PURPOSE: To investigate the selective effects of different types of external loads applied in vertical jump training on both the performance and muscle power output of the squat (SJ) and countermovement jump (CMJ). METHODS: Physically active males practiced maximum unconstrained vertical jumps over an 8-week period with no load, with either a negative or positive load exerted by a nearly constant external force that altered their body weight, and with a loaded vest that increased both the body weight and inertia. The magnitude of all applied loads corresponded to 30 % of body weight. RESULTS: A similar training-associated increase in jump height was observed in all experimental groups in both CMJ (7.4-11.8 %) and SJ (6.4-14.1 %). The relative increase in power output was comparable to the increase in jump height in SJ (7.4-11.5 %), while the power increase in CMJ was relatively small and load-specific (0.5-9.5 %). The observed differences could originate from the changes in the CMJ pattern, reflected through the depth of the counter movement that particularly increased after the training with negative load (42 %) and no load (21 %). The same participants also revealed increased CMJ duration, reduced ground reaction forces, as well as reduced maximum and average power output when compared with other training groups. CONCLUSION: Jump training with the applied loads could lead to a comparable improvement in jumping performance. However, the observed load-specific adaptations of CMJ pattern could decouple the training-associated increase in jump height from the increase in muscle power output.
PURPOSE: To investigate the selective effects of different types of external loads applied in vertical jump training on both the performance and muscle power output of the squat (SJ) and countermovement jump (CMJ). METHODS: Physically active males practiced maximum unconstrained vertical jumps over an 8-week period with no load, with either a negative or positive load exerted by a nearly constant external force that altered their body weight, and with a loaded vest that increased both the body weight and inertia. The magnitude of all applied loads corresponded to 30 % of body weight. RESULTS: A similar training-associated increase in jump height was observed in all experimental groups in both CMJ (7.4-11.8 %) and SJ (6.4-14.1 %). The relative increase in power output was comparable to the increase in jump height in SJ (7.4-11.5 %), while the power increase in CMJ was relatively small and load-specific (0.5-9.5 %). The observed differences could originate from the changes in the CMJ pattern, reflected through the depth of the counter movement that particularly increased after the training with negative load (42 %) and no load (21 %). The same participants also revealed increased CMJ duration, reduced ground reaction forces, as well as reduced maximum and average power output when compared with other training groups. CONCLUSION: Jump training with the applied loads could lead to a comparable improvement in jumping performance. However, the observed load-specific adaptations of CMJ pattern could decouple the training-associated increase in jump height from the increase in muscle power output.
Authors: James J Tufano; Jan Malecek; Michal Steffl; Petr Stastny; Vladimir Hojka; Tomas Vetrovsky Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 4.566
Authors: Marko Cosic; Sasa Djuric; Milena Z Zivkovic; Aleksandar Nedeljkovic; Bojan Leontijevic; Slobodan Jaric Journal: J Hum Kinet Date: 2019-10-18 Impact factor: 2.193