I r ^ ^ l J 23-«, 198/

« öy 1 A.A F

TECHNICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL

CONSIDERATIONS ON THE JUMPS

Elio Locatelli

This paper was presented at the
lOlh Iniernutiofud Track & Field
Coaches Association Congress held in
Buenos Aires in November 1986. Elio
Locatelli is now the head coach ofthe
Indian Women's Athletic Teams. The
aulhor deals in pai'licular with the
jumps in which the horizontal velocity
is the determining factor, i.e. long
jump, triple jump and pole vaulting.
Having examined the characterislics of
these disciplines, he illusirales the
Italian iraining methodology. « •
Translated hy Alessandra Lombardi
Introduction
Jumps include an approach run. end-
ing with a take-off aclion Ihal transmits a
lifting inipuKe to the alhlete's cenire of
gravity (CO). The relalionship bel-
ween the horizontal velocity (Vx). ac-
quired during the approach run. and
the vertical velocity (Vy), given lo the
centre of gravity at lake-off. deter-
mines the length or height of the jump.
Consequently, the angle of flighi (or
angle of projection of the CG) is acute
when the Vx is higher (longjump. tri-
ple jump) and obtuse when the Vy is
higher (high jump). I ihink il neces-
sary, at this point, to lisl a few of the
basic notions of physics (Table 1).
These enable us to carry out a number
of useful calculations lo deiermine the
essential features of the jumps.
During the approach run the alhlete
Iries to progress towards the speed that
is optimal for his take-off capacity. To
this end. the athlele should remain re-
laxed during the final phase of the ap-
proach run. increase the stride fre- 23
 quency and maintain a high knee lift.
In the preparalion for lake-off (last
strides), he should straighten the
trunk, sustaining both speed and stride
frequency. In ihe last stride of the pre-
paralion for lake-off. the heel touches
down first in the case of a high jump
(Straddle or Flop 2). while the ball of
the foot touches down first in the case
of the pole vault, the triple jump, long
jump or high jump (Flop 1). At the
peak of the negative phase, the knee
joint is strongly flexed, in the case of
the high jump (Straddle and Flop 2)
less in the Flop I or the long jump and
only slightly Hexed (compared lo the
running stride) in the triple jump or
pole vault. The last stride of the ap-
proach run is usually shorter than the
previous one, nearer lo the ground,
and therefore swifter, and the take-off
leg touches down well ahead ofthe pro-
jection of the CG on the ground.
On the basis of the duralion and the
direclion of the take-off we can ap-
praise the difference between the four
jumping disciplines. These paramet-
ers, together with the anthropomeiri-
cal measurements of the athlele. allow
us lo select the appropriate somatotype
for specialization in each discipline
(see Table 2).
The flight; as we know, once the
jumper loses contact wilh the ground,
it is no longer possible to change Ihe
path of the centre of gravity. The
jumper can only move segments of his
body so that they change their posiiion
relative lo the CG; the high jumper
must resist the rotational movement
created during the lake-off in order to
bring his entire body over the bar,
while the long jumper must dominate
the forward rolalion. As for the pole
vault, only the approach run and the
take-off show the characteristics of the

Tablet

BASIC NOTIONS OF PHYSICS

V,.= Vx- + Vy' Ek=-

Vx
Cos a = a can be obtained using Ihe special tables
Vo

Vy'
h= —— comesfromtheformulaoftheuniformlyacceleratedrectilinearmotion
2 8 that is
V y = \ 7 2 g • If

where
Ek = kinelic energy
V„ = resultant velocity (when the athlete leaves the ground)
a = angle of flight (or angle of projection ofthe CG)
h= height of flight (maximum height attained during the CG's parabola)
Vx = horizontal velocity
Vy = vertical velocity
•4*-= timoofllighi
S = y,SI m/s-
24
Table 2

CHARACTERISTICS OFTHE FOUR JUMPS

Event Take-off Approach Angle of Morphologic Anthropometric Measurements

lime !ipeed (m/sec) night lype Hcighi Weight

LONGJUMP 0.105-0,115 10.5-11.5 l5"-24" normotype from m 1.75 from kg 64

(over 8m) longitype torn 1.85 to kg 78

TRIPLE JUMP hop = 0.13 = 10.50 .17" normotype from m 1,75 from kg 68
(over 17m) step = 0.15 = 9.60 14- longitype lorn 1.90 to kg 82
jump = 0,17 = 8,70 IT

