JournalofHumanKineticsvolume262010,3137 SectionIKinesiology

31

by HubertMakaruk1,TomaszSacewicz1,AdamCzaplicki1,JerzySadowski1
Plyometricscanbeaneffectivewayofimprovingpowerperformanceinmanysports.Thepurposeofthisstudywas toexaminetheeffectsofadditionalloadingonpowerduringdropjumptraining.Fortytwountrainedphysicaleduca tionstudentswithplyometrictrainingbackgroundparticipatedinasixweektraining3timesaweek.Subjectswere randomizedtooneofthreetraininggroups:without(FREE)andwithaweightvest(VEST;5%bodyweight),anda controlgroup(CON).Pretrainingandposttrainingmeasuresofconcentricpeakpower(PP),force(FPP)andvelocity (vPP) at peak power and, in addition, time between eccentric and concentric peak power (tPPEC) were analyzed in a countermovementjump(CMJ)andadropjump(DJ)fromaheightof0.3m.TheFREEandVESTgroupsconsiderably improvedPPinCMJ(p<0.05),butvPPsignificantlyincreased(p<0.05)andtPPEC significantlydecreased(p<0.05) onlyintheFREEgroup.TheenhancementofPPandvPPwasonlydemonstratedbytheFREEgroupinDJ.TheFREE groupsignificantlydecreased(p<0.05)andtheVESTgroupsignificantlyincreased(p<0.05)tPPECinDJ.Itcanbe concludedthatusingadditionalloadduringdropjumptrainingdoesnotproducesuperiorgainsinpoweroutputwhen comparedtoatraditionaldropjumptrainingprogram.. Keywords:plyometrics,stretchshorteningcycle,peakpower,dynamography,kinetics cial, however, to find an optimal load to achieve the traininggoals. Theissueofusinganadditionalloadduringplyo metrictrainingiscomplex.Boscoetal.(1986)reported that3weeksofstrengthtrainingwithplyometricexer cises with a weight vest (78% of body weight; BW) significantlyimprovedperformanceinsprintrunners, whereas there were no changes in the control group. Ontheotherhand,Larsonsstudy(2003)didnotshow differences in jumping heights between groups with andwithouttheadditionalloadduringpureplyomet rictraining. Drop jump training with a weight vest or belt/barbellisevenmorecontroversial.Duringadrop jump(DJ),anexplosiveverticaljumpoccursimmedi ately after preloading, by dropping down from a given height, usually between 0.206 m (Markovic, 2007). It has been demonstrated that DJs result in muscle damage because of eccentric contraction and

Introduction
Plyometricexercisesinvolvespecificmuscleaction called a stretchshortening cycle (SSC). This sequence of rapid eccentric (stretching) and concentric (short ening)actionproducesmorepowerfulgainsthancon centricactionalone(Finnietal.,2001).Aspoweristhe maindeterminantofsportsperformance(Kawamori& Haff, 2004), plyometric exercises are often used in many training programs (Luebbers et al., 2003; Myer etal.,2006;Makaruk&Sacewicz,2010). Because the specificity of each sport requires in creased power in different conditions (e.g., shot put vs.sprintruns),powertrainingprogramsshouldalso take into consideration the components of power: force (F) and velocity (v). While many studies also point out that an additional load is the best training stimulustomaximizepoweroutput(Jonesetal.,2001; Hoffmanetal.,2005;Winchesteretal.,2008),itiscru
1

- The Josef Pilsudski University of Physical Education in Warsaw, Faculty of Physical Education in Biala Podlaska

Authorssubmittedtheircontributionofthearticletotheeditorialboard. AcceptedforpintinginJournalofHumanKineticsvol.26/2010onNovember2010.

