Vertical Jumps Performance Analysis: Implementation of Novel

Complex of Jumps

Anna Zakharova

and Kamiliia Mekhdieva

Ural Federal University named after the first President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin, 19 Mira Street, Yekaterinburg, Russia

Keywords: Vertical Jumps Performance Analysis, Female Athletes, Fitness Control, Motor Asymmetry.

Abstract: The proposed study was focused on justification of complex of vertical jumping tests analysis for practical

applications of athletes’ enhancement. Eighteen national level female athletes aged from 18 to 25 (13

basketball-players and 5 biathletes) underwent anthropometric measurements and set of vertical jumping tests

on the force plate. To obtain comprehensive data on jumps performance and motor assymetry classic

countermovement and squat jumps were supplemented by countermovent jump with arms swinging and

single-leg jumps (on the right and left leg separately). Descriptive and comparative analysis were applied for

further statistical data processing. We found that: (i) mean values of body composition variables were within

the norm in both groups, meanwhile, biathletes had significantly higher relative body and leg muscle mass;

(ii) there were no significant differences in countermovement jump performance between basketball players

and biathletes except longer duration of squat and take-off phases in biathletes; (iii) squat jump performance

analysis revealed significantly higher strength of knee extensors in female biathletes; (iv) jump height in

countermovement jump with arms swinging was significantly higher in biathletes’ group; (v) motor

asymmetry of lower extremities was more evident in basketball players. The proposed set of different vertical

jumps provides with valuable information on fitness level in athletes.

1 INTRODUCTION

Vertical jumping tests are widely used in the sports

science and practice for evaluation of muscular

strength and motor coordination (Lara, 2006, Van

Hooren, 2017, Zakharova, 2017). These types of tests

have been introduced since the beginning of XX

century (Petrigna, 2019). A number of studies showed

high informative value and comprehensive outcome

data from this testing, as well as simplicity of its

carrying-out (Newton, 2006). Due to these facts, in

the modern era vertical jump tests are frequently used

by coaches and strength and conditioning

professionals to obtain valuable information for

correct trainings planning.

Initially, jump tests were used without specific

equipement and the only available information was

the jump itself. Along with technical development in

sport science new devices were implemented: force

plates, photoelectric cell systems, contact mats,

contact platforms, jump mats, accelerometer-based

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8170-2316

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2967-2655

systems, linear position transducers, digital cameras

with sensors placement for motion analysis etc.

(Petrigna, 2019). These hi-tech instruments are

widely used nowadays for obtaining comprehensive

information not only on height of the jumps, but also

on biomechanics (Ashley, 1994) and motor assymetry

of lower extremities (Yanci, 2014).

Although, progressive development provided

with valuable equipment for high quality research, we

should keep in mind that a number of issues

concerning reliability and feasibility still remains

unsetteled.

One of the mentioned above problems is a lack of

standartization in jump phases identification, which

may affect interpretation of jump phases duration,

time to peak force reaching and rate of force

development (Petrigna, 2019). Among other issues is

the high cost of force plates and motion analysis

devises.

Numerous studies are devoted to performance

analysis of vertical jumps. Biomechanical kinetic and

Zakharova, A. and Mekhdieva, K.

Vertical Jumps Performance Analysis: Implementation of Novel Complex of Jumps.

DOI: 10.5220/0010145400900097

In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Sport Sciences Research and Technology Support (icSPORTS 2020), pages 90-97

ISBN: 978-989-758-481-7

kinematic variables (force, velocity, displacement,

etc) are under consideration, nevertheless there is still

a gap in practical applications of valueable

information.

The aim of the proposed research was to justify

the complex of vertical jump test analysis for

practical applications of athletes’ enhancement.

2 ORGANIZATION AND

METHODS

The study was conducted in the laboratory

“Functional Testing and Complex Control in Sports”

of the Institute of Physical Education, Sports and

Youth Policy, Ural Federal University

(Yekaterinburg, Russia).

