Adarq.org

ya tmw ill take a break.. i promise.

have 4x(edit: didnt mean 4x10, meant 4x5, wtf heh) dj's from 16-18" on sunday.. so that alone will force me to do absolutely nothing but SMR/stretching/relax.

peace man..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eh0pTNIU9y4

uh.

<quote>the reason im doing everything weighted, is I want alot more reflexive force production when I land in those positions.. and I can progressively overload (albeit small progressions) those positions and keep increasing my stiffness properly.. If i could reflexively gain more force output in any of those positions, my jumping should improve..</quote>

This is just what I've found (and from talking with Kelly): Using weights to increase the force of the ankle stiffness stuff seems to affect the joints moreso than increasing the acceleration of the movement.

Since F=MA, you can increase the force by increasing your mass, or your acceleration. External weights would be increased mass.

Increasing the height of the movement would be acceleration, and my preferential choice.

Obviously some of your exercise choices don't lend themselves to increasing force through that means, but in spots where you can, I would.

<END NERD SPEAK>

sup alex "the takeover" maroko..

well, i don't really see how it's affecting the "joints" more than actual stiffness.. i mean i feel it all muscular, and i reach fatigue (muscular) faster when using the weighted variations.

i mean, if i was going very intense on the weight, to the point where i was forcing my rebounds (not actually rebounding) then i could understand that..



i havnt been doing the weighted variations the passed few sessions though.. im going ALL bodyweight.. ill use KE from freefall to overload, not some dumb weights.. so far i like it much better... so scratch what i said about doing weighted variations..

and single leg submax pogos with leg completely locked and glute squeezed is damn effective at hitting the PF's.

peace man

see RJ, im not crazy.. tho i have shin splints & my calfs hurt so bad..

from a post on tvs:

holla atcha boy so sexy .. yezzir.

37-38 today.. 37-38 on a make.. this is a miss and a make.. vid later..

yezzir.

must complete workout with shin splintz..

yezzir.

i did this stuff during high frequency squat.. always had good pop after doing lots of jumps/ankle jumps randomly throughout the day..

Quote from: adarqui on June 11, 2009, 11:51:21 pm

i liked it the first time i read it a few days ago... or maybe it was in bits and pieces on different forums

nice though.. im in agreement with that in regards to barbell lifting..

i think with force absorption/reactive movements though, a variety might offer more transfer.. im playing with that currently.

peace

it was pieced together from a few posts.  i seem to keep getting the same question nd figured it would go well on the blog so i don't have to type the same answer over and over

ya i know i was just messing with you..

peace

Post anything related to true plyometrics.



1. Does plyometric training improve vertical jump height? A meta-analytical review

PT provides a statistically significant and practically relevant improvement in vertical jump height with the mean effect ranging from 4.7% (SJ and DJ), over 7.5% (CMJA) to 8.7% (CMJ). These results justify the application of PT for the purpose of development of vertical jump performance in healthy individuals.

2. A Comparison of Plyometric Training Techniques for Improving Vertical Jump Ability and Energy Production

The 12-week program
resulted in significant increases in vertical jump height
for both training groups. The depth jump group
significantly improved their vertical jump height in all 3
jumps. None of the training methods improved
utilization of elastic energy. In activities involving
dynamic stretch-shorten cycles, drop jump training was
superior to countermovement jump training due to
neuromuscular specificity. This study provides support
for the strength and conditioning professional to include
plyometric depth jump training as part of the athlete's
overall program for improving vertical jumping ability
and concentric contractile performance.

3. The Influence of Varied Rest Interval Lengths on Depth Jump Performance

After determining their op-
timal depth jump height, the subjects performed 3 sets of 10
depth jumps, each set with a different rest interval duration.
The 3 rest intervals between depth jumps were 15, 30, and
60 seconds and were counterbalanced for each subject. Max-
imal vertical jump height and vertical ground reaction forces
were calculated for each depth jump trial. The Peak Perfor-
mance Motion Measurement System was used to measure
vertical jump height and the Kistler force platform was used
to measure ground reaction forces. Two-way analyses of var-
iance revealed that rest interval length did not affect (p
0.05) vertical jump height or vertical ground reaction forces.
Therefore, this study demonstrated a 15-second rest interval
was sufficient for recovery during the performance of depth
jumps.

4. The optimal training load for the development of dynamic athletic performance.

The experimental group which trained with the load that maximized mechanical power achieved the best overall results in enhancing dynamic athletic performance recording statistically significant (P < 0.05) improvements on most test items and producing statistically superior results to the two other training modalities on the jumping and isokinetic tests.