Kinesiology

EffectofAdditionalLoad onPowerOutputduringDropJumpTraining

32

EffectofAdditionalLoadonPowerOutputduringDropJumpTraining

Kinesiology

Figure1 Illustrationofthemeasuredandcomputeddataduringdropjumpfromheightof0.3m high ground reaction forces (GRF) (Robinson et al., 2004; Miyama & Nosaka, 2007). Therefore, additional loading during drop jumps may induce excessive stressonmusclesandjoints(Fowleretal.,1994;Kulas etal.,2008),aswellasincreasecontacttime,andthese two variables considerable deteriorate the SSC (Saez Saez de Villarreal et. al, 2010). On the other hand, Jansen and Ebben (2007) did not oppose to using the additional load during drop jumps. They claim that loaded drop jumps are usually performed from low heights, which provide less gravitational acceleration andmoderateintensityofthejumps. The main purpose of this study was to determine the effects of additional loading on power output during drop jump training, which was preceded by establishing differences in kinetics between drop jumps without and with an additional load. It was hypothesizedthatdropjumpswithanadditionalload wouldnotproducegreatergainsinpowerthantradi tionaldropjumps. n=14), which underwent no plyometric intervention. All subjects were experienced in drop jumps because theyhadparticipatedinplyometrictrainingstudiesat least twice before the study. Participants were asked to abstain from any other strength and power activities during the period of study. All subjects attended the same classes (i.e., football, taekwondo, and Nordic walking); each for two hours per week. Thesubjectsweregivenanexplanationonthenature ofthisstudyandallwereprovidedwritteninformed consent in accordance with the demands of the Research Ethics Committee of the University of PhysicalEducationinWarsaw.

Measurements
Kinetic data were recorded using a piezoelectric force platform (Kistler 9281CA, Switzerland), with samplingfrequencyof500HZ.Signalsfromtheplat formwereamplifiedandrecordedonaPCcomputer usinga16bitA/DboardandBioWare3.24software. Thefollowingparameterswereanalyzedineccentric and concentric phases (Figure 1): peak power (Pz), instantaneousgroundreactionforce(Fz)andvelocity(vz) at peak power. In addition, the time between eccentric andconcentricpeakpower(tPPEC)wasmeasured. Theverticalaccelerationofthecenterofmasswas calculatedaccordingtothefollowingformula:

Material&Methods
Subjects
Fortytwo untrained physical students (aged 21.21.3; body weight 76.17.7 kg; body height 1.820.06 m) volunteered for this study. The subjects wererandomlyassignedtooneofthreegroups:drop jumps without an additional load (FREE; n=14), with 5% of BW (VEST, n=14), and a control group (CON,
JournalofHumanKineticsvolume262010,

a z (t ) =

Fz (t ) m g m (1)

http://www.johk.awf.katowice.pl

byH.Makaruketal.

33

Theverticalvelocityofthecenterofmasswasob tained by numerical integration of the vertical accel erationaz(t)

TrainingProcedure
Eight conditioning sessions and two plyometric oriented sessions were conducted before the training period.Plyometrictrainingprogramswereconducted 3daysaweekfor6weeks(Monday,Wednesday,and Friday),apartfromthefirstandlastweekofinterven tion(onlyMondayandFriday). Alltrainingsessionswereperformedindoorsona synthetic (tartan) surface. Each session lasted 4045 minutes. The warm up consisted of 5minute jog, 5 minute dynamic stretching (swings, rotations, and bends), abdominal and back exercises (each 2 x 10 repetitions)toprotecttheback,andropejumps6x10. Threetypesofdropjumpswereimplementedascore exercises to maximize power output (Figure 2): (a) drop jump, (b) drop jump with two boxes (DJ2), (c) drop jump with hurdle (DJH). Subjects were in structedtojumpasquicklyaspossibletoamaximum height in DJ, on box in DJ2, and over the hurdle in DJH. In addition, all tasks were performed with full extensioninthehipandkneejoint,andthefeetwere set slightly outwards. The rest interval between sets wasabout2minutes.Nosubject complained of mus cle or joint pains. After each session, hanging on the bar(3x5seconds)andabdominalandbackexercises (2x10repetitions)wereperformedagain.Thetraining programswereidentical(Table1)exceptfortheaddi tionalloadintheVESTgroup(5%ofBW).