Eighteen qualified female athletes were recruited

for the study: 13 professional basketball players

(mean age – 19.5±2 years, height – 181.7±7.4 cm,

weight – 72.5±10.4 kg) and 5 biathletes (mean age –

20.8±2.3 years, height – 166.8±5.5 cm, weight –

57.8±5.6 kg). Both basketball-players as well as

biathletes had more than 7 years of training and

competitive experience and were national leaders in

their kind of sport among athletes of their age. All

tested subjects had no acute traumas or injuries, were

free of any neurological or muscular-skeletal

disorders and were admitted to perform the proposed

tests by the team medical staff. The investigation

conforms to the principles of the Declaration of

Helsinki of the World Medical Association. Subjects

involved in the study had been provided with

comprehensive information on the procedures,

methods, benefits and possible risks before their

written consent was obtained. The study protocol was

approved by the Ural Federal University Ethics

Committee (#05-2020).

2.1 Anthropometric Measurements

Anthropometric data (height and body mass) of

involved in the study athletes were measured with the

use of WB-3000 plus Digital Physicians Scale

(Tanita, Japan).

Body composition was also estimated by means

of bioimpedance analysis with the use of MC-980MA

Plus Multi Frequency Segmental Body Composition

Monitor (TANITA, Japan) based on the advanced

FDA cleared Bioelectric Impedance Analysis (BIA)

technology. The following parameters were under

consideration: body mass (kg), body mass index

(BMI), muscle mass (kg; %), fat mass (kg; %),

segmental analysis of each leg (kg; %) and muscle

mass balance.

2.2 Performance Analysis for Vertical

Jumps

The detailed analysis of complex of four types of

jumps was performed to evaluate speed-power

abilities of lower extremities as well as motor

asymmetry and body posture control.

Vertical jumps were `carried out on a force plate

TJ4002 (Marafon-Electro, Russia) which was

mounted and carefully calibrated according to

manufacturer’s specifications. Original custom-

designed software for ongoing analysis was used for

acquisition and processing of the vertical component

of the ground reaction force.

Preinstalled TJ4002 software package allowed to

analyze the following parameters: duration of

jumping phases (squat, take-off) (t, s); jump height

(cm); maximum force for take-off (N).

Separate placement of detecting elements inside

the used device (right and left parts of the force plate)

provided with graphical information on movement of

both legs simultaneously (Figure 1). This

visualization allowed to estimate motor asymmetry of

lower extremities in studied athletes.

Figure 1: Example of graphs in classic vertical

countermovement jump: the upper graph – sum of both

legs, R – right leg, L – left leg, x-axis – time (ms), y-axis –

force (N).

Before the test each participant of the study was

familiarized with the technique of each type of jump.

After appropriate 5-7 min warm up to avoid any

injury or healthcare issues during the test athletes

were given the task to make triple jumps with short

rest time between jumps:

 countermovement jumps (CMJ) with keeping

hands on the waist,

 squat jumps (SJ) with hands on the waist,

 single leg jumps on the right and left legs

bending hands on the waist,

 CMJs with arms swinging.

Vertical Jumps Performance Analysis: Implementation of Novel Complex of Jumps

Athletes were allowed to have about 1 minute rest

between the consecutive set of jumps.

Each athlete was instructed to perform the jumps

with the maximum effort. It was required to jump at

the highest possible speed and to attain the highest

point as possible. Only the best attempt from the set

of three trials of each type of jumps was further taken

into consideration for the ongoing analysis.

2.2.1 Countermovement Jumps

For correct carrying out CMJ, athletes were instructed

to perform a maximal vertical jump from upright

position on the force plate with fully extended knees

and feet shoulder-width apart. It was required to have

the arms bending on the waist and avoid any release

of the hands from the initial position.

No specific instructions were given regarding the

depth of the countermovement. Athletes were

encouraged to keep the trunk as vertical as possible.

