THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MAXIMAL STRENGTH, COUNTERMOVEMENT VERTICAL

JUMP, ACCELERATION AND CHANGE OF DIRECTION PERFORMANCE

INTRODUCTION

General intro:

In majority of sport activities the athletes never attain maximum sprinting speed. The speed over the
first steps, the ability to accelerate and change of direction (COD) would be considered of greater importance
for successful performance. Achieving maximum speed as soon as possible or possessing great acceleration
ability, has huge advantages in many sports. Researchers suggest that in compare with top level sprinters, the
acceleration phase for many athletes from other sports is much shorter (Baker & Nance, 1999).
In the researches, the jumps are generally divided into slow and fast stretch-shorten cycle (SSC)
jumps. The countermovement jump is a measure of slow (>250 ms) SSC performance and the drop jump a
measure of fast (<250 ms) performance (Hennessy & Kilty, 2001);Young & Elliot, 2001).

Specific intro:

Understanding of interrelations between abilities to display different components of speed, COD and
SSC during sprint and jump tasks is of essential importance for performance improvement in many sports.
Maximal strength, jumping performance and ability to accelerate and change direction are important abilities
in many sports. However, there is no research that identifies the extent of the relationship between
parameters strength, maximal acceleration and ability to change direction.

Therefore, the goal of the present study was to assess the relationship between maximal strength,
countermovement vertical jump, acceleration and change of direction performance in healthy young adults.
METHODS

Subjects

All subjects were physically active through their standard academic curriculum (average 4–7 classes
per week that included a low-, moderate-, and high-intensity exercises). Although none of them was a
professional athlete, note that they had a various experience with organized resistance strength training, and
therefore, a very different level of maximal strength.

The sample included the total of 30 subjects, students of the Faculty of Sport and Physical Education
(mean age 20.73 ± 1.26 years, body weight 77.4 ± 9.5 kg, body height 1.84 ± 0.07 m), All subjects during the
previous two years did not participated in professional sport, except at the level of University sport. The
participants did not report any medical problem or recent injuries that could compromise the tested
performance. Before the experiment, all participants received a complete explanation about the purpose and
procedures of the study, as well as the possible risks. Ethics Committee of the Faculty of sport and physical
education, University of Belgrade has approved the implementation of the research.

Testing procedures

All experimental measurements were carried out at the Methodical Research Laboratory of the
Faculty of Sport and Physical Education, University of Belgrade in period from 10AM until 2PM. Testing
included Anthropometric measures and performance tests. The experiment consisted of 2 testing sessions
separated by at least 3 days of rest.
The first session included anthropometric measurements and body composition assessment.
Anthropometric measures were taken according to the procedures recommended by the International Society
for the Advancement of Kin-anthropometry (Norton et al. 2000). Body height and body mass were measured
to the nearest 0.5 cm and 0.1 kg, respectively. Body composition (percentage of body fat content) was
assessed using a bioelectric impedance method (In Body 720, Biospace, Seoul, Korea). Also, in the first
session the familiarization for performance testing was performed.

Performance Testing procedures were performed in the second day and they included: maximum
strength (1RM squat test), Countermovement jump (CMJ test), acceleration (20m sprint test) and change of
direction (T-test). Standardized 30 min long warm procedures preceded every testing session and they
included medium intensity running, static and dynamic stretching as well as sprinting and jumping exercises
with gradual increase in intensity. All test were performed twice with 3 min break between the attempts.

Maximal Strength Testing. A standard procedure (McBride et al. 1999) was applied to assess the leg
extensor strength through 1RM squat test on the standard Smith machine. Before the start of the warm-up
procedure, a manual goniometer was used to visually establish the attainment of a 90˚ knee flexion angle
while squatting. The applied loading and the number of the associated warm-up sets and repetitions were as
follows: 30% (8 repetitions), 50% (4–6 repetitions), 70% (2–4 repetitions), and 90% (1 repetition) of an
estimated 1RM either based on the subjects recommendation or on calculated 1.5 times the subject’s body
mass (Logan et al. 2000). The test included 2–3 trials to assess 1RM. Each subject was asked to move the
weight upward in a controlled but forceful fashion, back to the upright position. Adequate rest was allowed
between trials (3–5 minutes).

Countermovement jump testing. The force plate (AMTI, Inc., Newton, MA, USA) was mounted and
calibrated according to the manufacturer’s specifications, while sampling frequency was set at 1000 Hz. The
guidelines provided by Vanrenterghem et al. (2001) were used for the assessment of muscle power in vertical
jumping. The instruction was to achieve the highest possible vertical jump, with the shortest duration of
ground contact. During jumps hands were placed on the hips, in order to eliminate the impact of the arm
swing (Viitasalo et al. 1998; Potache and Chua 2000; Taube et al. 2012).
 20m sprint was measured with ..............