•
a- = MT 1^ da kg 72
•d'= 16"-18" 1.90 a kg 85

I OLE VAULTING from 0.115 = 9,8

(over5.5Um) (Vigneron) (Trafimenco)
to0,140 = 10 longitype from m 1,80 from kg 72
(Tully), (Bubka) torn I.^'11 tnkg82

a' = as wide
as possible

HIGH JUMP
a) -Fiop" I
(over2.3Üm) 0.15-0.21 from 8 to 8,70 55"-65" longitype from m 1.90 from kg 70
torn 2.03 to kg 80
b)"nop2"
"Straddle" 0.18-0.24 from 7 to 7,80 60"-7tr longitype from m 1,85 from kg 74
(over 2.30) to m 1,95 to kg 82

to
'-/I
 \\ —1^
LI = 4% = 33.2tm
L2 = 89% = 738.7cm
U = 7% = 58. k m
= 830.0cni
Fig. I • Kinematic analysis of ihe j u m p
jumping disciplines; after that, the
athlete's movements are dictated by
the implemenl. The French, very
rightly, describe pole vaulters as "gym-
na^^s moving around a particular im-
plemenl called a pole".
In my opinion, there is another, fun-
damental distinction belween the four
jumps:
— extension jumps (longjump. triple
jump and pole vaulting); in these
disciplines, top level performances
are determined by the horizontal
component (Vx);
— elevation jumps (high jump); al-
lhough the Flop technique allows
greater speed during the approach-
run, the decisive factor here re-
mains the vertical velocity gener-
ated at lake-off Vy).
We will here examine in detail only
26 the extension jumps.
V. = use of Ihe "closing" lechnique in Ihe landing
(Ihe higher Ihe value nf K, the better Ihe landing
lechnii|ue|
Characteristics
of the extension jumps
Long Jutnp
Top level results tn the long jump are
lied 10 Ihe lake-off speed (Vx) and to
the time the athlete employs to per-
form the take-off actions. We can
therefore affirm that the take-off time
is a performance-limiting factor. The
athlete's mtncmcnts during the flight
can only help him maintain his balance
so thai he may bring his pelvis forward,
ahead of his shoulders, in preparation
for a good landing. I should like lo un-
derline that neither the "hang"
technique nor the "hitch-kick"
technique offers a specific advantage,
since high level results have been ob-
tained with both.
Figure 1 shows an 8.30m jump and il-
histratesthe respective influence of the
impulse al take-off (L2), ofthe landing
technique (L3) and of the angle of Ihe
take-off leg at the beginning of ihe
flighi.
Triple jump
In recent years, mulliple bounds
(from 3 to 10) have become an essential
part of the iraining of all sprinters and
jumpers.
There is an unquestionable, signifi-
cant, relationship between the im-
provemenls registered in the tesls thai
athleles perform periodically with
bounding exercises, and iheir sprinting
capacity.
However, this should not lead us to
believe that this type of training, now
widely used, can provide us with a large
number of alhletes who can achieve
good results in a triple jump competi-
tion.
An athlele cannol undertake the
necessary specializalion wilhoul hav-
ing first strengthened his muscles and
tendons and before his bone structure
has settled. This to avoid joinl injuries
that remain, unfortunately, quite fre-
quent in this discipline.
Withoul dealing here with the pre-
cautions Ihat should be laken to avoid
irreversible injuries in adolescents
when they first learn ihe movements,
we shall examine lhc tundamenlals of
Ihe triple jump lechnique. For begin-
ners, the jump is based on speed,
rhythm and co-ordination, but the
basic qualilies for specialization are
speed, slrenglh and two psychological
factors; perseverance and motivation.
The masters of this discipline are un-
doubtedly the Soviets, lead by Vitold
Kreyer. former world record holder,
now acknowledged as one of the major
experts in this field. We should re-
member that the leading school used to
be the Polish one with the coach
Tadeus Starzynski and Joseph
Schmidt, the firsi athlete ever to jump
17m.
Apart from these two "scientific"
schools, 1 wish lo mention some
athletes that I consider more natural,
in the sense that they do nol follow
rigorously the precepts of the
abovementioned schools. The Brazi-
lians have a great tradition, from Fer-
reira Da Silva, Prudencio. to ihe
former world record holder. De
Oliveira. Meist of the North American
athleles also come under this same
heading, the presenl world record hol-
der. Banks; the 1984 Olympic Champ-
ion. Al Joyner, and Mike Conley,
whom I consider one of the mosl skil-
led jumpers. The Cuban alhletes,
headed by Betancourt. tollow ihe
Soviet school.
The ouisianding difference between
thc "natural * alhletes and the Soviet
athleles is that the preparation of the
latter is based mainly on strength train-
ing (this is obvious from their muscle
structure), while the other athleles
make the mosl ofolher qualilies, speed
and elasticity. Consequently, the
rhythmic structure of the performances
is different.
The percentages suggested by