2.2.2 Squat Jumps

Before performing vertical SJ subjects were

instructed to descend into a semi-squat position with

knees flexed at about 90 degrees and hold this

position for approximately 3 seconds before takeoff,

start jumping bending arms on the waist (Van

Hooren, 2017).

It was strongly recommended to avoid any

countermovement during the jump to have just the

concentric action of the agonist muscles involved in

the movement.

2.2.3 Countermovement Jumps with Arms

Swinging

In order to perform this type of jump correctly,

athletes were encouraged to carry out a maximal

vertical jump from an upright position with both arms

swinging simultaneously. No specific instructions

were given regarding the depth of the

countermovement.

Basically, ccountermovement jump with arms

swinging (CMJAS) is used for comparison of the

obtained data with classic countermovement jumps

with keeping hands on waist (McErlain-Naylor, 2014,

Lees, 2004). Some authors strongly recommended to

pay particular attention to arms position during the

tests and precisely describe the protocol of vertical

jump (Petrigna, 2019) as the outcome data should

consider different patterns of countermovement jump

with and without arms swinging.

In our view, the best way was to include both

types of countermovement jumps as (i) jumps with

hands on the waist is a universal test, meanwhile in

team sports there are no isolated movements: the

whole body coordination for solving the game tasks

is required; (ii) the comparison of the test results

between both jumps provided with valuable

information that is extremely useful in

comprehensive interpretation of vertical jump tests in

athletes.

2.2.4 Single-leg Vertical Jumps

Single-leg vertical jumps (SLJ) were performed to

obtain information not only about power of thigh

extensors of each leg separately, but also data on

symmetry/asymmetry (motor balance or imbalance)

of lower extremities.

It was recommended to jump on right/left leg,

standing in the center of the platform for more precise

recording of the movement. It was not allowed to

release the hands from the waist.

2.3 Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was performed with the use of

statistic software package “SPSS Statistics 17.0”

(IBM). Descriptive analysis was applied with

calculation of mean values (M), standard deviation

(SD), minimum and maximum values of the

measured variables from anthropometric analysis and

vertical jump tests.

Normality of distribution in groups was estimated

by Shapiro Wilk test. Furthermore, obtained jump test

data between groups of athletes was compared by t-

test (Student criteria). Differences were significant at

P < 0.05.

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Analysis of anthropometric data showed that

basically all studied athletes had appropriate body

composition in reference to their sports

specialization. Table 1 demonstrates descriptive data

from detailed analysis of body composition in studied

athletes and comparison of measured variables

between groups.

As one can see, there were no significant

differences between mean values of right leg muscle

mass and left leg muscles mass neither in basketball

players nor in biathletes. At the same time, it is clear,

that biathletes had higher relative muscle mass in the

whole body and in both legs in comparison with

female basketball players.

icSPORTS 2020 - 8th International Conference on Sport Sciences Research and Technology Support

Table 1: Results of detailed anthropometric analysis

(M±SD (min-max)).

Parameters Basketball-

players (n = 13)

Biathletes

(n = 5)

Height, cm 181.7±7.4

(170-192)

166.8±5.5 **

(162-174)

Body mass, kg 72.5±10.44

(58.5-98.4)

57.8±5.6 **

(52-65)

BMI, kg/m

21.9±1.9

(19.7-26.7)

20.1±1.1 **

(19-22)

Muscle mass,

53.65±5.1

(46.7-67.7)

47.4±4.1 *

(43.6-53.4)

Muscle mass, % 74.7±4,3

(66.5-82)

82.2±2.9 **

(79-86)

Fat mass, % 21.8±4.2

(15-30)

13.5±2.9 **

(9.7-17.1)

Right leg

muscle mass, kg

8.95±0.92

(7.6-11.4)

7.84±0.52

(7.2-8.4)**

Right leg

muscle mass, %

12.4±0.7

(11-13.8)

13.54±0.73

(12.6-14.5)**

Left leg muscle

mass, kg

9.1±1.01

(7.6-11.8)

7.9±0.6

(7.3-8.5)*

Left leg muscle

mass, %

12.6±0.6

(12-14)

13.64±0.7

(12.7-14.5)**

** - P < 0.01

* - P < 0.05

Results of performance analysis for vertical jumps

revealed no significant differences in

countermovement jump performance between female

basketball players and biathletes except duration of

squat and take-off phases (Table 2).