, (2) where t = foot contact time. Peak power (Pz) was calculated as the product of instantaneous vertical groundreactionforceFzandverticalvelocityvz

Pz (t ) = Fz (t ) v z (t )
Testing

(3)

Inthepreliminarystudy,subjectsperformedthree randomlyorderedtrialsofDJineachofthesixcondi tions:fromheightsof0.2,0.3,and0.4with0and5%of BW. The best trial (peak concentric power; PP) was usedfordataanalysis.Theintervalbetweentrialswas about30secondsandforeachconditiontherewasa3 or4minutepause.Theinstructiongiventoeachsub ject was drop off the box, and immediately jump as high as you can. The upper extremities first swung backwards and then high upwards. The knee flexion angle was not specified. In the primary study, a countermovement jump (CMJ) and a DJ from the height of 0.3 m were performed twice: 3 days before thetrainingperiodandthenafteritscompletiondur ing the second part of the study. Testing procedures werethesameasabove. ThereliabilityofmeasurementsinCMJandDJwas evaluated one week before the study. The interclass coefficientswere0.870.92forpeakpowerindifferent conditions, and 0.930.95for force at peak power and 0.850.90forvelocityatpeakpower.

Statisticalanalysis
The ShapiroWilk test was used to check the nor mality of the data. The statistical significance of the differences between variable means (peak power, force, velocity, and time peak power in eccentric and concentric phases between unloading and loading

Figure2 Illustrationofdropjump(DJ),dropjumpwithtwoboxes(DJ2),anddropjumpwithhurdle(DJH)
EditorialCommitteeofJournalofHumanKinetics

Kinesiology

v z (t ) = a z (t )dt

34

EffectofAdditionalLoadonPowerOutputduringDropJumpTraining

Table1 Summaryofdropjumptrainingprogram
Week 0.2m Setxrepetition 3x5DJ 2x5DJ 2x5DJ2 2x5DJH 2x5DJ 2x5DJ2 Dropheight 0.3m Setxrepetition 4x5DJ2 4x5DJH 3x5DJ 4x5DJ2 4x5DJH 3x5DJ 0.4m Setxrepetition 2x5DJ2 3x5DJH 3x5DJ 3x5DJ2 3x5DJH

Primarystudy
The effects of drop jump training on kinetics are presented in Table 34. Both FREE and VEST groups increased PP in CMJ (there was a significant group x time interaction: F2,39=4.26; p < 0.05). A significant in creaseinvPP anddecreaseintPPEC(groupxtimeinter action: F2,39=3.95; p < 0.05 and F2,39=10.12; p < 0.01, re spectively)wereobservedonlyintheFREEgroup. A significant improvement in PP and vPP was ob served for DJ in the FREEgroup (therewasa signifi cant group x time interaction: F2,39=3.31; p < 0.05 and F2,39=3.49;p<0.05,respectively).Asignificantgroupby time interaction was found for tPPEC, F2,39=11.38; p < 0.001, whereby the decrease in the FREE group and theincreaseintheVESTgroupwerenoted.

Kinesiology

1 2 3 4 5 6

Dropjump(DJ),dropjumpwithtwoboxes(DJ2),drop jumpwithhurdle(DJH)

conditions) was assessed by means of a Students t test. A twoway (group x time) repeatedmeasures ANOVAwithTukeyposthocadjustmentswereused to compare the changes in the dependent variables among the groups over the intervention period. Sta tistical significance was set at p<0.05. Statistica v. 5.1 programwasusedforthecalculations.

Discussion
The main findings of the study indicate that drop jumps with an additional load do not demonstrate superior performance in power output when com pared to traditional drop jumps (without the addi tionalload).Moreover,greatergainsinpeakpoweror velocity at peak power were observed in the FREE group, which did not use any additional load during dropjumps. The identification and comparison of kinetics in loading and unloading conditions were obtained at thestartingpointofthestudy.Theadditionalloaddid notaffectthepeakpowerintheeccentricphaseatall heights. This indicates that increasing body weight during drop jumps does not appear to be a superior stimulus for effective eccentric stretch to produce positive effects in concentric action (Moran & Wallce, 2007). The significant increase of the vertical velocity accompanied by substantial decrease of the vertical

Results
Preliminarystudy The velocities at eccentric peak power (vPE) for DJ fromheightof0.2and0.4mweresignificantlyhigher in loading versus unloading conditions (Table 2), but the force at eccentric peak power (FPE) was signifi cantlylowerinDJfromtheheightof0.4m. Thedropjumpwithouttheadditionalload(FREE) fromtheheightof0.3mresultedinhigherPPvalues, whereas higher vPP values were associated with drop jumps from the heights 0.2 and 0.3 m, relative to loaded conditions (VEST). The differences in tPPEC be tween both conditions were significant at all starting heights and tPPEC was shorter for the DJ without an additionalload.