Kreyer for hop-slep-jump. respec-
tively, in all efforts over 17m are: 37%
- 30% - 33% = 6.30- 5.10- 5.60 (17m);
he advises the same subdivision for an
18m jump: 6.70 - 5.40 - 5.90 = 37% -
30% - 33%. When De Oliveira set the
world record, his jump was subdivided
as follows: 35% - 317o - 34% = 6.26 -
5.54-6.09= 17.89.
These figures were given me by De
Oliveira's coach. Pedro Toledo, The
results of foul (and questionable) 27
 jumps performed al Moscow are
around I8m; it should be meniioned
that al the lime, this athlele suffered
from pains in the back and in the
periosteum. In any case, the structure
of his jump was: 6.50 - 5,20 - 6.30 =
36% - 29% - 35%,
This data and the results of other
tesls on bounds and speed clearly indi-
cate that the preparalion of these
athletes is mainly directed towards
speed iraining without loads, while the
tests described by Kreyer show that the
training of the Soviet athletes is based
on strength training; Piskulin. for in-
stance, weighed 75 kg and he was able
lo perform a full squat with 170 kg. Dif-
ferent physical qualities naturally lead
toa numberof differences in the jump-
ing technique, especially in the arm ac-
tion. This varies from a predominance
of the double arm action in the Soviet
school to the mixed lechnique used by
De Oliveira; alternate arm action in
the hop and double arm action in the
step,
Il was nol a random choice; De
Oliveira aimed to make the best possi-
ble use ofthe speed acquired during his
approach run, he iherefore chose the
movemenis that minimized the reduc-
lion of his lake-off speed.
As for the Italian experience, we
have a sound tradition, from Cavalli,
Gentile, Mazzuccato to BadinelM who
recorded 17.12m in 1986.
Pole Vaulting
As we mentioned earlier, in the pole
vault the athlete's position and actions
in the various phases of the jump are
conditioned by the implemenl; so we
shall begin with a few introductory re-
28 marks on the implement itself and on
how the athlete can exploit its proper-
ties.
First of all is the "grip height". The
grip height of lop level alhletes varies
from 4,9()m (Vigneron) to 5,l2m
(Bubka). Thc world record holder uses
a 220lbs Pacer Pole, that is 17ft and
4.5in long (5,30m). The grip height is
measured from the point of the pole to
the upper arm (the right arm for lefl
foot jumpers and vice versa). The dif-
ference between the athlete's personal
best and his grip height (minus the
20cm of the box) is an important
parameter for pole vaulters; it is called
the "efficiency index". The index of
top level athletes varies from 80cm to
Im.
The grip height also determines the
distance between the take-off mark
and the box. Bubka lakes-off at 4.30m
from Ihe box. Vigneron at 4,10m. The
Italian indoor record holder, Gianni
Stecchi, uses a I9()lbs Pacer pole; his
grip heighl is 4.80m and his lake-off is
al 3.8()m from the box. The factors
affecting performances in pole vaulting
can easily be deduced from the compa-
rison of these figures.
An important preliminary operation
is the identification of the pole's most
llexible point. This should be situated
to the letl of the box (for left fool jum-
pers and viceversa for right fool jum-
pers) when the pole is fully flexed. If
the implemenl is new, this part is not
always easy lo find, but il is advisable
to put a mark im it and check the pole's
arc before jumping.
There are no rules limiting the lenglh
or rigidily of the pole: these vary ac-
cording to the athlete's expertise and to
his physical structure. Research on the
materials used for poles is aimed at ob-
taining implements as light and flexible
as possible.
 It is essential for pole vaulters to
build up a running speed, when carry-
ing the pole, that is very close to their
maximum speed withoul the pole. It is
not only a question of the implement's
weighl, but also of the fact that it must
be carried in an asymmetrical posiiion.
thus putting the alhlete off-balance.
Therefore, beginners should im-
mediately be taught an adequate run-
ning lechnique without concentrating
only on increasing the maximum
speed. The lake-off speed is a deter-
mining factor in pole vaulting since the
lake-off angle is directly related to it.
The take-off speed of top level vaulters
is 9-lOm/sec; so their resultant velocity
(Vo) on the path of the vault is 8-8.5m/
sec.
The preparalion for the plant. The
athlete should begin this phase in the
last two or three strides of the approach
run in order to direct the pole towards
the rear of the box and assume the cor-
rect posiiion for the take-off. This is
the most delicate phase of the whole ef-
fort; in facl, the cause of most unsuc-
cessful jumps is a delayed preparation
for the plant. The pole musl be planted
inlo the rear of the box with a driving