Table 2: Results of countermovement jump test (M±SD

(min-max)).

Parameters Basketball-

players

(n = 13)

Biathletes

(n = 5)

Jump height,

23.5±3.7

(19-29)

27.4±5.3

(20-33)

Maximum force

for take-off, N

1162.5±189.8

(933-1542)

1031±123.97

(904-1233)

Relative

maximum force

for take-off,

% body weight

161.5±21.5

(127.6-200.5)

180.5±16

(163.3-198.9)

Squat phase

duration, s

0.31±0.06

(0.24-0.43)

0.3±0.02 *

(0.28-0.32)

Take-off phase

duration, s

0.38±0.07

(0.27-0.48)

0.41±0.03 *

(0.37-0.44)

* - differences significant at P < 0.05

In such sport as basketball athletes require

excellent sprinting performance while the

competition in biathlon may be typing as endurance

activity. Biathletes’ tardiness in countermovement

jump performance may be explained by the typical

technique rhythm of skiing rather smooth than

propulsive. Satisfactory average values of relative

force for take-off were demonstrated by biathletes.

Although 7 basketball players developed excellent

relative force (more than 180 % body weight), the

average value was low due to its wide variation within

the group (127.6-200.5 % body weight).

Squat jump performance analysis revealed

significant differences in average relative force for

take-off. This means higher strength of knee

extensors in female biathletes (Table 3). In

comparison with countermovement jump squat jump

requires less well-developed capability to co-activate

muscles (Van Hooren, 2017) thus determines strength

of lower limbs precisely.

Table 3: Results of squat jump test (M±SD (min-max)).

Parameters Basketball-

players

(n = 13)

Biathletes

(n = 5)

Jump height,

22.6±4.4

(16-29)

25.4±4.3

(21-32)

Maximum force

for take-off, N

1065.7±197

(828-1428)

967±153

(827-1182)

Relative

maximum force

for take-off,

%body weight

134.22±41.94

(118.2-166.04)

168.4±13.4 *

(154.9-190.6)

* - differences significant at P < 0.05

Jump test with arms swinging results were

contrary to expected ones: jump height by biathletes

was significantly higher than by basketball players. In

basketball tackling manoeuvre with arms swinging is

essential, so we hoped that jump height would be

better.

Table 4: Results of countermovement jump test with arms

swinging (M±SD (min-max)).

Parameters Basketball-

players

(n = 13)

Biathletes

(n = 5)

Jump height,

29.3±3.8

(22-36)

34.8±5.2*

(27-39)

Maximum force

for

take-off, N

1065±147

(864-1329)

1025±58

(936-1069)

Squat phase

duration, s

0.3±0.03

(0.26-0.35)

0.29±0.03

(0.25-0.31)

Take-off phase

duration, s

0.4±0.06

(0.33-0.48)

0.39±0.06

(0.3-0.43)

* - differences significant at P < 0.05

Vertical Jumps Performance Analysis: Implementation of Novel Complex of Jumps

The inclusion of an arms swinging increased jump

height by approximately 8-10 cm (McErlain-Naylor,

2004). Notably, in basketball players arms swinging

increased the average jump performance only by 5.8

cm above the classic countermovement jump result

(Table 2 and Table 4).

Comparison of vertical countermovement single-

leg jump test (female basketball players vs female

biathletes) revealed statistically significant better

results in biathletes’ right single-leg jumps (height

and force) but long and smooth (Table 5) as it was

found in countermovement jumps (Table 2).

