See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/280300480

Comparison of Methods That Assess Lower-body Stretch-Shortening Cycle

Utilization

Article in The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research · July 2015

DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001100

CITATIONS READS
50 4,455

3 authors:

Timothy J. Suchomel Christopher J. Sole

Carroll University The Citadel
162 PUBLICATIONS 3,772 CITATIONS 43 PUBLICATIONS 574 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Michael Henry Stone

East Tennessee State University
511 PUBLICATIONS 19,148 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Athlete monitoring program in NCAA Division I female soccer View project

Thesis View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Timothy J. Suchomel on 14 October 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 COMPARISON OF METHODS THAT ASSESS LOWER-BODY
STRETCH-SHORTENING CYCLE UTILIZATION
TIMOTHY J. SUCHOMEL,1 CHRISTOPHER J. SOLE,2
1
Department of Exercise Science, East Stroudsburg University, East Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania; 2Department of Health,
Exercise, and Sport Science, The Citadel, The Military College of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina; and 3Center of
Excellence for Sport Science and Coach Education, Department of Exercise and Sport Science, East Tennessee State University,
Johnson City, Tennessee
ABSTRACT
Suchomel, TJ, Sole, CJ, and Stone, MH. Comparison of
methods that assess lower-body stretch-shortening cycle
utilization. J Strength Cond Res 30(2): 547–554, 2016—
The purpose of this study was to compare 4 methods that
assess the lower-body stretch-shortening cycle (SSC) uti-
lization of athletes. Eighty-six National Collegiate Athletic
Association Division I athletes from 6 different sports per-
formed 2 squat jumps and 2 countermovement jumps on
a force platform. Pre-stretch augmentation percentage
(PSAP), eccentric utilization ratio (EUR), and reactive
strength (RS) for jump height (JH) and peak power (PP)
magnitudes, and reactive strength index–modified (RSI-
mod) were calculated for each team. A series of one-way
analyses of variance with a Holm-Bonferroni sequential
adjustment were used to compare differences in PSAP,
EUR, RS, and RSImod between teams. Statistical differen-
ces in RSImod (p , 0.001) existed between teams,
whereas no statistical differences in PSAP-JH (p =
0.150), PSAP-PP (p = 0.200), EUR-JH (p = 0.150), EUR-
PP (p = 0.200), RS-JH (p = 0.031), or RS-PP (p = 0.381)
were present. The relationships between PSAP, EUR, and
RS measures were all statistically significant and ranged
from strong to nearly perfect (r = 0.569–1.000), while most
of the relationships between PSAP, EUR, and RS measures and
RSImod were trivial to small (r = 0.192–0.282). Pre-stretch
augmentation percentage and EUR, RS, and RSImod values
indicate that women’s tennis, men’s soccer, and men’s soccer
teams may use the SSC most effectively, respectively. Pre-
stretch augmentation percentage, EUR, RS, and RSImod values
may show vastly different results when comparing an individual’s
and a team’s ability to use the SSC. Practitioners should con-
Address correspondence to Timothy J. Suchomel, timothy.suchomel@
gmail.com.
30(2)/547–554
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Ó 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
AND MICHAEL H. STONE3
sider using RSImod to monitor the SSC utilization of athletes
due to its timing component.
KEY WORDS countermovement jump, squat jump, reactive
strength index–modified, reactive strength, pre-stretch
augmentation, eccentric utilization ratio
INTRODUCTION
M
easuring and monitoring the performance
characteristics of athletes is vital for sport sci-
entists and strength and conditioning practi-
tioners to understand how various types of
training affect an athlete’s overall performance (23). The
ability of athletes to effectively use the stretch-shortening cycle
(SSC) is an important performance aspect in many sports
(8,17). The SSC has been defined as a naturally occurring
muscle action that consists of a combination of eccentric and
concentric muscle actions, where the stored energy of the
eccentric action enhances the concentric action (4,18). A com-
mon method of assessing an athlete’s ability to use the SSC
involves comparing the performance characteristics of an ath-
lete’s squat jump (SJ) and countermovement jump (CMJ) (16).
Previous researchers have used pre-stretch augmentation
percentage (PSAP), eccentric utilization ratio (EUR), and
reactive strength (RS) calculations to indirectly examine the
ability of an athlete to use the SSC to improve their jump
height (JH) and peak power (PP) during a vertical jump
(8,12,17,23). These calculations may also be used as an indi-
cator of dynamic performance capacity (8) or to determine
how athletes respond to different phases of training during
the training year (17). After the JH or PP of the SJ and CMJ
have been determined, subtle differences in how PSAP,
EUR, and RS are calculated provide sport scientists and
practitioners with a percentage, ratio, or absolute difference
between the SJ and CMJ, respectively. Briefly, PSAP is cal-
culated using the equation ([CMJ variable 2 SJ variable]$[SJ
variable]21$100) (22), EUR using the equation (CMJ varia-
ble$SJ variable21) (17), and RS using the equation (CMJ
variable 2 SJ variable) (23). Although not discussed in pre-
vious research, it is possible that each of these calculations
was developed in an attempt to provide data to coaches and
VOLUME 30 | NUMBER 2 | FEBRUARY 2016 | 547
 Comparing Methods of SSC Utilization