aclion of the left arm before the athlete
completes his last siride; the right arm
then pushes it up. It is only al this point
that the greater part of the momentum
is transferred lo the pole.
If this phase is performed correctly,
the chances are the jump will be a good
one, as long as the athlete's liming is
accurate in the successive phases: rock
back, pull-up, push and clearance.
In the last 6-8 approach strides, the
athlele should increase the stride rale,
lifting the knees higher, to assist the
preparation of the plant and the take-
off.
The vaulter's aim in this phase is to
flex the pole withoul. however, hold-
ing on lo it too long since this would
lower its speed of return to the vertical
and negatively influence the pull-up
phase. For an efficient plant/take-off,
the pole should be posilioned exactly
on the running axis; the hand spacing
should be adequate (belween 60 and 80
cm); Ihe angle belween the pole and
the ground al take-off should be as
wide as possible; obviously, this angle
depends mostly on the athlete's stand-
ing height.
The direclion ofthe impulse at lake-
off is difficult to establish and may vary
according lo the vaulter's skill and lo
the conditions of a particular compeli-
lion. In any case, the take-off angle
should be around 16-18 degrees.The
point of take-off is a very importanl
factor and should be roughly in line
with the upper hand.
The sum of the forces applied to the
pole, causing it to flex, is in the first
phase equal to the kinetic energy built
up during the approach run, multiplied
by the co-sinus of alpha:
mV
Ek = cos a
and then:
mV
Ek = sin a
where a is the angle belween the axis of
the pole and the direction of the vaul-
ter's impulse al take-off (AB), see
Table 1.
The take-off lasts about 0.14-0.16
seconds; when co-sinus a increases,
sinus a decreases and vice versa.
In the case of lop level jumpers, the 29
 angle (u 2) belween the pole's horizon-
tal axis and Ihe curve formed in the seg-
ment contained in the hand grip is ap-
proximately 30 degrees; the angle of
projeclion of the CG al take-off is
about 16-18 degrees. The sum of these
two angles gives us the initial angle of
tlight: here 46-48 degrees.
Having completed the lake-off. the
vaulter begins the phase of "penetra-
tion" in Ihe pole. It consists in rocking
movements from the hand grip under
thc pole, with the lower arm more or
less static. Al this poinl ihe curve of the
pole will be approximately 56-58 de-
grees from ils axis (a straight line from
thecentreof ihegrip tolhe poinl of the
implement).
1 he speed of return to the vertical is
conditioned by the following factors:
I - a) the kinetic energy built up dur-
ing thc approach run and applied
to the pole:
mV
Ek =
b) the angle a I that is deiermined
by the accuracy of the planl and by
the vaulter's standing heighl;
c) the forces exerled at lake-off;
2 - the centripetal force - the vaul-
ter's body acting on the pole dur-
ing the rock back: Fu = n- R-w";
3 - the force of inertia - the acce-
leralion influencing Ihe vaulter's
body during ihe rock back;
F u = m • R ^E.
During ihe following phase, the
"rock back", the vaulter musl first
bring his take-off leg parallel to his free
leg and then tuck them bolh up near
the hands (this action comes easily if
M) thelowerarmvields to the movement).
The vaulter then immediately pro-
ceeds to Ihe "pull up": as the pole ap-
proaches the vertical, he extends his
legs bringing his CG in line with the
axis of projection, so that he profits
from all the energy that the pole ac-
cumulated when it was fiexed.
The pole catapults Ihe vaulter up-
wards; when his hips reach the level of
his upper arm. he performs a quarter
turn around the pole. This is thc begin-
ning ofthe "push" phase. The pushing
aclion of the upper arm marks Ihe end
of the athlete's upward motion and al-
lows him lo clear the bar with his abdo-
men which he has pulled in. his head is
benl slightly forward.
He will then complete the action
wilh a rapid movement of his upper
arm towards the shoulder.
There are two clearance techniques:
the "jack-knife" and the "tly-away".
The first one allows very skilled
athleles to jump one or two centime-
tres more, bul il requires very rapid
movements. while the second
technique is. on the whole, safer.
Training melhodology
The results of Italian long jumpers
and triple jumper, shown in the 1986
rankings list (see Table 3). allow us to
believe that the training melhod we fol-
low is the right one.
Table 4 shows that performances in
the extension jumps are deiermined by
the following factors:
— speed;
— take-off capacity;
— lechnique.
In regard to speed, it is interesting to
observe the different types of power
exerted during the two phases of sprint
running (Fig, 2):
 Table 3

