in 4.84% and 10.85% in interval training group while on the other hand 16.39% and 22.46% in continuous training group after 8 and 16 weeks.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;5) As for ther growth of the sit-up was revealed in 4.45% and 9.73% interval training group while on the other hand 3.90% and 7.38% continuous training group after 8 and 16 weeks.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;6) As for the growth of the pull up was revealed in 4.45% and 9.73% in interval training group while on the other hand 3.90% and 7.38% in continuous training group after 8 and 16 weeks.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;7) As for the growth of 100m run was revealed in -0.90% and -1.96% in interval training group while on the other hand 0.28% and -4.78% in continuous training group after 8 and 16 weeks.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;8) As for the growth of sargent jump was revealed in 4.31% and 6.90% in interval training group while on the other hand 0.87% and 5.09% in continuous training group after 8 and 16 weeks.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;9) As for the growth of trunk flexion was revealed in 6.46% and 11.77% in interval training group while on the other hand 8.10% and 15.30% in continuous training group after 8 and 16 weeks.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;10) As for the growth of jump step test was revealed in 4.77% and 6.90% in interval training group while on the other hand 4.00% and 9.61% in continuous training group after 8 and 16 weeks.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;11) As for the growth of 1,500m run was revealed in -2.55% and -4.88% in interval training group while on the other hand 0.56% and -3.56% in continuous training group after 8 and 16 weeks.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;12) As for the growth of vital capacity was revealed in 3.50% and 7.15% in interval training group while on the other hand 3.12% and 7.39% in continuous training group after 8 and 16 weeks.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;As above menthon was generalization, we can find the training effect on the physical fitness, especially interval training was more effective than continuous training during 16 weeks.