Table2 MeanSDofeccentric(PE)andconcentric(PP)peakpower,force(FPE)and(FPP),velocity(vPE)and(vPP)atpeak powerandtimebetweeneccentricandconcentricpeakspower(tPEPK)fordropjumps(DJ)withoutandwithadditional load

Drop height(m) 0.2 0.3 0.4 Load (%BM) Eccentricphase Concentricphase Time tPPEC FPE PP PE vPE FPP vPP (s) (W) (ms1) (W) (ms1) (N) (N) 0 4806325 2183172 2.210.15 4744529 2071198 2.290.13 0.2780.016 2092158 2.220.15a 0.2940.018c 5 4843411 2127181 2.280.12b 4643347 0 5573501 2429185 2.300.14 5258427 2203225 2.390.14 0.2760.013 5 5459348 2348209 2.330.16 4921479a 2115193 2.330.12a 0.2880.017c 0 6881703 2946268 2.340.15 4981387 2061186 2.420.16 0.2660.012 5 6756812 2777293a 2.430.13b 5059436 2153208 2.350.13 0.2780.015b SignificantlydifferentfromDJwithoutadditionalloadfromthesameheight:ap<0.05;bp<0.01; cp<0.001

JournalofHumanKineticsvolume262010,

http://www.johk.awf.katowice.pl

byH.Makaruketal.

35

Table3 MeanSDofchangesforpeakpower(PP)andforce(FPP)andvelocity(vPP)atpeakpowerinconcentricCMJandDJ duringthetrainingintervention

Kinesiology Typeof jump Group PP(W) Concentricphase FPP(N) Pre Post 1467157 1556171 1432149 1589185 1409165 1451172 2329171 2381189 2248208 2431215 2359211 2345223 vPP(ms1) Pre Post 2.350.013 2.480.16a 2.390.016 2.440.18 2.370.014 2.340.16 2.300.010 2.410.011a 2.280.011 2.260.013 2.270.012 2.260.011

Pre Post FREE 3447383 3859473a CMJ VEST 3422456 3877408a CON 3339491 3395512 FREE 5358379 5729476a DJ VEST 5119497 5479417 (0.3m) CON 5352522 5305519 Significantly different from pretraining values a-p<0.05

ground reaction at eccentric peak power in drop jumps with the weight vest from the height of 0.4 m seem to point to a comparatively soft landing. This observation confirms the presence of protective inhi bition against the impact stress during the eccentric phase, as reported by Gollhofer & Kyrolainen (1991) andLeukeletal.(2008). The additional load considerably decreased peak powerindropjumpsfromheightof0.3minthecon centric phase. This was probably associated with de creasedvelocityatpeakpower,whichwasnoticedfor DJwiththeweightvestfromtheheightsof0.2mand 0.3 m. These findings are supported by research con ducted by Driss et al. (2001), who also showed de creased peak power and velocity at peak power by adding the additional load for CMJ in untrained males,andbyCormieetal.(2008),whoreportedthat accelerationofthesystemmassdecreasesastheaddi tionalloadisincreasedduringsquatjump. The DJ with a weight vest elicited longer time be tweeneccentricandconcentricpeakpower.Thissug geststhatitmaydecreaseefficacyofSSCbyagreater lossofstoredelasticenergybyminimizingthecontri bution of elastic elements of the muscletendon unit Table4 MeanSDofchangesfortimebetweeneccentricand concentricpeakpower(tPPEC)inCMJandDJduringthe trainingintervention
Typeof jump CMJ DJ (0.3m) Group FREE VEST CON FREE VEST CON Time;tPPEC(s) Pre 0.3420.041 0.3500.036 0.3580.040 0.2720.021 0.2740.019 0.2800.018 Post 0.3220.039a 0.3640.034 0.3500.038 0.2580.018a 0.2900.018a 0.2860.022