ITALIAN I98li RANKINGS U S T

Longjump (indoor 1 outdoor) Triple jump (indoorlouiäoor)

1) Fvangelisti 8.24 I) Badinclli 17.12
1) Secchi '8.04 2) Challiuifin 16.39
3) Cheruhini(l) 7.94 3) Mazzutcato(l) 16..33
4) Hiscarini 7.90 4) Cecconi 16.31
5) Zuneheddu 7.78 5) Biscarini 16.29
6) Fanlon 7.71 ft) Piapan(l) 16.16
7) Muranod) 7>71 7) Chierici 16.16
8) Furlanid) 7.69 8) Parigi 16.12
M) Bertoshi 7.65 9) Buttiglione 16.00
10) Hccalti 7.62 10) Di Lidilo 15.99
jvcragc jump 7.828 average jump 16.287

(H)m

Fi|>. 1 - DUTeri-ni I,tpe> ol poitur <ilili>alioii in the lIHIm race; lhe^eetioll It is (lie one- (hat s p i ' i i r i i i i l h t.i>ii-
cenis Ihe extension Jumps 31
 — acceleration phase;
— flying phase. .• ^

>r >^ ~
If we apply this same concept to the u
a
approach run of extension jumps, we o-

may say that the exercises affecting the Iu 5 X

u
"acceleralion" are already included in H
O X X
the training therefore we do not need
other specific exercises lo improve this
aspect. The exercises affecting the "fly- v; ec
CL C " • . M S f^ 0
ing phase". (that can be identified with E^
3 C
•c
3C
0 .
t--' 3C
c
;?•'
w.
r-'
the lake-off speed - last 6 strides) I —. :^
'^' 'S
should be added lo the training prog- H
u
C
ramme, carefully chosing the approp-
riate cycles, since this is the most im-
portant phase of the jump (see Table
i. 111
.s £ 3 £
IT; u
f^

j:;
;* Wl

'^ fc
r- oc
c
't iSi " . £
u
5). &
E
3 CM
The take-off capacity, as we men- —
CO 'r-. •—• U", CT;
d^
'S •rf Ö
tioned earlier, is the principal quality .2
>> -»' r~
s Ä «'
QC

Ti
of a jumper. The slrength exerled dur- ~ > w*. •rr^ -C X W;
ift u j= rr-.i (-i
ing the take-off can be described as 3
to
u
"^ <r\ "
\0d
s rr-J
"explosive - reactive - ballistic'. The ^. a; 3 ~ 0 1-1 00
3 OC
deveiopmeni of this type of slrenglh is u
ii
1/^
il
E
3
s s;^ E
•0 'S
tt
a r-
E
a
—I
V
t u '•"
0*
sS r)
II 11 11

A.
•c
u
e • 3 Si)
E
>o l / ^ c^ X
3
3
^1
e
IS- I/".

0 c ' u-, (WNl o-'

• ^ "