Meanwhile, results of left single-leg jump showed

the only significant difference in value of maximum

force for take-off between the groups (Table 6).

Table 5: Results of countermovement single-leg (right)

jump test (M±SD (min-max)).

Parameters Basketball-

players

(n = 13)

Biathletes

(n = 5)

Jump height, cm 13.3±3.7

(10-23)

17.2±3.1 *

(13-20)

Maximum force

for take-off, N

935±122

(731-1222)

806±72.2 *

(725-883)

Relative

maximum force

for take-off,

%body weight

120.45±76.3

(118.4-143.93)

141.14±78.4**

(131.8-151.5)

Squat phase

duration, s

0.29±0.05

(0.21-0.37)

0.34±0.07 *

(0.27-0.43)

Take-off phase

duration, s

0.42±0.08

(0.36-0.62)

0.5±0.06 *

(0.45-0.56)

* - differences significant at P < 0.05

Table 6: Results of countermovement single-leg (left) jump

test (M±SD (min-max)).

Parameters Basketball-

players

(n = 13)

Biathletes

(n = 5)

Jump height, cm 13.5±2.7

(10-21)

15.8±3.03

(13-19)

Maximum force

for take-off, N

927±118

(748-1166)

804±87.6

(703-895)*

Relative

maximum force

for take-off,

%body weight

128.65±11,15

(106.5-146.58)

140.63±90*

(127.8-153.3)

Squat phase

duration, s

0.3±0.08

(0.22-0.52)

0.32±0.05

(0.27-0.37)

Take-off phase

duration, s

0.44±0.1

(0.35-0.61)

0.53±0.11

(0.43-0.69)

* - differences significant at P < 0.05

Comparison of vertical countermovement single-

leg jump test – right leg vs left leg – revealed no

significant differences. Although, a healthy person

may jump slightly higher on one leg relative to the

other, the magnitude of the difference is assumed to

be relatively small (Lawson, 2005).

For determination of motor asymmetry in lower

extremities more attention must be paid to single-leg

jump height but not force or use different field tests:

no significant differences between the dominant and

non-dominant legs were found in the vertical jumps

tests (Newton, 2006, Yanci, 2014).

Determination of motor asymmetry is onerously

or expensive. For example, vertical jump forced test

(Impellizzeri, 2007) consists of countermovement

jumps with both legs simultaneously: one on a single

force platform, the other on a leveled wooden

platform. Kistler Co ̶ the global leader in dynamic

measurement technology for measuring pressure,

force, torque and acceleration in sport science ̶

suggested to use two force platforms for the

asymmetry research. Contrary to above mentioned

options Marathon-Electro force plate TJ4002 allows

to determine three force graphs: each leg separately

and their sum (Figure 1).

Graphical data from jump tests increased the

value of the obtained results. It was possible to

compare the movement of both legs and suggest the

amendments to athletes’ trainings.

Basically, asymmetry was assessed by

determining vertical or horizontal differences

between right and left curves with respect to axes,

indicating time and space asynchrony.

Figure 2 demonstrates an optimal pattern of squat

jump – knee extensors and core muscles were

extremely efficient, no signs of imbalance were

registered.

Figure 2: Example of an optimal vertical squat jump: the

upper graph – sum of both legs, R – right leg, L – left leg,

x-axis – time (ms), y-axis – force (N).

icSPORTS 2020 - 8th International Conference on Sport Sciences Research and Technology Support

Figure 3 detected both time asynchrony in the

phase of knee extension, as well as a lower input of

the left leg in the phase of take-off. Potentially, these

may be the consequence of the previous or chronic

injury or incomplete rehabilitation in the past. Apart

from this, we may turn our attention to low peak in

the take-off phase in both legs that is the evidence of

insufficient speed-power trainings.