sport scientists about the athlete’s use of the SSC in a prac-
tical manner. For example, sport coaches may understand
the PSAP calculation to a greater extent because of it being
reported in percentage while sport scientists may understand
the ratio method of EUR. Although PSAP, EUR, and RS
compare SJ and CMJ performance, these methods only use
outcome (e.g., JH) and instantaneous (e.g., PP) variables in
their calculations. Furthermore, PSAP, EUR, and RS meas-
ures fail to include a timing component regarding the dura-
tion of the movement, which may exclude valuable
information about how an athlete uses the SSC to achieve
a specific JH or PP.
Reactive strength index–modified (RSImod) is a reliable
measurement of CMJ performance that examines an athlete’s
CMJ-JH and relates it to their time to takeoff (TTT) (i.e.,
[CMJ-JH$CMJ-TTT21]) (7,20). In theory, an athlete who uses
the SSC effectively should have a short TTT but still maintain
the ability to achieve a high JH (5,6). Thus, RSImod should
also be considered as an indicator of effective SSC utilization.
The existing literature suggests that PSAP, EUR, RS, and RSI-
mod may be used as indicators of an athlete’s ability to use the
SSC (7,8,12,17,20,21,23). However, no research has compared
RSImod with different methods of assessing SSC utilization
between sport teams. To determine whether PSAP, EUR,
RS, and RSImod provide the same information regarding
the ability of athletes to effectively use the SSC, further
research is warranted. Therefore, the first purpose of this study
was to examine the relationships between PSAP, EUR, RS,
and RSImod, while a second purpose was to compare 4 meth-
ods that assess the lower-body SSC use of athletes.
METHODS
Experimental Approach to the Problem
This study required the subjects to attend 1 testing session to
compare different methods of assessing SSC utilization.
Each subject performed 2 SJs and 2 CMJs as part of an
ongoing athlete performance monitoring program. Four
methods of assessing SSC utilization, including PSAP,
EUR, RS, and RSImod, were compared to examine the
SSC utilization of 6 different collegiate athletic teams.
Subjects
Eighty-six National Collegiate Athletic Association Division
I male and female athletes participated in this study. The
male athletes competed in baseball (n = 28; body mass = 87.9
6 9.2 kg; height = 181.9 6 6.3 cm), soccer (n = 21; body
mass = 79.4 6 9.1 kg; height = 179.9 6 6.9 cm), and tennis
(n = 6; body mass = 74.1 6 10.2 kg; height = 176.2 6 9.7
cm), while the female athletes competed in volleyball (n = 9;
body mass = 71.9 6 7.9 kg; 174.0 6 8.4 cm), soccer (n = 12;
body mass = 63.0 6 5.0 kg; height = 166.1 6 6.1 cm), and
tennis (n = 8; body mass = 71.8 6 13.3 kg; height = 168.2 6
5.6 cm). All athletes were between 18 and 23 years of age.
Each athlete was currently in the preseason phase of their
training at the time of data collection. All subjects provided
written informed consent before participation in this study.
This retrospective study was approved by the Institutional
Review Board at the East Tennessee State University.
Procedures
Before participation, each athlete completed a standardized
warm-up that included 25 jumping jacks, 1 set of 5 mid-thigh
clean pull repetitions with a 20-kg barbell, and 3 sets of 5
mid-thigh clean pull repetitions with 40 kg for female
athletes and 60 kg for male athletes. Before performing the
specific warm-up for the SJ, the tester reviewed the jump
instructions with each subject and demonstrated a SJ. The
subjects were then familiarized to the starting position of the
SJ by squatting to a knee angle of 908. This was verified by
the tester through the use of a manual goniometer 2–3 times
so that the subject became familiar with the starting position
of each SJ. A specific warm-up was then performed that
consisted of a SJ at 50 and 75% of the athlete’s perceived