£
«-1 u-j
^ «
~_ tN
j• -a- • r i.
in
"—
-^
.S
4» .5 r: 11
2 — 0 0
ta ^ rr ->^
E 0 0 * 3. ss r-l
t 00 _t
j2 0 o^ oc 00 r- K •c

1 C- -2i -
0. •
>
>
u £ ^ m
s
c
-^x i
-C ' -Tl
'.3 5-, w, —
•3 c :£ ^
e I; , j<:
o C MJ
y; s; J * c

0 0
d Q 'E
ai 111
U. ai 'E
"o "w u 5 CQ 0
u Ob c
E c u
u '•B "(0 •

0
Z > m m 0 d
h-
The vaulter lests his pitle before the jump - fl
LU
z:
32 ritual Ihat all jumpers never fail In accomplish
T a h l e 5 - T r a i n i n g o l speed a n d e n d u r a n c e Tor extension j u m p s

SPRINT A N D
ACCT.I.ERA I ION r A P A C I T \

Bounds from u Jumps » I t h

Shun sprini medium
siantistill iind w n h
( 2 l l - « l m alaclacid run-up
shnri ninHjp
power 1 (S-lOstnclesl
(:-4s|ridc>.)

SPF-BD E N D U R A N C E
I l'.iir

l.)l,„ii1ri. Cross shori-fasl

liiUnMii I ucnihii: powet) I Phase - Capyeity (4 weeks!
L;iciafid wiirk
over disiances
rnimSil-.^OOm Ph;ise - TowLT (4 weckst

speed exercises
(F!ving runs over
Miillihuunds
Phase wUhh-S II Phase Dynamie
2(l-.1Hm and Jumps wilh
run-up strides exercises
supramaximal runs) full run-up
first 2 weeks tK.li)tL-,inililiir.nj^ with loads
i ump.'I l i n e j v i H i i I i

Laeiacid power High iniensiiv runsover From the 4'' week (impt)rtant
distances from KU-IIHI-1 Slim eompeiitions) once a week
(iwicea week) 2 maintenance runs
Tahle 6 - Beginning cjcle

TRIPLE JUMP 1985/86 LONG JUMP 1985/86

STRENGTH
EXERCISES 1st WEEK 2nd & 3rd WEEK Isl WEEK 2nd & 3rd WEEK

weekly sets rep. load weekly sets rep. load weekly sets rep. load weekly sets rep. load
sess. %B-W. sess. %B.W. sess. %B.W. sess. %B,W.
\) General strength
I) Traditional exercise
A, Jerkwilhsquat
under - snalch - cleiui 2 4-5 4-6 100% 3 4-5 4-6 100% 2 3-4 4-6 100% 2 3-4 4-6 100%
B. Squat 2 6-8 6-8 120% 2 6 6-8 130- — — — — — — — —
140%
C. Half squat — — — — J 6 5-6 270% 2 6-8 5-6 200- 2 6-8 5-6 250-
250% 270%
D. Step-up •}
6 15 100% 2 6 15 115% I 4-6 12-15 100% 2 4-6 12-15 1(K)%
E. Slandingcall-raise 1 3 30 200% — — — — 1 3-4 20-30 200% 2 3 20-.3O 200%

2} Special exercises
A. Atempohalf-squal — — — — 2 5 15 1707o — — — — 1 4 10 150%

B) Speed/Strength
1) Throws(backward.'iand
forwards 6/7 kg) 2 — 3U 7 kg 3 — 3(t Vkg 2 20-30 6 kg 2 — 20-30 6-7 kg
2) Bounds from
aslandsiill I L.-D 20 T. 2x 400 m multibounds 1 L.-D, 10-20 — 2 L.-D. 20-30 T.
3) Uphillsprin((15%> — — — — I0x(2> 40 m) — — — — 1 40m 10

1
 Table 7 - Fundamental cycle

TRIPLE JLIMP 1985/86 LONGJUMP 1985/86

STRENGTH EXERCISES 4 WEEKS 4 WEEKS

weekly sets. rep. load weekly sets rep. load

sess. %B.W. sess. %B,W.
A) General strength
11 Traditional exercises
A. Jerk with squat under - snatch - clean 3 4 5-6 I2Ü-130 3 3 4-5 110-120
B. Squal 2 8 3-6 160-200 — — — —
C. Half-squal _ ^ — — 1-2 8 2-5 200-.300
D, Step up 2 6 10 120-150 2 4 10 120
E. Standingcalf-raise 3 M 20-30 200 3 3^ 20-30 200
F. Negative half-squat (eccentric) 1 6 6 150-180 — — — —
2) Speciale.xercises
A. A tempo half-squat (wilh both legs;
take-off leg) 1 8_ 15 180-200 1-2 6 10-15 160-180