T-test change of direction (COD) was performed on standard T-test polygon (REF) and measured
with...

The sample of variables

The sample of the variables included six variables: one repetition maximum in squat test (1RM), body mass
(BM), one repetition maximum normalized with body mass (1RM/BM0.67), peak power during concentric
phase of countermovement jump (Ppeak con CMJ), time for 20m sprint and time for T-test COD.

In order to increase the validity of the results obtained, all the data recorded in the half-squat test were
normalized in order to eliminate the influence of the body size. Data normalization was carried out in
relation to the body mass according to Jarić (2002).

Normalization of the results from 1 RM half-squat test was calculated by formula:

R = 1 RM / BW 0.67

R - Normalized value of the results in half-squat test;

1RM - one repetition maximum in half-squat test,
BW - body weight of subjects.

Statistical analysis

Descriptive statistics included the central and dispersion parameters: the arithmetic mean (M) and standard
deviation (SD). Before using the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient (r) were carried out a
preliminary analysis to test normality, linearity, homogeneity of variance and determine if there are outliers.
Outliers were determined by Box-plot. The r values in the ranges of from 0.10 to 0.29 are considered to be
low, from 0.30 to 0.49 moderate, and over 0.50 high (Cohen, 1988). The reliability of the calculated
dependent variables 20m sprint (s) and T-test (s) has been shown to be high: 20 m sprint (s) (ICC= 0,91), T
test (s) (ICC = 0,95). No significant differences were recorded among 2 consecutive trials (dependent-
samples t-test, sig. 0,406 and 0,08 respectively). The relationship between one repetition maximum (1RM),
body mass (BM), one repetition maximum normalized with body mass (1RM/BM0.67), peak power during
concentric phase countermovement jump (Ppeak con (W) CMJ), 20m sprint and T-test agility was tested with
Pearson Coeficient of linear correlation (r). The level of statistical significance was p<0.05 for all
measurements. Statistical analysis was performed by SPSS 16.0 (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA) and Excel
2003 (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, USA).
RESULTS

Basic descriptive statistics (Mean score ± SD) for anthropometric and performance variables is presented in
Table 1.

Table 1. Basic descriptive statistics of the sample

Variable Mean ± SD MIN - MAX

BH (cm)
BM (kg) 77,42 ± 9,51 60,53 - 95,69
PBF (%)
1 RM (kg) 128,17 ± 21,35 90,00 - 180,00
1RM/BM0.67 7,01 ± 1,31 4,75 - 10,50
Ppeak con (W) CMJ 227,12 ± 30,14 177,92 - 319,49
20m sprint (s) 3,23 ± 0,14 3,01 - 3,67
T-test (s) 10,32 ± 0,40 9,72 - 11,19
CMJ (cm)

Significant relationships between all performance tests are presented in Table 2.

Table 2. Significant correlations between performance tests

20m (s) T-test (s) CMJ_H

** *
Ppeak con CMJ (W) -0,47 -0,40 0,66**
T-test (s) 0,44* - -
CMJ_H -0,57** -0,50** -

(*p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01)

Maximal squat strength (1RM) was not significantly related to any of the jump, sprint or COD test
(all correlations were less than 0.2, p > 0.05). Contrary, maximal acceleration on 20m showed significant
correlation with vertical jump height, change of direction and peak concentric power in CMJ.

There is significant correlation between vertical jump performance (CMJ_H) and 20m sprint and T-
Test (p<0.01). There is a significant correlation between change of direction ablity (T-test) and 20m sprint (p
< 0.05). There is a medium-high correlation between a Ppeakcon CMJ and vertical jump height (CMJ_H).
Also, peak concentric power correlates with 20m sprint (s) (p < 0,01), and T test (s) (p <0.05) (Table 2).
DISCUSSION

The main finding of the present study is that production of peak concentric power during CMJ has
significant correlation with vertical jump, acceleration and change of direction abilities (r = -0.4 to 0.66, p <
0.05). Low to medium level of correlation was found between T-test and 20m sprint. Parameters of maximal
strength in both absolute and relative values have no significant correlation with acceleration, CMJ or COD
test.

