Abstract
The drop jump (DJ) is commonly utilised to assess athletes. The criterion two force platform (2FP) method of assessing DJ performance involves two adjacent force platforms, one for the box and one for the athlete to rebound from. Most researchers and practitioners only have access to one force platform (1FP) and they rarely account for the often considerable discrepancy between box height and drop height (DH). Therefore, this study aimed to determine the criterion validity of evaluating DJ performance with 1FP. Twenty-six young male sports students performed three DJs, from a 0.30 m and 0.40 m high box, on two adjacent force platforms. The DH, touchdown velocity and several performance variables were calculated using the 2FP and 1FP methods. Ordinary least-products regression identified no fixed or proportional bias between methods for any DJ variable. The mean DH was 10% lower than the 0.30 m box and 14% lower than the 0.40 m high box. This discrepancy highlights the importance of accounting for DH when conducting DJ assessments. In conclusion, the 1FP method of evaluating DJ performance is a valid alternative to the criterion 2FP method and could be embedded into automated force analysis software for researchers and practitioners to utilise.
Reference24 articles.
1. Drop jump: A technical model for scientific application;Pedley;Strength Cond. J.,2017
2. A comparison of methods used to identify â€~optimal’drop height for early phase adaptations in depth jump training;Byrne;J. Strength Cond. Res.,2010
3. Training for power events;Schmidtbleicher,1992
4. Drop height is influenced by box height but not by individual stature during drop jumps;Geraldo;J. Phys. Educ.,2019
5. Reliability of bounce drop jump parameters within elite male rugby players;Costley;J. Sports Med. Phys. Fit.,2018
Cited by
19 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献