武井 誠一郎 (タケイ セイイチロウ)

写真a

所属

スポーツ科学学術院 スポーツ科学部

職名

助教

学歴 【 表示 / 非表示

  • 2017年04月
    -
    2021年03月

    早稲田大学   大学院スポーツ科学研究科  

  • 2013年08月
    -
    2015年05月

    Louisiana State University in Shreveport   Master of Science in Kinesiology and Wellness  

  • 2008年04月
    -
    2012年03月

    早稲田大学   スポーツ科学部   スポーツ医科学科  

学位 【 表示 / 非表示

  • 2021年03月   早稲田大学   博士(スポーツ科学)

経歴 【 表示 / 非表示

  • 2021年04月
    -
    継続中

    早稲田大学   スポーツ科学学術院   助教

  • 2018年04月
    -
    2020年03月

    早稲田大学   スポーツ科学学術院   助手

 

研究キーワード 【 表示 / 非表示

  • ストレングス&コンディショニング

  • コーチング学

論文 【 表示 / 非表示

  • Comparison of the Power Output Between the Hang Power Clean and Hang High Pull Across a Wide Range of Loads in Weightlifters.

    Seiichiro Takei, Kuniaki Hirayama, Junichi Okada

    Journal of strength and conditioning research    2020年03月  [査読有り]  [国際誌]

     概要を見る

    Takei, S, Hirayama, K, and Okada, J. Comparison of the power output between the hang power clean and hang high pull across a wide range of loads in weightlifters. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2020-The current study compared the peak power output during the hang power clean (HPC) and hang high pull (HHP) across a wide range of external loads in weightlifters. Eight weightlifters completed 1 repetition maximum (1RM) assessment for the HPC (1.59 ± 0.17 kg/body mass) and a power test for the HPC and HHP at relative loads of 40, 60, 70, 80, 90, 95, and 100% 1RM of the HPC. The ground reaction force and 2-dimensional bar position data were recorded to determine the system (barbell + body mass) kinetics and bar height, respectively. System power was calculated as force multiplied by system velocity. The HHP produced significantly greater peak power than the HPC at 40, 60, and 70% 1RM. Conversely, there was no statistical or practical difference in peak power between the exercises at 80, 90, 95, and 100% 1RM. No significant interaction was found in force at peak power, whereas velocity at peak power was significantly greater during the HHP than during the HPC at 40, 60, and 70% 1RM. In addition, significantly greater peak bar height was observed for the HHP than the HPC at 40, 60, and 70% 1RM. From the power output comparisons across loads, the HHP should be used over the HPC at loads of 40-70% 1RM, whereas the HPC and HHP can be interchangeably used at loads of 80-100% 1RM.

    DOI PubMed

  • Is the Optimal Load for Maximal Power Output During Hang Power Cleans Submaximal?

    Seiichiro Takei, Kuniaki Hirayama, Junichi Okada

    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPORTS PHYSIOLOGY AND PERFORMANCE   15 ( 1 ) 18 - 24  2020年01月  [査読有り]

     概要を見る

    Purpose: The optimal load for maximal power output during hang power cleans (HPCs) from a mechanical perspective is the 1-repetition-maximum (1RM) load: however, previous research has reported otherwise. The present study thus aimed to investigate the underlying factors that determine optimal load during HPCs. Methods: Eight competitive Olympic weight lifters performed HPCs at 40%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, 95%, and 100% of their 1RM while the ground-reaction force and bar/body kinematics were simultaneously recorded. The success criterion during HPC was set above parallel squat at the receiving position. Results: Both peak power and relative peak power were maximized at 80% 1RM (3975.7 [439.1] W, 50.4 [6.6] W/kg, respectively). Peak force, force at peak power, and relative values tended to increase with heavier loads (P < .001), while peak system velocity and system velocity at peak power decreased significantly above 80% 1RM (P= .005 and .011, respectively). There were also significant decreases in peak bar velocity (P < .001) and bar displacement (P < .001) toward heavier loads. There was a strong positive correlation between peak bar velocity and bar displacement in 7 of 8 subjects (r> .90, P < .01). The knee joint angle at the receiving position fell below the quarter-squat position above 70% 1RM. Conclusions: Submaximal loads were indeed optimal for maximal power output for HPC when the success criterion was set above the parallel-squat position. However, when the success criterion was defined as the quarter-squat position, the optimal load became the 1RM load.

    DOI

  • INFLUENCE OF THE INTENSITY OF SQUAT EXERCISES ON THE SUBSEQUENT JUMP PERFORMANCE

    Atsuki Fukutani, Seiichiro Takei, Kosuke Hirata, Naokazu Miyamoto, Hiroaki Kanehisa, Yasuo Kawakami

    JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH   28 ( 8 ) 2236 - 2243  2014年08月  [査読有り]

     概要を見る

    Jump performance can be enhanced after performing squat exercises, and this is thought to be because of the phenomenon of postactivation potentiation (PAP). However, the influence of the intensity of squat exercises on jump performance enhancement and its association to PAP have not been elucidated. Thus, we examined the influence of the intensity of squat exercises on the subsequent jump performance and the magnitude of PAP. Eight weightlifters (age, 19.8 +/- 1.3 years; height, 1.67 +/- 0.07 m; body mass, 77.1 +/- 14.8 kg) were recruited as subjects. The intensity of squat exercises was set in 2 conditions: heavy condition (HC) (45% 1 repetition maximum [1RM] x 5 repetitions [reps], 60% 1RM x 5 reps, 75% 1RM x 3 reps, and 90% 1RM x 3 reps) and moderate condition (MC) (45% 1RM x 5 reps, 60% 1RM x 5 reps, and 75% 1RM x 3 reps). Before and after the squat exercises, the subjects performed countermovement jumps 3 times. In addition, a twitch contraction was concurrently elicited before and after the squat exercises. In both conditions, twitch torque and jump height recorded after the squat exercises increased significantly compared with those recorded beforehand. The extents of increase in both twitch torque and jump height were significantly larger in HC than in MC. We conclude therefore that a high-intensity squat exercise is better than a moderate-intensity squat exercise as a warm-up modality for enhancing subsequent jump performance.

    DOI