(Wilsonetal.,1991). Theprimarystudyinvolvedacomparisonofdrop jump training with and without the additional load. Both FREE and VEST groups significantly improved concentricpeakpowerinCMJ.Suchfindingsarecon sistentwiththoseofLarson(2003),whoreportedthat therewasnoneedforaddingaweightvesttoincrease effectiveness of plyometric training. In addition, the resultsofthepresentstudyalsodemonstratedthatthe unloading drop jump training provided a greater contribution of velocity to peak power production or decreasingtimebetweeneccentricandconcentricpeak power. This may indicate that plyometric training gains in power output are associated with the en hancement of speed of movement at a given force, ratherthantheimprovementofmusclestrength.Such a conclusion is in accordance with previous research inuntrainedindividuals(Sorensenetal.,2006).These findings are valuable to ball games coaches, since it has been reported that during thecompetitive season in volleyball players, peak velocity for CMJ and DJ decreases (Newton, 2006). It is also worth mentioning thatalthoughchangesinforceatpeakpowerwerenot significant(p=0.07)forCMJintheVESTgroup,trends may indicate that using the additional load affected muscle strength. Therefore, drop jump training with a weighted vest for athletes who require power production against large resistance (e.g., shot put or wrestling) may be considered. However, it should be examinedintrainedsubjectsinfuturestudies. The FREE group significantly increased peak power in DJ test, while the VEST group did not. As seenearlierinCMJ,gainsinpeakpowerresultedfrom increased velocity at peak power. However, the non significantdecreaseofpeakpowerintheVESTgroup was probably associated with time increase between eccentric and concentric peak power. This factor can

Significantlydifferentfrompretrainingvaluesap<0.05
EditorialCommitteeofJournalofHumanKinetics

36

EffectofAdditionalLoadonPowerOutputduringDropJumpTraining

deteriorate stretchshortening cycle mechanism, as previouslystated. It is notable that both CMJ and DJ show different results,mostprobablyduetothenatureofbothtests. The DJ is classified as fast SSC, characterized by a shortercontractiontimeandasmallerrangeofmotion whencomparedwiththeCMJ,whichisratedasslow SSC. It has been hypothesized that each of these can representdifferentmuscleactionpatterns(Flanagan& Comyns, 2008). Thus, our research confirms that the DJ was more sensitive for detecting neuromuscular

changesduetoplyometrictraininginindividualsthan theCMJ.Also,Gherietal.(1998)pointedoutthatdrop jumps are more advantageous to sportspecific jump ing and are applied in training more frequently than countermovementjumps. From a practical perspective, the present findings suggest that traditional plyometric training is suffi cienttoenhancepoweroutputinbeginners.However, inclusion of an additional load should be considered withcautionforstrengthpowerathletes.

Kinesiology

References
BoscoC,RuskoH,HirvonenJ.Theeffectofextraloadconditioningonmuscleperformanceinathletes.MedSci SportsExerc.1986;18:415419. CormieP,McBridgeJM,McCaulleyGO.Powertime,forcetime,andvelocitytimecurveanalyisduringthejump squat:impactofload.JApplBiomech.2008;24:112120. DrissT,VandwalleH,QuievreJ,MillerCh,MonodH.Effectofexternalloadingonpowerinasquatjumponaforce platform:acomparisonbetweenstrengthandpowerathletesandsedentaryindividuals.JSportsSci.2001;19:99 105. FinniT,IkegawaS,KomiPV.Concentricforceenhancementduringhumanmovement.ActaPhysiolScand.2001; 173:369377. FlanaganEP,ComynsTM.Theuseofcontacttimeandthereactivestrengthindextooptimizefaststretchshortening cycletraining.StrengthandCondJ.2008;30:3238. FowlerNE,LeesA,ReillyT.Spinalshrinkageinunloadedandloadeddropjumping.Ergonomics.1994;40:133139. GehriDJ,RicardMD,KleinerDM,KirkendallDT.Acomparisonofplyometrictrainingtechniquesforimproving verticaljumpabilityandenergyproduction.JStrengthCondRes.1998;12:8589. GollhoferA,KyrolainenH.Neuromuscularcontrolofthehumanlegextensormusclesinjumpexercisesunder variousstretchloadconditions.IntJSportsMed.1991;12:3440. HoffmanJR,RatamessNA,CooperJJ,KangJ,ChilakosA,FaigenbaumAD.Comparisonofloadedandunloaded jumpsquattrainingonstrength/powerperformanceincollegefootballplayers.JStrengthCondRes.2005;19:810 815. JensenRJ,EbbenWP.Quantifyingplyometricintensityviarateofforcedevelopment,kneejoint,andground reactionsforces.JStrengthCondRes.2007;21:763767. JonesK,BishopP,HunterG,FleisigG.Theeffectsofvaryingresistancetrainingloadsonintermediateandhigh velocityspecificadaptations.JStrengthCondRes.2001;15:349356. KawamoriN,HaffGG.Theoptimaltrainingloadforthedevelopmentofmuscularpower.JStrengthCondRes.2004; 18:675684. KulasA,ZalewskiP,HortobagyiT,DeVitaP.Effectsofaddedtrunkloadandcorrespondingtrunkposition adaptationsonlowerextremitybiomechanicsduringdroplandings.JBiomech.2008;41:180185. LarsonGS.Theeffectsofplyometrictraining,withaweightvest,onlowerextremitypowerinvolleyballplayers. Thesis(M.A.)UniversityofNorthCarolina,ChapelHill.2003. LeukelC,TaubeW,GruberM,HodappM,GollhoferA.InfluenceoffallingheightontheexcitabilityofthesoleusH reflexduringdropjumps.ActPhysiol(Oxf).2008;192:569576.

