I had a chance to wear my DMAXX spats during a speed and agility workout session and a flag football pickup game.ĭuring my work out session, I noticed that the DMAXX spats did a phenomenal job of keeping my cleat tightly compressed to my foot.
I would recommend that if you are looking to have any kind of secured ankle support, then you should just stick to the traditional spatting option and tape your ankles or wear a cleat with actual ankle sport. Now in my personal review, these are strictly for compression and style. From Power Ranger logos, to Courage the Cowardly Dog, to common sayings like “I’m Lit”, the ability to customize your spats can accentuate your style and personality. Most of the designs I have witnessed in person are truly amazing. There are some creative options out there. In all honesty, my initial thought was that the spatted cleat covers were more for compression and aesthetics.Īesthetically, I have seen some of these with custom designs and mottos.
Anytime I ask about the ankle support aspect, I always get mixed reviews. I decided to investigate these spat cleat cover, because I have recently seen a few flag football teammates wearing them. Traditional spatting involves literally taping your cleat to the ankle and lower leg itself. When a player spats his cleats, it typically helps with ankle support and added compression while one’s foot is inside their cleat. Now, if you are unfamiliar with what “spatting” is and how these spat covers are beneficial, let me break it down for you. Further study is warranted to determine if this high-top style of football cleat can reduce the incidence of ankle sprains and how it might compare to spat taping.Today I will be reviewing the DMAXX Spat Football Cleat Covers. Conclusions: The results of this study provide some evidence that the Under Armour ® Highlight cleat restricts ankle ROM following a training session better than the taped low/mid-top cleat. Results: The low/mid-top cleat with tape condition had significantly higher inversion range-of-motion (ROM) and inversion/eversion rotation postexercise when compared to the Highlight cleat ( P < 0.05). A linear mixed-effects model was used for analysis. Dependent variables included ankle arthrometry measures of anterior displacement (mm), inversion/eversion rotation (deg), and the modified BESS error scores.
Main Outcome Measures: The independent variable was treatment (Highlight vs low/mid-top cleat with ankle tape). Measurements were taken before and immediately after practice. The 2 treatments included Under Armour ® Highlight cleats and a low/mid-top cleat with ankle tape applied to the nondominant ankle only.
Interventions: Ankle laxity was assessed using an instrumented ankle arthrometer (Blue Bay Research Inc, Milton, FL), while postural control testing was performed on the Tekscan MobileMat™ Balanced Error Scoring System (BESS South Boston, MA). Setting: Athletic training room and football practice field sideline. Objective: To determine if differences in ankle joint laxity and postural control exist between football players wearing the Under Armour ® Highlight cleat (Under Armour Inc, Baltimore, MD) as compared to a low/mid-top cleat with ankle tape. The Under Armour ® Highlight cleat is marketed on the premise that it provides added support without the need for additional ankle taping. While ankle taping is a preferred method of external prophylactic support, its restrictive properties decline during exercise. Context: Lateral ankle sprains are the most common injuries in high school sports.
0 kommentar(er)