5. Drop jumping. II. The influence of dropping height on the biomechanics of drop jumping.

The results of a biomechanical analysis show no difference between DJ20 and DJ40 in mechanical output about the joints during the push-off phase. Peak values of moment and power output about the ankles during the push-off phase were found to be smaller in DJ60 than in DJ40 (DJ20 = DJ60). The amplitude of joint reaction forces increased with dropping height. During DJ60, the net joint reaction forces showed a sharp peak on the instant that the heels came down on the ground. Based on the results, researchers are advised to limit dropping height to 20 or 40 cm when investigating training effects of the execution of bounce drop jumps.

6. A Biomechanical Analysis of the Vertical Jump and Three Modified Plyometric Depth Jumps.

Maximum moment and power values were calculated for each joint. ANOVAs were used to compare the selected variables from DJ to the corresponding variables in CMJ. All variables from the selected joints were greater with DJ, and 29 of the 33 comparisons were significantly different (p <= 0.05). The corresponding joint moments for ankle, knee, and hip depth jumps were significantly greater than for CMJ. The modified plyometric jumps were shown to enhance the contribution of the muscles that extend the ankle, knee, and hip.

7. Muscle Power and Fiber Characteristics Following 8 Weeks of Plyometric Training

Peak muscle power output, measured using a countermovement vertical jump, significantly increased from pretraining to posttraining for group 1 (PLYOMETRIC TRAINING) (2.8%) and group 2 (PLYOMETRIC + AEROBIC TRAINING) (2.5%). Each group demonstrated a significant increase in fiber area from pretraining to posttraining for type I (group 1, 4.4%; group 2, 6.1%) and type II (group 1, 7.8%; group 2, 6.8%) fibers, but there were no differences between the groups. Following plyometric training, there is an increased power output that may in part be related to muscle fiber size.

8. The effect of plyometric training on distance running performance

Following the training period, the E group (PLYOMETRICALLY TRAINED) significantly improved 3-km performance (2.7%) and RE at each of the tested velocities, while no changes in V?O2max or Thla were recorded. CMJ height, 5BT, and MTS also increased significantly. No significant changes were observed in any measures for the C group. The results clearly demonstrated that a 6-week plyometric programme led to improvements in 3-km running performance. It is postulated that the increase in MTS resulted in improved RE. We speculate that the improved RE led to changes in 3-km running performance, as there were no corresponding alterations in V?O2max or Thla.

9. Comparison of Dynamic Push-Up Training and Plyometric Push-Up Training on Upper-Body Power and Strength

The PPU (PLYOMETRIC PUSHUP)
group experienced significantly greater improvements than
the DPU (DYNAMIC PUSHUP) group on the medicine ball put (p
0.03). There
was no significant difference between groups for the chest
press, although the PPU group experienced greater increases

10. EFFICACY OF A MINI-TRAMPOLINE PROGRAM FOR IMPROVING
THE VERTICAL JUMP

The mini-trampoline appears to be an effective apparatus for
increasing the height of the vertical jump.  Also, the mini-trampoline
seems to elicit better technique from many individuals:  In terms of
balance, there was significantly less forward translation in the jump.
Range of motion, as indicated by knee flexion in the crouch, decreased
for most subjects.  And the coordination of the thigh and shank was
relatively simultaneous after the training program.

11. The effects of plyometric, weight and plyometric-weight training on anaerobic power and muscular strength

The results showed that all the training treatments elicited significant (P<0.05) improvement in all of the tested variables. However, the combination training group showed signs of improvement in the vertical jump performance, the 50 yard dash, and leg strength that was significantly greater than the improvement in the other 2 training groups (plyometric training and weight training). This study provides support for the use of a combination of traditional weight training and plyometric drills to improve the vertical jumping ability, explosive performance in general and leg strength.

12. Biomechanical analysis of drop and countermovement jumps

The results obtained for DJ appeared to depend on jumping style. In a subgroup of subjects making a movement of large amplitude (i. e. bending their hips and knees considerably before pushing off) the push-off phase of DJ closely resembled that of CMJ. In a subgroup of subjects making a movement of small amplitude, however, the duration of the push-off phase was shorter, values for moments and mean power output at the knees and ankles were larger, and the mean EMG activity of m. gastrocnemius was higher in DJ than in CMJ. The findings are attributed to the influences of the rapid pre-stretch of knee extensors and plantar flexors after touch-down in DJ. In both subgroups, larger peak resultant reaction forces were found at the knee and ankle joints, and larger peak forces were calculated for the Achilles tendon in DJ than in CMJ.