B) Speed/Strength
1) Throws(backwardsandforwards6/7kg) 3 30 7 kg 2 — 30 7 kg
2) Bounds
A. From a standstill (L-D-T-5-10) 2 30-40 also with 2 30 also with
weighted belts weighted belts
B. With2-4-6apprüachstrides(D-T-5-10) — — — — — — — —
C. Multibounds endurance 3 5(KI-600malso 2 200m also with w belts
with weighted belts
t
D Uphin.sprim-15% — — — — 40-6()m 12-15

bi
w.
Table 8 - Inien-sive fundamental cyde

TRIPLE JUMP 1985/86 LONG JUMP 1985/86

STRENGTH EXERO-SES
3 WEEKS 3 WEEKS
weekly sets rep. load weekly sets rep. load
sess. %B,W. sess. %B,W.
A) General strength
1) Trattiiionat exercises
A. Jerk with squat under- snatch-clean 2 6 3^ 120-1.50 2 3 4 110-130
B. Squat -^ — — — — — ^ —
C. Half-squat I 8 2/6 pyramid 1 6 2-6 pyramid
D. Step up 1 4 8- 150 4 10 120
E. Slandingcaif-raise 1 2 20 220 3 20 200
2) Special exercises
A, A tempo half-squat (with both legs;
take-off leg) 1 6 10 200 6 16 200
B. Continuous half-squai jump
(hoth legs; tiike-offleg) 1 4 3 m i.

C- Half-squatjuinpwithbounce — ^ -^ — 6 8 100
D. Specificsiep 1 6 6 120 5 6 120
B) Speed/Strength
1) Throws (backwards and forwards 6/7 kg) 3 — 20 7 kg — 15 6-7 kg
A. From astandslill (L-D-T-5-10) I — 50 50
B. With2-4-6approachstridestD-T-5-l0) 2 — 60 60
C Multibounds endurance 1 ^ 240ni (6x40m) — —
D. Spnnitow(ngR-l(VI2kg — — — — 2 — I0x30m —
C) Special/Strength
II Plyometric exercises 3 20 depth jumps of 40/9*k:m 2 20 depth jumps of40-9{)cm
on 1 or 2 legs on 1 or 2 legs
2) Reactivity — — — — 2 40 hops belween hurdles
50/91 cm heigh
1
Table 9 - Spectal cyde

TRIPLE JUMP 1985/86 LONGJUMP 1985/86

STRENGTH EXERCISES
3 WEEKS 1 WEEKS
weekly sets rep. load weekly sets rep. load
sess. %B.W, sess. %B.W.
A) General strength
1) Traditional exercises
A, Jerk with squat under - snatch - clean 1-2 3 2-3 120-150 1 3 2-3 100-140
B. Squat —i- — — — — — — —
C. Half-squat 1 5-6 2-5 pyramid 1 5-6 2-5 pyramid
D, Step up 1 4 6-8 140 — — — —
E, Standing calf-raise X 2-3 20 220 I 2-3 20 220
2) Special exercises
A. A tempo half-squat (with both legs;
take-off leg) 1 5 5 ^^ — — —
B. Continuous half-squat jump m
(both legs; take-off leg) — — — — — — — —
C. Half-squal jump with bounce I 6 6 no 2 5 6 100
D. Specific step I 6 6 120 1 6 6 100
E. Stepaltemaledwithtake-offstep — — — — — — — —
BI Speed/Strength
1) Throws (backwards and forwards 6/7 kg) 2 — 15 6kg 1 — 15 6 kg
2) Bounds — — — — — — — —
A. From a standstill (L-D-T-5-10) 1 ^- 60 — 1-2 ^ 40 —.
B. With 2 ^ 6 approach strides (D-T-5-1U) 3 8üi icluding 1-2 60
complete triple jumps
C) Spedal/Strength
1) Plyometric exercises 3 20 depth jumps(40% 2 20 depth jumps on l i e g
Triple j + 2 a p. Stride)
2) Reactivity 2 60 hops over hurdles 2 36-48 hops over hurdles
1