Figure 3: Vertical squat jump: signs of chronic knee injury

or incomplete rehabilitation: the upper graph – sum of both

legs, R – right leg, L – left leg, x-axis – time (ms), y-axis –

force (N).

Figure 4 is a typical demonstration of motor

asymmetry of knee extensors in playing sports

athletes. Despite of normal distribution of muscle

mass in both legs, neuromuscular transmission is

inefficient which results in inability to recruit all

muscle fibers of the left leg.

Figure 4: Vertical squat jump: motor asymmetry of knee

extensors: the upper graph – sum of both legs, R – right leg,

L – left leg, x-axis – time (ms), y-axis – force (N).

Figures 5 and 6 show motor asynchrony in

countermovement jump performance. Noteworthy,

Figure 5 is an illustration of asymmetry in the final of

take-off phase, while Figure 6 shows asynchrony both

in phase of knee extension, as well as take-off phase.

Figure 5: Countermovement jump: motor asymmetry in the

take-off phase: the upper graph – sum of both legs, R – right

leg, L – left leg, x-axis – time (ms), y-axis – force (N).

Figure 6: Countermovement jump: motor asymmetry in the

phase of knee extension and take-off: the upper graph – sum

of both legs, R – right leg, L – left leg, x-axis – time (ms),

y-axis – force (N).

Our numerous undertaken research with the use of

force plate allowed to define the following statements

for fitness control in athletes:

i) Relative maximum force for take-off in the

countermovement jump should be equal to 180 % of

body weight in female athletes and 200 % - in males.

ii) Countermovement jump performance should

be better than squat jump. If not, it is strongly

recommended to devote more time to high-quality

jumping, plyometric motor tasks in order to use

effectively the elastic energy of the muscles and

tendons.

iii) The arm swinging jump should be 8-10 cm

higher than countermovement jump (hands on the

waist). If not, then learn to coordinate the actions of

the arms and legs in different jumping.

iv) Height of a single-leg vertical jump on right

and left legs should be approximately equal and not

less than 60 % of the double-leg countermovement

jump height. If the countermovement jump

performance is good, but single-leg jump is poor, then

check the core muscles strength and pay more

Vertical Jumps Performance Analysis: Implementation of Novel Complex of Jumps

attention to the core muscles development (deep back

and abdominals).

So presented interrelations between jumps height

may reveal weaknesses in an athlete in particular case

(Table 6). For example, basketball player #1 (weight

86 kg) produced 1542 H of maximum force for take-

off in the countermovement jump. So her relative

maximum force for take-off in the countermovement

jump was equal to 179,3 % that was close to desirable

180 % of body weight in female athletes. Jumps

heights were in necessary balance between each other

(CMJ>SqJ, CMJAS > CMJ and

SLJ Right = SLJ Left)

but heights of a single-leg vertical jump on right and

left leg (12 cm) were less than 60 % of the double-leg

countermovement jump height. This may be the

evidence of poor core muscles in basketball player #1.

Table 7: Height of vertical jumps in athletes, cm.

Type of

jump

Basket

ball-

player #1

Basket

ball-

player #2

Biathlete

# 1

Biathlete

# 2

CMJ 24 19 32 27

SqJ 22 17 32 27

CMJAS 32 22 39 39

SLJ R 12 10 18 15

SLJ L 12 13 19 13

Basketball player #2 (weight 74 kg) produced

1109 H of maximum force in the countermovement

jump. Relative maximum force for take-off in the

countermovement jump was only 150 % of body

weight, that was lower than necessary in female

athletes. Jumps heights were in necessary balance

between each other (CMJ>SqJ, CMJAS > CMJ) but

arm swinging doesn’t prolong the height for 8-10 cm.

So different exercises must be included in training to

coordinate the actions of the arms and legs in jumping

or other mutual movements. There was also

asymmetry in legs as SLJ Right was not equal to SLJ

Left leg.

