All 45 subjects counterbalanced into the control group (n=15), the standard warm-up group (n=15), and the dynamic warm-up group (n=15), none of them were retained
throughout the study. Thus, no data were excluded from the analyses. Subject demographics are presented in Table 1.
Hamstrings Flexibility
Means, standard deviations, and effect sizes for hamstring flexibility are presented in Table 2. There was a significant group x time interaction [F(2,42) = 12.00, p < 0.0001] for
hamstring flexibility (Figure 1). A Tukey honestly significant difference (HSD) post-hoc analysis demonstrated that the hamstring flexibility within the DWU group was significantly greater at post-test than at pre-test. Also, the pre-test DWU measure was significantly greater than the CON and SWU pre-test measures. There was no significant main effect for group [F(2,42) = 0.15, p =.860, 1-β = 0.072]. However, there was a significant main effect for time
[F(1,42) = 22.60, p < 0.0001, 1-β = 0.996] demonstrating greater hamstring flexibility in the
post-test.
Eccentric Knee Extension Peak Torque
Means, standard deviations, and effect sizes for eccentric knee extension peak torque are presented in Table 3. The results revealed a significant group x time interaction [F(2,44) =
49
4.930, p = 0.012] for eccentric knee extension peak torque (Figure 2). A Tukey post-hoc analysis revealed a significant increase in the DWU group from pre-test to post-test
measures. Furthermore, there was no significant difference between the pre-test measures for all three groups. There was no significant group main effect [F(2,42) = 0.164, p = 0.849, 1-ß =
0.074]. However there was a significant main effect for time [F(1,42) = 4.546, p = 0.039, 1-
ß=0.549], which indicated a greater knee extension peak torque at post-test than at pre-test.
Concentric Knee Extension Peak Torque
Means, standard deviations, and effect sizes for concentric knee extension peak torque are presented in Table 4. There was a significant group x time interaction [F(2,42) = 3.671, p =
0.034] for concentric knee extension peak torque (Figure 3). A Tukey post-hoc analysis indicated no significant differences between the three groups at pre-test measurement. Furthermore, no group demonstrated a significant difference from pre-test to post-test measures. The only significant finding was that the DWU at post-test had significantly greater concentric knee extension peak torque than the CON and SWU at post-test. Although the DWU group did show an increase from pre-test to post-test measures (8.99 ft•lbs) it was not significant as the minimum significant difference (MSD) was 10.25 ft•lbs. There was no significant group main effect [F(2,42) = 0.163, p = 0.85, 1-ß=0.074], or time main effect [F(1,42)
= 1.307, p = 0.259, 1-ß = 0.201].
Quadriceps Flexibility
Means, standard deviations, and effect sizes for quadriceps flexibility are presented in Table 5. There was no significant group x time interaction [F(2,42)= 0.735, p = 0.485, ES =
50
0.08, 1-ß = 0.166]. Thus, quadriceps flexibility does not appear to be influenced by the type of warm up. There was no significant main effect for group [F(2,42) = 0.619, p = 0.543, 1-ß =
0.146], nor was there a significant main effect for time [F(1,42) = 1.194, p = 0.281, 1-ß =
0.187].
Hip Flexor Flexibility
Means, standard deviations, and effect size for hip flexor flexibility are presented in Table 6. There was no significant group x time interaction [F(2,42) = 8.538, p = 0.408, ES =
0.27, 1-ß= 0.198]. Thus, hip flexor flexibility does not appear to be influenced by different warm-ups. There was no significant group main effect [F(2,42)=0.848, p = 0.435, 1-ß = 0.186],
nor was there a significant main effect for time [F(1,42) = 1.972, p = 0.168, 1-ß = 0.168].
Rectus Femoris Flexibility
Means, standard deviations, and effect size for rectus femoris flexibility are presented in Table 7. There was no significant group x time interaction [F(2,44) = 2.602, p = 0.086, ES =
0.25, 1-ß=0.49]. Thus, rectus femoris flexibility does not appear to be influenced by the type of warm up. There was no significant main effect for group [F(2,42) = 0.859, p = 0.431, 1-ß =
0.188], nor was there a significant main effect for time [F(1,42) = 1.155, p = 0.289, 1-ß =
0.183].
Concentric Knee Flexion Peak Torque
Means, standard deviations, and effect size for concentric knee flexion peak torque are presented in Table 8. Furthermore, There was no significant group x time interaction [F(2,42) =
51
1.091, p = 0.345, ES = 0.22, 1-ß=0.229]. Thus concentric knee flexion peak torque does not appear to be influenced by the type of warm up. There was no significant main effect for group [F(2,42) = 0.380, p = 0.686, 1-ß = 0.107], nor was there a significant main effect for time
[F(1,42) = 2.143, p = 0.151, 1-ß = 0.299].
Eccentric Knee Flexion Peak Torque
Means, standard deviations, and effect size for eccentric knee flexion peak torque are presented in Table 9. There was no significant group x time interaction [F(2,42) = 0.358,
P=0.701, ES = 0.13, 1-ß = 0.104]. Thus, eccentric knee flexion peak torque does not appear to be influenced by the different warm ups. There was no significant group main effect [F(2,42)
= 0.404, p = 0.670, 1-ß = 0.111], nor was there a significant main effect for time [F(1,42) =
0.595, p = 0.445, 1-ß=0.117].
Concentric Hamstrings to Concentric Quadriceps Ratio
Means, standard deviations, and effect size for concentric hamstrings to concentric quadriceps ratio are presented in Table 10. There was no significant group x time interaction [F(2,42) = 0.426, p = 0.656, ES = 0.002, 1-ß = 0.115]. Thus, concentric hamstrings to
concentric quadriceps ratio does not appear to be influenced by the different warm ups. There was no significant group main effect [F(2,42) = 0.638, p = 0.533,1-ß = 0.150], nor was there a
52 Eccentric Hamstrings to Concentric Quadriceps Ratio
Means, standard deviations, and effect size for eccentric hamstrings to concentric quadriceps ratio are presented in Table 11. Furthermore, there was no significant group x time interaction [F(2,42) = 1.573, p = 0.219, ES = 0.24, 1-ß=0.315]. Thus, eccentric
hamstrings to concentric quadriceps ratio does not appear to be influenced by the different warm ups. There was no significant group main effect [F(2,42) = 0.126, p=.880,1-ß = 0.068],
nor was there a significant time main effect [F(1,42) = 0.021, p = 0.886, 1-ß = 0.052].
Vertical Jump Height
Means, standard deviations, and effect size for vertical jump height are presented in Table 12. There was no significant group x time interaction [F(2,42) = 2.230, p = 0.120, ES =
0.10, 1-ß = 0.429]. Thus, vertical jump height does not appear to be influenced by the different warm ups. There was no significant group main effect [F(2,42) = 0.252, p = 0.779, 1-
ß = 0.087], nor was there a significant main effect for time [F(1,42) = 0.026, p = 0.873, 1-ß =
0.053].
Vertical Jump Power
Means and standard deviation for vertical jump power are presented in Table 13. There was a significant group main effect [F(2,42) = 0.729, p = 0.488, 1-ß = 0.165], nor was there a
significant main effect for time [F(1,42) = 0.026, p = 0.873, 1-ß = 0.053]. There was no
significant group x time interaction [F(2,42) = 2.230, p = 0.120, ES = 0.06, 1-ß = 0.429]. Thus,