TABLE 1. Correlation matrix of PSAP, EUR, RS, and RSImod values.*

PSAP-JH PSAP-PP EUR-JH EUR-PP RS-JH RS-PP RSImod

PSAP-JH 1.000
PSAP-PP 0.670† 1.000
EUR-JH 1.000† 0.670† 1.000
EUR-PP 0.670† 1.000† 0.670† 1.000
RS-JH 0.871† 0.569† 0.871† 0.569† 1.000
RS-PP 0.650† 0.951† 0.650† 0.951† 0.628† 1.000
RSImod 0.240z 0.192 0.240z 0.192 0.623† 0.282† 1.000

*PSAP-JH = pre-stretch augmentation of jump height; PSAP-PP = pre-stretch augmentation of peak power; EUR-JH = eccentric
utilization ratio for jump height; EUR-PP = eccentric utilization ratio for peak power; RS-JH = reactive strength difference for jump
height; RS-PP = reactive strength difference for peak power; RSImod = reactive strength index–modified.
†Statistically significant at p # 0.01 level.
zStatistically significant at p # 0.05 level.

the TM

548 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

maximum effort with a near weightless (,1 kg) polyvinyl
chloride pipe. After a minute of rest, each athlete performed
2 single maximum effort SJs with 30 seconds of rest between
each jump. Briefly, each subject stepped onto the force plate
and stood motionless for approximately 1–3 seconds to
establish a baseline of their system weight. Subjects were
then instructed to squat to the “ready position,” whereby
each subject squatted to a knee angle of approximately 908.
After the subjects reached the ready position and were
motionless for approximately 2 seconds, a countdown of
“3, 2, 1, jump” was given. The subjects then used a concen-
tric-only muscle action to jump as high as possible. Visual
examination of the force-time curve after each SJ was used to
determine whether a countermovement was performed. A SJ
that included a countermovement was discarded, and an
additional jump was performed. During a 1-minute rest
period, the tester reviewed the CMJ instructions with each
subject and demonstrated a CMJ. Subjects were instructed to
perform a countermovement in a manner that they felt
allowed them to jump the highest and that the counter-
movement was to be performed to a self-selected depth.
Each athlete then performed a CMJ at 50 and 75% of their
perceived maximum effort with the same polyvinyl chloride
pipe. After a minute of rest, the athletes completed 2 single
maximum effort CMJs with 30 seconds of rest between each
jump. Similar to the SJ, the subjects stepped onto the force
plate and stood motionless for approximately 1–3 seconds to
establish a baseline of their system weight. The subjects then
received the countdown “3, 2, 1, jump,” whereby the subjects
performed a countermovement to a self-selected squat depth
followed by a concentric muscle action to jump as high as
possible. All SJs and CMJs were performed while the ath-
letes held the polyvinyl chloride pipe on their upper back,
similar to a high-bar back squat position, as previously
described (20,21). This was done in an effort to isolate the
performance of the lower extremities, standardize jumping
Figure 1. Pre-stretch augmentation percentage for JH during CMJ
compared with SJ. BB = men’s baseball; MS = men’s soccer; MT = men’s
tennis; VB = women’s volleyball; WS = women’s soccer; WT = women’s
tennis; PSAP = pre-stretch augmentation percentage; JH = jump height;
CMJ = countermovement jump; SJ = squat jump.
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com
Figure 2. Pre-stretch augmentation percentage for PP during CMJ
compared with SJ. BB = men’s baseball; MS = men’s soccer; MT = men’s
tennis; VB = women’s volleyball; WS = women’s soccer; WT = women’s
tennis; PSAP = pre-stretch augmentation percentage; PP = peak power;
CMJ = countermovement jump; SJ = squat jump.
conditions, and eliminate the use of an arm swing, which
previous research has indicated may affect JH and other
force-time variables (14). All SJ and CMJ repetitions were
performed on a uniaxial force platform (91 3 91 cm; Rice
Lake Weighing Systems, Rice Lake, WI, USA) sampling at
1,000 Hz.
All SJ and CMJ data were collected and analyzed using
a custom LabVIEW program (2010 version, National Instru-
ments Co., Austin, TX, USA). In addition, a digital low-pass