13. THE EFFECT OF PLYOMETRIC TRAINING ON STRENGTH-SPEED ABILITIES OF BASKETBALL PLAYERS

14. Does plyometric training improve vertical jump height? A meta-analytical review

The pooled estimate of the effect of PT on vertical jump height was 4.7% (95% CI 1.8 to 7.6%), 8.7% (95% CI 7.0 to 10.4%), 7.5% (95% CI 4.2 to 10.8%) and 4.7% (95% CI 0.8 to 8.6%) for the SJ, CMJ, CMJA and DJ, respectively. When expressed in standardised units (ie, effect sizes), the effect of PT on vertical jump height was 0.44 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.72), 0.88 (95% CI 0.64 to 1.11), 0.74 (95% CI 0.47 to 1.02) and 0.62 (95% CI 0.18 to 1.05) for the SJ, CMJ, CMJA and DJ, respectively. PT provides a statistically significant and practically relevant improvement in vertical jump height with the mean effect ranging from 4.7% (SJ and DJ), over 7.5% (CMJA) to 8.7% (CMJ). These results justify the application of PT for the purpose of development of vertical jump performance in healthy individuals.

15. The effect of two plyometric training techniques on muscular power and agility in youth soccer players.

Posttraining, both groups experienced improvements in vertical jump height (p < 0.05) and agility time (p < 0.05) and no change in sprint performance (p > 0.05). There were no differences between the treatment groups (p > 0.05). The study concludes that both DJ and CMJ plyometrics are worthwhile training activities for improving power and agility in youth soccer players.

16. Aquatic Plyometric Training Increases Vertical Jump in Female Volleyball Players.

Similar increases in VJ were observed in both groups after 4 wk (APT = 3.1%, CON = 4.9%; both P < 0.05); however, the APT (AQUATIC PLYOMETRIC TRAINING) group improved by an additional 8% (P < 0.05) from week 4 to week 6, whereas there was no further improvement in the CON group (-0.9%; P = NS). After 6 wk, both groups displayed significant improvements in concentric peak torque during knee extension and flexion at 60 and 180[degrees][middle dot]s-1 (all P < 0.05).

17. Kinematic Responses to Plyometric Exercises Conducted on Compliant and Noncompliant Surfaces

18. Effects of a plyometric program on vertical landing force and jumping performance in college women

19. Relationships between three potentiation effects of plyometric training and performance

Conclusions: Plyometric training specifically potentiated the normalized EMG, tendon stiffness and elastic energy utilization in the myotendinous complex of the triceps surae. Although these changes are possibly essential determinants, only increases of tendon stiffness were observed to correlate with performance improvements.

20. THE EFFECTS OF A 6-WEEK PLYOMETRIC TRAINING PROGRAM ON AGILITY

21. THE EFFECT OF SHORT-TERM SQUAT VS DEPTH JUMP TRAINING ON VERTICAL JUMP

The primary results of this experiment indicate that vertical jump was not significantly improved with short-term plyometric or squat training using the design and volume in this study. However, a six-week periodized squat training program did increase 1RM strength. Strength coaches may have to design programs with greater volume or longer duration to elicit significant improvements in vertical jump.

22. Quantifying Plyometric Intensity via Rate of Force Development, Knee Joint, and Ground Reaction Forces

Results indicate that there are quantitative differences between plyometric exercises in the rate of force development during landing and the forces placed on the knee, though peak GRF forces associated with landing may not differ.

23. Comparative Effect of Three Modes of Plyometric Training on Leg Muscle Strength of University Male Students

Based on the findings, it was concluded that plyometrics exercises with depth jumping and rebound jumping characteristics are best used in developing muscle strength of the lower extremities.

24. Correlational Effects Of Plyometric Training On Leg Muscle Strength, Endurance And Power Characteristics Of Nigerian University Undergraduates

Correlation between all other variables was found not to be significant. Based on the finding of the study it was concluded that plyometrics training with repeated jumps horizontally and that which involves rebound jumping on the spot, are capable of improving leg muscle power in similar ways. Moreover, the study also concluded that, plyometrics training is capable of improving leg muscle strength and power significantly

25. The Effect of Drop Jump Starting Height and Contact Time on Power, Work Performed, and Moment of Force

26. A Multi-Test Assessment of Anaerobic Power in Male Athletes: Implications for Sport Specific Testing

27. Calcium Sensitivity of Human Single Muscle Fibers following Plyometric Training.

Conclusion: Plyometric training increased single-fiber Ca2+ sensitivity, especially in type I fibers. These changes could not be explained by a modified TnT isoform expression pattern.

28. Use of an Overhead Goal Alters Vertical Jump Performance and Biomechanics

These results indicate that overhead goals may be incorporated during training and testing protocols to alter lower-extremity biomechanics and can increase performance.