JournalofHumanKineticsvolume262010,

http://www.johk.awf.katowice.pl

byH.Makaruketal.

37

LuebbersPE,HulverMW,ThyfaultJP,CarperMJ,LockwoodRH,PotteigerJA.Effectofplyometrictrainingand recoveryonverticaljumpperformanceandanaerobicpower.JStrengthCondRes.2003;17:704709. MakarukH,SacewiczT.Effectsofplyometrictrainingonmaximalpoweroutputandjumpingability.Human Movement.2010;11:1722. MarkovicG.Doesplyometrictrainingimproveverticaljumpheight?Ametaanalyticalreview.BrJSportsMed.2007; 41:349355. MiyamaM,NosakaK.Protectionagainstmuscledamagefollowingfiftydropjumpsconferredbytendropjumps.J StrengthCondRes.2007;21:10871092. MoranK,WallaceES.Eccentricloadingandrangeofkneejointmotioneffectsonperformanceenhancementin verticaljumping.HumMovSci.2007;26:824840. MyerGD,FordKR,BrentJL,HewettTE.Theeffectsofplyometricvs.dynamicstabilizationandbalancetrainingon power,balance,andlandingforceinfemale.JStrengthCondRes.2006;20:345353. NewtonRU,RogersRA,VolekJS,HakkinenK,KraemerWJ.Fourweeksofoptimalloadballisticresistancetraining attheendofseasonattenuatesdecliningjumpperformanceofwomanvolleyballplayers.JStrengthCondRes. 2006;20:955961. RobinsonLE,DevorST,MerrickMA,BuckworthJ.Theeffectsoflandvs.aquaticplyometricsonpower,torque, velocity,andmusclesorenessinwomen.JStrengthCondRes.2004;18:8491. SaezSaezdeVillarrealE,RequenaB,NewtonRU.Doesplyometrictrainingimprovestrengthperformance?Ameta analysis.JSciMedSport.2010;13:513522. SorensenH,BrinkM,LonbroS,VissingK,OvergaardK,AndersenTB,JorgensenKD,MortensenJ,ElstromO, PetersenN,HansenTI,AagaardP.Plyometrictrainingincreasesstrengthandpower,whileresistancetraining onlyincreasesstrength.In:StrengthtrainingforSport,Health,AgingandRehabilitation.5thInternational ConferenceonStrengthTraining.Odense,2006. WilsonG,ElliottB,WoodG.Theeffectofperformanceofimposingadelayduringstretchshortencycle.MedSci SportsExerc.1991;23:364370. WinchesterJB,McBrideJM,MaherMA,MikatRP,AllenBK,KlineDE,McGuiganMR.Eightweeksofballistic exerciseimprovespowerindependentlyofchangesinstrengthandmusclefibertypeexpression.JStrengthCond Res.2008;22:17281734. Acknowledgements This study was supported in part by Jozef Pisudski University of Physical Education in Warsaw, grant BW III/26.
Kinesiology

Correspondingauthor
HubertMakaruk,Ph.D. TheJosefPilsudskiUniversityofPhysicalEducationinWarsaw, FacultyofPhysicalEducationinBialaPodlaska,Poland 2ndAkademickaStreet Phone:+48691953524 Fax:+48833428800 Email:hubert.makaruk@awfbp.edu.pl

EditorialCommitteeofJournalofHumanKinetics