Biathlete #1 (weight 49 kg) demonstrated good

leg strength with relative power for take-off 200 % of

body weight. The only problem in her fitness was an

inaptitude to use the elastic energy of the muscles and

tendons as her countermovement jump height was

equal to squat jump. Plyometrics was recommended

for improvement.

As the biathlete #2 is concerned there were

following aspects for fitness enhancement: legs

strength, elastic energy utilization, asymmetry in legs

(left leg was weaker than right one) and core muscles.

For more detailed information or in case of doubt

it is recommended to review the vertical jumps

graphs.

4 CONCLUSIONS

The detailed analysis of proposed set of different

vertical jumps provides with valuable information on

fitness level in athletes. It is essential to follow the

correct technical requirements when performing each

type of jump (countermovement jump, squat jump,

single-leg jumps and countermovement jump with

arm swinging) for reliable data collecting. Inclusion

of this set of jumps on the whole could be useful for

sports professionals and coaches in assessing the

speed-power abilities of lower extremities, strength of

the core muscles, posture and motor balance.

Information on inter- and intramuscular coordination

of lower extremities is available from analysis and

comparison of movement graphs.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The work was supported by Act 211 Government of

the Russian Federation, contract № 02.A03.21.0006

REFERENCES

Ashley, C.D., & Weiss, L.W., 1994. Vertical jump

performance and selected physiological characteristics

of women. In Journal of Strength & Conditioning

Research, 8, 5-11

Impellizzeri, F.M., Rampinini, E., Maffiuletti, N., &

Marcora, S.M., 2007. A vertical jump force test for

assessing bilateral strength asymmetry in athletes.

In Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 39(11),

2044-2050.

Lara, A. Abián, J. Alegre, L.M., Jiménez, L., Aguado, X.,

2006. Jump tests on a force platform for applicants to a

sports science degree. In Journal of Human Movement

Studies, 50(2), 133-147.

Lawson, B. R., 2005. Bilateral asymmetries in max effort

single-leg vertical jumps. In Biomedical sciences

instrumentation, 41, 317-322.

Lees, A., Vanrenterghem, J., & De Clercq, D., 2004.

Understanding how an arm swing enhances

performance in the vertical jump. In Journal of

biomechanics, 37(12), 1929–1940.

McErlain-Naylor, S., King, M., Pain, M., 2014.

Determinants of countermovement jump performance:

a kinetic and kinematic analysis. In Journal of Sports

Sciences, 32, 1805-1812.

Newton, R. U., Gerber, A., Nimphius, S., & Shim, J. K.,

2006. Determination of functional strength imbalance

of the lower extremities. In Journal of Strength and

Conditioning Research, 20(4), 971.

Petrigna, L., Karsten, B., Marcolin, G., Paoli, A.,

D’Antona, G., Palma, A. & Bianco, A., 2019. A Review

icSPORTS 2020 - 8th International Conference on Sport Sciences Research and Technology Support

of Countermovement and Squat Jump Testing Methods

in the Context of Public Health Examination in

Adolescence: Reliability and Feasibility of Current

Testing Procedures. In Frontiers in Physiology, 10,

1384.

Van Hooren, B., Zolotarjova, J., 2017. The Difference

between Countermovement and Squat Jump

Performances: A Review of Underlying Mechanisms

with Practical Applications. In Journal of Strength and

Conditioning Research, 31(7), 2011-2020.

Yanci, J., Los Arcos, A., Mendiguchia, J., &Brughelli, M.,

2014. Relationships between sprinting, agility, one-and

two-leg vertical and horizontal jump in soccer players.

In Kineziologija, 46(2), 194-201.

Zakharova A., Mekhdieva K., Berdnikova A., 2017.

Comprehensive Fitness Control in Young Soccer

Players - Comparison of Laboratory and Field Testing

Indicators. In: icSPORTS 2017: Proceedings of the 5th

International Congress on Sport Sciences Research and

Technology Support, 25-32.

Vertical Jumps Performance Analysis: Implementation of Novel Complex of Jumps