^
u
Table 10 - Ciimpelition cycle

TRIPLE JUMP 1985/86 L O N G J U M P 1985/86

STRENGTH EXERCISES
4 WEEKS 4 WEEKS
weekly sets rep. load weekly sets rep. load
sess. %B.W, sess. %B,W-
A) General slrength
1) Traditional exerci-tes
A. Jerk with squal undtT-snalch -clean I 2-4 2-3 120-150 1 2-3 3 110-120
B. .Squat — — — — — — — —
C. Half-squal 1 4-5 2^ pyramid 1 4-5 2-3 pyramid
D. Step up — — -^ — — — — —
E. Standing calf-raise I 2 20: 220 1 2 20 220

2) Special exercises
A. A tempo half-squal (with both l e ^ :
take-off leg) 1 5 5 200 1 5 5 200
B. Continuous half-squat jump
(both legs; take-off leg) ^ -.^ ^ j .
^=_ i _^
C. Half-squat jump with bounce I 5 5 110 !-: 5 5 KX)
D. Specificsiep 1 4 6 120 1 4 6 100

B) Speed/Strength
1) Throws (backwards and forwards 6/7 kg) I 15-20 6 kg 1 15 6kg
2) Bounds
A. Fromastandslill(L-D-T-5-10) 1 .30(5J-10J) — — — —
B. With2-4-6approachstrides(D-T-5-I0) I 80 including I 60(5J-Iüj)
complete triple jumps

C) Special/Strength
1) Plyometric exercises 2 15-20 60% Triple jumps 1 15/20 depth jumps on 1 leg
2) Reactivity 2 6x6ovcrhurdles 2 6x6ovcrhurdles
1
 100%- VARiAZIONE LONGITUDlNAl^ ZZllIkW KB < B »IZl«* Kg B> IV«« «a i s »ri««e tUt u 2iii2aa «9 U
DEli-A RELAZIONE F-V •
IN UN ATLETA Bo 411 *se - H ; - u I - as« •
s . J3.? » 3 0 * 331 ^«^ M» S41H MS » w 3s; »ratt

s« MS eueo^r »' M 7DH 27« S«92«t no 111 u t t J7 0 il M«

S» 11 r 9000% IS« M » •SS n234a a i 92 301» 205 •SKA

80%- s,. iro 10O* US ia>«t

"' '00^ i i ' •SOX '»' «xnt

60%-

M%-

20%-

height o f t h e ( ( i m e m

Fig. 3 • Variations n f Ihe relationship belween strength and speed

 of paramount importance for the suc-
cess of all jumpers. The methods we
use are illustrated in our training
schedules (Table 6,7,8,9,10).
We also monitor the development of
strength using the Bosco Test; this al-
lows us to measure the power exerted
by the leg extensor muscles and draw
each athlete's strength/speed curve
during the various training cycles.
Figure 3 shows the tests of an Italian
jumper recorded at different stages of
his preparation, over a period of 14
months {22/10/84 - 21/12/85). We can
observe a qualitative change in
strength and in speed, depending on
the different work loads of the training
programme. If we compare the results
of bounds with a load equal to 100% of
the body weight (maximum dynamic
strength), to the results of bounds with-
REFERENCES
BOSCO, C : Personal communications 1985-
40 1986.
out loads (explosive strength), we see
that on 22/10/84, the latter are 40.6%
higher. Prof. Carmelo Bosco considers
this value the index of the relationship
between strength and speed. On 8/12/
84, the index was 38.7%; this may indi-
cate either a decrease in the maximum
strength or an increase in the explosive
strength. In this case, the maximum
strength remained more or less the
same, while the explosive strength in-
creased greatly.
The analysis of these values shows
that the dynamic strength is being
transformed into speed/strength. This
takes place during the transition from
the fundamental training cycle, where
the accent is on maximum strength, to
the special training cycle, where the ac-
cent is on the explosive - reactive
strength. •
JAGODIN, V.M.: "IIsalto con I'asta", Moscow
1978.
TOLEDO, P.: Personal communications 1980.
VITTORI C : Personal communications 1986
and Figure 2.