Comparison of the Vertec and Just Jump Systems for Measuring Height of Vertical Jump by Young Children
53
Citation
7
Reference
10
Related Paper
Citation Trend
Abstract:
To assess differences between the Vertec and the Just Jump Systems in measuring height of vertical jump, 248 boys and 232 girls between 7 and 11 years were required to perform four maximal countermovement vertical jumps. A maximum of the four trials recorded was the dependent variable. Each vertical jump was simultaneously evaluated by each measuring device and a paired t test indicated the systems were significantly different; however, the experiment wise difference of .93 in has no practical value. The Just Jump System seems a viable alternative. Advantages and potential pitfalls regarding the use of each system are discussed.Keywords:
Vertical jump
Countermovement
Value (mathematics)
To assess differences between the Vertec and the Just Jump Systems in measuring height of vertical jump, 248 boys and 232 girls between 7 and 11 years were required to perform four maximal countermovement vertical jumps. A maximum of the four trials recorded was the dependent variable. Each vertical jump was simultaneously evaluated by each measuring device and a paired t test indicated the systems were significantly different; however, the experiment wise difference of .93 in has no practical value. The Just Jump System seems a viable alternative. Advantages and potential pitfalls regarding the use of each system are discussed.
Vertical jump
Countermovement
Value (mathematics)
Cite
Citations (53)
Vertical jump testing is a commonly used method for measuring an individual’s anaerobic (explosive) power (Markovic, et al., 2004). Reliable and repeatable assessment of the vertical jump has implications in many health, wellness, and physical activity domains. The Vertec™ and force plate (gold standard) are devices used for accurately measuring vertical jump height; research conducted on these devices have shown their validity in measuring jump height (Buckthorpe, et al. 2012). The force plate and the Vertec™, although accurate at measuring vertical jump height, are costly and not easily accessible to many coaches and the general public. An accurate and accessible field measure would allow assessment of vertical jump height and power in many settings. PURPOSE: The purpose of this experiment was to examine the reliability and validity of the My Jump app (utilized on Ipad mini) compared to the Vertec™. METHODS: Sixty-five college-aged participants performed three maximal countermovement vertical jumps. A Vertec™ measurement device was used in conjunction with the My Jump app to measure jump height. Jump heights from the Vertec™ were then correlated to those from the My Jump app. Peak power values were calculated using the Sayers equation (Sayers et al. 1999). The Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient was determined between the jump heights measured by the Vertec™ and the My Jump app. RESULTS: The average jump height measured by the Vertec™ 20.1 in. (5.4) was significantly higher than the height from My Jump app 16.1 in. (4.5). A strong and significant correlation was found between the two height measurements, r=0.814, p<0.01 and for peak power measures r=0.933 p<0.01. CONCLUSIONS: The My Jump app may provide a reliable measure of vertical jump height in multiple settings without the need of costly equipment such as force plates or Vertec™. We chose to compare the My Jump app to the Vertec™ because the Vertec™ is more commonly used to measure jump height due to the expense compared to a force plate.The lower height values using My Jump app may stem from the fact that subjects reach for the rungs on the Vertec™ while My Jump app measures the flight time to determine the vertical height of the center of mass. However, the ease of use and portability makes the app an accessible tool for measuring jump height in multiple settings.
Vertical jump
Force platform
Cite
Citations (1)
Vertical jump
Plyometrics
Cite
Citations (9)
The countermovement jump is commonly used to assess an athlete's neuromuscular capacity. The aim of this study was to identify the mechanism behind the strong correlation between jump height and mechanical power in a countermovement jump. Three athletes each performed between 47 and 60 maximal-effort countermovement jumps on a force platform. For all three athletes, peak mechanical power and average mechanical power were strongly correlated with jump height (r = 0.54–0.90). The correlation between jump height and peak power was largely determined by the correlation between jump height and the velocity at peak power (r = 0.83–0.94) and was not related to the correlation between jump height and the ground reaction force at peak power (r = −0.20–0.18). These results confirm that the strong correlation between jump height and power is an artefact arising from how power is calculated. Power is a compound variable calculated from the product of instantaneous ground reaction force and instantaneous velocity, and application of statistical theory shows that the correlation between jump height and power is artificially inflated by the near-perfect correlation between jump height and the velocity at peak power. Despite this finding, mechanical power might still be useful in assessing the neuromuscular capacity of an athlete.