Peak concentric power during CMJ, acceleration and COD performance

Power is considered as a fundamental ability for successful athletic performance (Kraemer et al.
2001; Potteiger et al. 1999). The assessment of power can be used to track performance changes over period
of time and determine the efficacy of training programs (Kraemer et al. 2001). The data collected in this
study would initially suggest that vertical jump, acceleration, and change of direction share common
physiological and biomechanical determinants as well as that level of concentric power production is most
important parameter. However, the coefficients of determination show that even the most significantly
correlated tests (CMJ and Ppeak con CMJ) share only 40% of common variance, while for other tests this is
even lower.
Concentric force development is essential for sprint start performance (5m sprint) and maximal
concentric jump power is related to sprint acceleration (Sleivert & Taingahue, 2004). For all three tests in our
study (CMJ, 20m and COD), peak concentric effort from leg extensor apparatus was needed for good
performance. Therefore it is logical to expect medium high correlation between CMJ power and CMJ height.
As well, negative medium correlation with 20m and COD suggest that with higher power production, time is
these tasks will be shorter. It should be noted both sprint and COD require relatively high level of running
technique and coordination in COD, so it reasonable not to expect high correlation between these test and
peak power. Therefore it is commonly accepted to analyze vertical jump, acceleration and COD as relatively
independent abilities (Little & Williams, 2005; Vescovi & Mcguigan, 2008).

CMJ and sprint/COD performance

Interestingly CMJ jump height showed the highest correlation with acceleration and COD
performance (r = -0.5 to -0.57). Our results are in line with previous studies of Young et al. (1996) who
reported that CMJ in football players is significantly related (r = -0.66) to their 20m sprint times. Cronin and
Hansen (2005) reported similar correlations (r = -0.56 to -0.62) between CMJ and 5m, 10m and 30m sprint.
The magnitude of the correlations in these studies, including the current research in the sample of students, is
surprisingly similar despite the variation in the population, training status and the sprint distance used. While
COD performance requires dominantly horizontal component, this indicates positive effects of coordinated
work of leg extensor apparatus both in vertical and horizontal testing performance. Previous report on the
sample of female volleyball players of different level showed that training dominantly in the vertical domain
may also improve certain types of COD performance (Barnes et al. 2007).
Medium correlation between 20m acceleration and COD test is in line with different previous
reports. Yet, the level of explained variance between these tests is low. Previous studies in professional
soccer players reported that acceleration, and agility are relatively independent attributes with relatively low
level of explained variance (Little & Williams, 2005). This also suggests that some other different factors
including high power production and coordination, contribute to performance in each speed test. Thus, the
predictors of sport speed on shorter distances could be quite different in compare to 100-m track sprint speed
(Cronin & Hansen, 2005). The reason for this is the running technique of athletes who participate in ball
sports, which differ from running technique of the sprinters (Young, James & Montgomery, 2002). Therefore
it is possible that the predictors of acceleration, maximal speed and COD will have some similarities, but
also could significantly vary between athletes. As well, considering high number of different COD tests, the
level of correlation between sprint and COD depends on type of the test used for change of direction.
Maximum strength

It might be assumed, due to movement patterns similarities between the squat and the vertical jump
that a significant relationship may exist between squat 1RM and CMJ. Interestingly, in present sample of
students, this was not the case. No significant relationship was found between maximal strength (1RM squat)
and speed/jump test performances. Considering low speed of execution during maximal squat test and
relatively fast execution during CMJ, these tests share very little variance with no statistical significance.
Therefore seems that they asses different strength qualities - maximum strength and speed strength. This
imply that speed strength abilities (maximal power) are significantly related to vertical jump, acceleration
and COD performance while 1RM maximal strength is not. This supports the contention that strength and
power indices are not the same (Abernethy, Wilson & Logan, 1995) and that it should be evaluated
separately (Cronin & Hansen, 2005). Also, non-existence of correlation between maximal muscle strength in
1RM squat and speed/jump tests, can be explained by the fact acceleration, COD and CMJ tests require high
level of synergistic work of entire body, while 1RM squat represent maximum strength of legs, mainly
quadriceps muscle group.

Similar results regarding the relationship of maximal strength and sprint/vertical jump ability were
reported in sample of basketball players (Alemdaroğlu, 2012). Also, It sample of rugby players, Cronin and
Hansen (2005) reported non-significant (r = -0.01 to -0.29) relationship between 3RM squat strength and the
3 acceleration tests. As well, in the sample of professional rugby players there was no significant relationship
between 3RM squat and 10m (r = -0.06) and 40m (r = -0.19) sprint performance (Baker & Nance, 1999). On
the other side, a few studies in sample of soccer players showed different results. Wisløff et al, (2004)
showed that maximal strength in half squats highly correlate with sprint and jump performance in the sample
of top level soccer players. Also, significant correlation between 1RM squat and CMJ was found in high
level American soccer players (Nuzzo et al. 2008).

