Adarq.org

I don't think there is a model. The only model I can see is that the closer you are to an elite value the harder it will be to improve (just like in anything else in life).

So if you have a 20 inch SVJ it would be easier than if you'd have a 35 inch SVJ. BUT - again - there are so many factors that govern this... if the athlete has sports experience, if the athlete lifted before, his structure, his CNS, his sleep, his nutrition, his endocrine system and so on and so forth.

Therefore I think it's stupid to launch numbers around. I can't understand why one would be limited in his training until he gets to a really good squat number to begin with. And even then he might get a higher VJ by reducing bodyfat or improving his explosiveness or even traditional "plyo" power (even though we talk about SVJ here).

In the end you're going only to be limited by your structure and some CNS characteristics in your SVJ, if you take care of all the other factors. The problem is - very few people do all this.

So your argument is that making estimations in life where the dependent variable is influenced by lots of factors is "stupid" and "launching numbers around"?

So I guess then that predicting the weather is stupid, predicting stock values is stupid, predicting demographic development is stupid, analyzing the intellectual potential of a child is stupid, etc.

What, you don't have an answer for what I said and you came up with this?

GETTING BACK TO SQUATTING AND SVJ, what I said holds true. If anything, it's probably easier to increase the SVJ than it is to increase the running VJ if your RVJ technique is already at a high level for your particular structure because the SVJ responds better to strength work and strength is a more alterable quality than reactive stuff.

How much have you increased your squat and SVJ with training? And starting from what squat and what SVJ?

Now, you MIGHT have a point here, but only if you can propose a better model than the percentage based one. Go ahead.

I'll try.


Possible inches you can gain =
[ (70-SVJ) * 0.9 *SVJ ] /  3.2[ SVJ - 3 ]


I'm being kinda serious here. i did a few examples and it looks kinda accurate. SVJ = starting SVJ at 17 years old with no prior jump or weightlifting.

So far:

Squat: 132 lbs x 5 to 435 lbs x 5
SVJ: ~27" to 36"

I got mine from ~20 inches to 30 while taking my squat from 80kgx5 (90 1RM) at 67 kg bodyweight to 120kgx5 (135 1RM) at 82 kg bodyweight. So as you can see that's a 10 inch increase in SVJ and I'm still under 2x in terms of squatting strength. Once and if I ever get to 2.5x I should have ~38-40.

So it's all a matter of strength, strength application and structure as the most important factors (if we're to ignore the factors I talked about in my previous post). So basically it depends IF you can increase your strength as far as a 2x-2.5x squat to reach your genetic limit more or less.

Quote from: Raptor on June 12, 2011, 12:35:44 pm

Hm, so let's see:

If I have a 9 inch vertical jump, I can expect to get to 12 (+30%) but that's pretty much it? And the more I can SVJ the more I gain, right?

If I have a standing 50 inch vertical jump, getting to 66 inch (+30%) would not be impossible, right?

So if I suck having a 9 inch vert I actually have a much lower ceiling of growth than if I were to jump 50 because 30% of a small number is less than 30% of a higher number.

See how idiotic this gets?

If you take a guy who has a 0.7 bodyweight squat and jumps 16 inches and get him to 2.5x, would you expect him to get 30% more on his SVJ OR would you expect him to possibly double that or more?

Estimations like that are never accurate at the extremes. You would not measure the height of the Eiffel Tower or the size of a brain cell with a ruler either. It can measure distances, but it is not meant to do so at extremely long or short ones. The same reason applies here. Unless the population you derived your rule of thumb from had sufficiently many athletes with SVJs <10 and >49, your rule of thumb will not apply to those people.
Now, you MIGHT have a point here, but only if you can propose a better model than the percentage based one. Go ahead.

Let's just say the average person has a 20 inch vertical jump (person, not athlete). That might even be a little high, but do you honestly think that person can't get to a 26-27 inch jump? Hell, they could get that with Air Alert. Now if you're saying after noob gains, it is impossible to increase a vertical jump more than 30%, then I might agree with you.

I don't think there's such a thing as a "typical" improvement, unless typical means "the guy reaches ~2.5x squat", since that's the squat value were more strength usually won't transfer too good to explosiveness. If you take a guy from a 0.7x squat and get him to 1.5x squat and he improves by 6 inches and stops his squat improvement to 1.5x instead of continuing to get it up to ~2.5, then how can you say that that's his near max ceiling of improvement?

So in reality you could say "your limit in terms of strength to SVJ improvement is probably a 2.5x squat" instead of throwing a number of inches or a % of the original SVJ around.

So if a guy has a 2.5x squat and jumps 26 inches, besides that he must be humongously unexplosive (and he should train that), then yes you could say that maybe the structure is very bad for jumping and therefore he doesn't have much ceiling to improvement.

But if you take formerly weak people, regardless of structure, with say a 1x untrained squat and get them to 2.5x, wouldn't you expect them to improve a lot? The only factor at that point becomes if they ARE ABLE to get to that ~2.5x number.

Very unique physical traits? Wait, what?