Countermovement
Ground reaction force
Force platform
Vertical jump
Cite
Citations (25)
Fifteen subjects, 21–62 years old, participated in a 6-week toe flexor strengthening program using the archxerciser. Pre-and posttraining data for toe strength, vertical jump height simultaneously using the Just Jump and Vertec, and horizontal jump distance were collected for both control and exercise legs. Post hoc paired sample t-tests (p < 0.05) indicated significant improvement in all categories. This supported the hypothesis that the unconventional method of strength training the toe flexors should be considered a valuable adjunct in a training program designed to enhance vertical or horizontal jump ability. The relationship of different testing methods was also assessed. A Pearson correlation coefficient showed a significant (0.001 level) correlation when simultaneously using the Vertec and Just Jump to quantify vertical jump performance. A significant (0.01 level) correlation between individual performance in the vertical and horizontal jump was also identified. These results indicate that the tester is not restricted to a single testing device or method for assessment of jump performance.
Vertical jump
Long jump
Cite
Citations (16)
The aim of this study was to identify the determinants of peak power achieved during vertical jumps in order to clarify relationship between the height of jump and the ability to exert maximum power.One hundred young (16.8±1.8 years) sportsmen participated in the study (body height 1.861 ± 0.109 m, body weight 80.3 ± 9.2 kg). Each participant performed three jump tests: countermovement jump (CMJ), akimbo countermovement jump (ACMJ), and spike jump (SPJ). A force plate was used to measure ground reaction force and to determine peak power output. The following explanatory variables were included in the model: jump height, body mass, and the lowering of the centre of mass before launch (countermovement depth). A model was created using multiple regression analysis and allometric scaling.The model was used to calculate the expected power value for each participant, which correlated strongly with real values. The value of the coefficient of determination R2 equalled 0.89, 0.90 and 0.98, respectively, for the CMJ, ACMJ, and SPJ jumps. The countermovement depth proved to be a variable strongly affecting the maximum power of jump. If the countermovement depth remains constant, the relative peak power is a simple function of jump height.The results suggest that the jump height of an individual is an exact indicator of their ability to produce maximum power. The presented model has a potential to be utilized under field condition for estimating the maximum power output of vertical jumps.
Countermovement
Vertical jump
Force platform
Takeoff
Ground reaction force
Power function
Cite
Citations (32)
Abstract The aim of this study was to examine the effects of arm‐swing and sporting activity on jump height and jump height variability of countermovement jumps in adolescent students to inform correct jumping technique in different settings. Altogether, 324 students (grades 5–11) performed three countermovement jumps with bilateral arm‐swings and three countermovement jumps without arm‐swings on a force platform. The participants were divided into three groups based on sporting activity. The groups with the most (“active group”; more than 6 h formal athletics in a sport club per week) and least active (“sedentary group”; less than 3 h formal athletics in a sport club per week) participants were compared. Jump height was calculated for all jumps, and the best trial of three was used for further analysis. Jump height variability was indicated by the coefficient of variation over three jumps. The reliability of jump height was determined using the intra‐class correlation coefficient (ICC) over three trials of each jumping technique. The reliability of jump height was very high for all conditions (ICC: 0.90–0.96). Jump height was significantly higher for countermovement jumps with than without arm‐swings for both groups. Jump height in the active group was significantly greater than in the sedentary group for both jumping techniques. A significant interaction between jumping technique and sporting activity indicates a greater benefit of arm‐swing in the active than in the sedentary participants. No significant differences between groups were observed for jump height variability. Jump height can be measured reliably in active and sedentary adolescent individuals for both jumping techniques. The relevant jumping technique should be chosen with respect to the context of its application and based on its suitability for the individual and task of interest.