Conclusion

The specificity and level of relationships between maximal strength, acceleration, COD and CMJ
may be attributable to differences in the control and coordination of several muscle groups. While most of
the significant correlations are low to medium, it should be noted that very small amount of variance can be
explained between the performed tests. We must have in mind that correlations can only provide us an
insights about associations and they will explain cause and effects. Therefore, regarding the practical
applications we must have this in mind.
The results showed that single strength measure such as 1RM squat cannot adequately express or
provide insight into all the mechanisms responsible for sport performance. However, It does not mean that
parameter such as maximum strength is not important for performance or staying injury free. The complex
mechanism regarding the inter-relations between maximum strength, acceleration, COD and jump
performance is still not completely clear. While in some samples researchers reported high importance of one
parameter for another, in different sample this may not be the case.

.....
REFERENCES

1. Abernethy, P., Wilson, G., & Logan, P. (1995). Strength and power assessment. Sports
medicine, 19(6), 401-417.
2. Alemdaroğlu, U. (2012). The relationship between muscle strength, anaerobic performance, agility,
sprint ability and vertical jump performance in professional basketball players. Journal of human
kinetics, 31, 149-158.
3. Baker, D., & Nance, S. (1999). The Relation Between Running Speed and Measures of Strength and
Power in Professional Rugby League Players. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning
Research, 13(3), 230-235.
4. Barnes, J. L., Schilling, B. K., Falvo, M. J., Weiss, L. W., Creasy, A. K., & Fry, A. C. (2007).
Relationship of jumping and agility performance in female volleyball athletes. The Journal of
Strength & Conditioning Research, 21(4), 1192-1196.
5. Hennessy, L., & Kilty, J. (2001). Relationship of the stretch-shortening cycle to sprint performance
in trained female athletes. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 15(3), 326-331.
6. Kraemer, W. J., Mazzetti, S. A., Nindl, B. C., Gotshalk, L. A., Volek, J. S., Bush, J. A., ... & Fleck, S.
J. (2001). Effect of resistance training on women’s strength/power and occupational
performances. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 33(6), 1011-1025.
7. Little, T. & Williams A. G. (2005). Specificity of acceleration, maximum speed, and agility in
professional soccer players. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 19(1), 76–78.
8. McBride, J. M., Triplett-McBride, T. R. A. V. I. S., Davie, A., & Newton, R. U. (1999). A
Comparison of Strength and Power Characteristics Between Power Lifters, Olympic Lifters, and
Sprinters. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 13(1), 58-66.
9. Nuzzo, J. L., Mcbride, J. M., Cormie, P., & Mccaulley, G. O. (2008). Relationship between
countermovement jump performance and multijoint isometric and dynamic tests of strength. The
Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 22(3), 699-707.
10. Potteiger, J. A., Lockwood, R. H., Haub, M. D., Dolezal, B. A., Almuzaini, K. S., Schroeder, J. M., &
Zebas, C. J. (1999). Muscle power and fiber characteristics following 8 weeks of plyometric
training. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 13, 275-279.
11. Sleivert, G., & Taingahue, M. (2004). The relationship between maximal jump-squat power and
sprint acceleration in athletes. European journal of applied physiology, 91(1), 46-52.
12. Vanrenterghem, J., De Clercq, D., & Cleven, P. V. (2001). Necessary precautions in measuring
correct vertical jumping height by means of force plate measurements. Ergonomics, 44(8), 814-818.
13. Vescovi, J. D., & Mcguigan, M. R. (2008). Relationships between sprinting, agility, and jump ability
in female athletes. Journal of Sports Sciences, 26(1), 97-107.
14. Viitasalo, J. T., Salo, A., & Lahtinen, J. (1998). Neuromuscular functioning of athletes and non-
athletes in the drop jump. European journal of applied physiology and occupational
physiology, 78(5), 432-440.
15. Wisløff, U., Castagna, C., Helgerud, J., Jones, R., & Hoff, J. (2004). Strong correlation of maximal
squat strength with sprint performance and vertical jump height in elite soccer players. British
journal of sports medicine, 38(3), 285-288.
16. Young, W. B., James, R., & Montgomery, I. (2002). Is muscle power related to running speed with
changed of direction?. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 42(3), 282.
17. Young, W. B., Pryor, J. F., & Wilson, G. J. (1995). Effect of Instructions on characteristics of
Countermovement and Drop Jump Performance. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning
Research, 9(4), 232-236.
18. Young, W., & Elliott, S. (2001). Acute effects of static stretching, proprioceptive neuromuscular
facilitation stretching, and maximum voluntary contractions on explosive force production and
jumping performance. Research quarterly for exercise and sport, 72(3), 273-279.
19. Young, W., Hawken, M., & McDonald, L. (1996). Relationship between speed, agility and strength
qualities in Australian Rules football. Strength Cond Coach, 4(4), 3-6.