Upper Body Flywheel vs Plyometrics Training: Effects on Explosiveness Power Among Male Collegiate Basketball Players

Thongprem, Thanadech Jun Hong (2026) Upper Body Flywheel vs Plyometrics Training: Effects on Explosiveness Power Among Male Collegiate Basketball Players. Final Year Project (Bachelor), Tunku Abdul Rahman University of Management and Technology.

Text THANADECH JUN HONG THONGPREM_FULL TEXT.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (3MB)

Abstract

Upper-body explosive power is essential for basketball performance, yet head-to-head comparisons between flywheel eccentric overload training (FEOT) and plyometric training (PT) continue to be scarce. The present investigation employed a randomized controlled design to examine the effects of a six-week upper-body FEOT versus PT protocol on explosive power in male collegiate basketball athletes. Fourteen male collegiate basketball athletes (aged 18 – 25 years) were stratified and randomly allocated to either a FEOT group (n = 7) utilizing a KPulley2 or a PT group (n = 7) employing medicine balls and bodyweight exercises. Both cohorts completed three supervised sessions per week for six weeks with progressive overload. Upper-body explosive power was measured using seated medicine ball throw (3 kg) distance before and after the intervention. Paired samples t-tests revealed statistically significant improvements from pre-test to post-test in both groups: the PT group increased mean throw distance from 4.75 ± 0.49 m to 5.21 ± 0.53 m (mean difference = -0.461 m, p = 0.069, one-sided p = 0.035), while the FEOT group increased from 4.74 ± 0.46 m to 5.38 ± 0.52 m (mean difference = -0.643 m, p = 0.025, one-sided p = 0.013). However, independent samples t-tests showed no significant between-group differences at post-test (mean difference = -0.176 m, p = 0.545). Both training modalities effectively enhanced upper-body explosive power, with FEOT demonstrating a larger magnitude of improvement and statistically significant within-group change. Coaches may consider both methods viable for developing upper-body power, though FEOT may offer marginally greater benefits.