Countermovement
Cite
Citations (24)
The ability to generate lower body explosive power is considered an important factor in many athletic activities. Thirty-one men and women, recreationally trained volunteers, were randomly assigned to 3 different groups (control, n = 10; VertiMax, n = 11; and depth jump, n = 10). A Vertec measuring device was used to test vertical jump height pre- and post-training. All subjects trained twice weekly for 6 weeks, performing approximately 140 jumps. The VertiMax group increased elastic resistance and decreased volume each week, while the depth jump group increased both box height and volume each week. The depth jump group significantly increased their vertical jump height (pre: 20.5 ± 3.98; post: 22.65 ± 4.09), while the VertiMax (pre: 22.18 ± 4.31; post: 23.36 ± 4.06) and control groups (pre: 15.65 ± 4.51; post: 15.85 ± 4.17) did not change. These findings suggest that, within the volume and intensity constraints of this study, depth jump training twice weekly for 6 weeks is more beneficial than VertiMax jump training for increasing vertical jump height. Strength professionals should focus on depth jump exercises in the short term over commercially available devices to improve vertical jump performance.
Vertical jump
Cite
Citations (50)
The vertical jump is a functional activity for sports performance. Different devices can measure and calculate vertical jump. The Vertec utilizes a jump and reach method. The jump mats calculate jump height by measuring air time. The purpose of this study was to examine the correlation between these two types of vertical jump height measurements. Also, to examine the effect of gender, height and weight may have on these measurements. A jump mat and Vertec were utilized at the student health fair of a state University in Florida. Seventy-six college students and faculty (57 males and 19 females) participated in the vertical jump height measurements. Subjects had a mean age of 21.86 ( ± 6.39) years, mean weight of 163.11 ( ± 35.39) pounds, and mean height of 69.20 ( ± 3.88) inches. When measuring vertical jump, each of these two measurement techniques provided a significant correlation when examining height, weight and sex as variables. Each variable had a significant correlation. Weight alone did not have an effect on the Pearson correlation between the devices (860). Height and weight combined reduced the correlation to 735. When testing individuals with varying heights and weights, the correlation between the devices decreased. For test retest, the same type of vertical jump height measuring device is recommended.
Vertical jump
Positive correlation
Long jump
Cite
Citations (2)
Background: A fundamental relationship between power and strength exist and is the foundation of power output. Vertical jump and weightlifting have many similarities including movement biomechanics. Both countermovement jump and weightlifting exercises uses stretch shortening cycle. Squat jump generally produce lower jump height then countermovement jump and do not include the stretch shortening cycle. Few studies have investigated if there is a correlation between one-repetition maximum in clean and maximal jump height in countermovement jump and squat jump and investigated if the result is equal in men and women. Aim: The purpose of this study was to investigate if there was a correlation between one-repetition maximum in clean and maximal jump height in countermovement jump and squat jump. The secondary purpose was to investigate if the correlation between one-repetition in clean and maximal jump height in countermovement jump and squat jump was equal in men and women. Method: Seventeen healthy subjects (n=17), nine males and eight women (age; 32.6 ± 9.4) completed the study. The study included two sessions, the first session was a one-repetition maximum test in clean and the second session was a vertical jump test including countermovement and squat jump. Both sessions included a dynamic warm up and the one-repetition maximum test also included a specific warm up. Result: The result showed a very strong significant correlation between one-repetition maximum in clean and maximal jump height in countermovement jump (r=0.77, p=0.000) and squat jump (r=0.72, p=0.001) in the combined group of men and women. When separating men and women the result showed no statistically significance moderate to strong correlations between one-repetition maximum in clean and maximal jump height in countermovement jump (men: r=0.45, p=0.229; women: r=0.59, p=0.121) and squat jump (men: r=0.40, p=0.320; women: r=0.46, p=0.209). Conclusion: Findings from this study show that there is a very strong significant correlation between one-repetition maximum in clean and maximal jump height in countermovement and squat jump in the combined group of men and women. When separating men and women the result was in the range of a moderate to strong correlation but not statistically significant. Therefore more research is needed in this area and a larger sample size is recommended to further investigate if the correlation is equal between one-repetition maximum in clean and maximal jump height in countermovement and squat jump in men and women.
Countermovement
Squat
Vertical jump
One-repetition maximum
Cite
Citations (0)