Butterworth filter with a cutoff frequency of 10 Hz was used
to remove random noise from the signal. Jump height was
calculated based on the estimated flight time of the center of
mass using previously established methods (15). Peak power
was calculated as the maximal value of power during the
propulsive phase of the CMJ and SJ. Time to takeoff was
calculated from the force-time record as the length of time
from the initiation of the countermovement to the point of
takeoff (7,20). A threshold of 5 N was used to detect the
Figure 3. Eccentric utilization ratio for JH during CMJ compared with
SJ. BB = men’s baseball; MS = men’s soccer; MT = men’s tennis; VB =
women’s volleyball; WS = women’s soccer; WT = women’s tennis; EUR =
eccentric utilization ratio; JH = jump height; CMJ = countermovement
jump; SJ = squat jump.
VOLUME 30 | NUMBER 2 | FEBRUARY 2016 | 549
 Comparing Methods of SSC Utilization
Figure 4. Eccentric utilization ratio for PP during CMJ compared with
SJ. BB = men’s baseball; MS = men’s soccer; MT = men’s tennis; VB =
women’s volleyball; WS = women’s soccer; WT = women’s tennis; EUR =
eccentric utilization ratio; PP = peak power; CMJ = countermovement
jump; SJ = squat jump.
initiation of the countermovement. Pre-stretch augmenta-
tion percentage of JH (PSAP-JH) and PP (PSAP-PP) was
calculated using the equation ([CMJ variable 2 SJ varia-
ble]$[SJ variable]21$100) (22). Eccentric utilization ratio of
JH (EUR-JH) and PP (EUR-PP) was calculated using the
equation (CMJ variable$SJ variable21) (17). Reactive strength
calculations of JH (RS-JH) and PP (RS-PP) were made using
the equation (CMJ variable 2 SJ variable) (23). Finally, RSI-
mod was calculated using the equation (CMJ-JH$CMJ-
TTT21) (7,20). Values of JH, PP, and RSImod produced
during each jump were used for analysis of reliability and
then averaged for further statistical analyses (9).
Statistical Analyses
The intrasession test-retest reliability of JH, PP, TTT, and
RSImod was established using intraclass correlation coef-
ficients (ICCs) and typical error, as completed in previous
studies (20,21). It should be noted that this study used typical
Figure 5. Reactive strength calculated differences for JH between the
CMJ and squat. BB = men’s baseball; MS = men’s soccer; MT = men’s
tennis; VB = women’s volleyball; WS = women’s soccer; WT = women’s
tennis; RS = reactive strength; JH = jump height; CMJ =
countermovement jump.
the TM
550 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Figure 6. Reactive strength calculated differences for PP between the
CMJ and squat. BB = men’s baseball; MS = men’s soccer; MT = men’s
tennis; VB = women’s volleyball; WS = women’s soccer; WT = women’s
tennis; RS = reactive strength; PP = peak power; CMJ =
countermovement jump.
error expressed as a coefficient of variation percentage (10).
Pearson’s zero-order product-moment correlations (r) were
calculated between PSAP-JH, PSAP-PP, RS-JH, RS-PP, and
RSImod. Correlation values of 0.0, 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 0.9, and
1.0 were interpreted as trivial, small, moderate, large, very
large, nearly perfect, and perfect, respectively, based on a pre-
viously established scale by Hopkins (11). A series of one-
way analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were used to compare
differences in PSAP-JH, PSAP-PP, RS-JH, RS-PP, EUR-JH,
EUR-PP, and RSImod between sport teams. When neces-
sary, post hoc analyses were performed using the Bonferroni
technique. Effect sizes (d) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs)
were calculated for mean differences for all pairwise compar-
isons. Effect sizes values of 0.0, 0.2, 0.6, 1.2, 2.0, and 4.0 were
interpreted as trivial, small, moderate, large, very large, and
nearly perfect, respectively, according to Hopkins (11). To
examine the homogeneity of variances before further
Figure 7. Reactive strength index–modified values for each team during
the CMJ. BB = men’s baseball; MS = men’s soccer; MT = men’s tennis;
VB = women’s volleyball; WS = women’s soccer; WT = women’s tennis;
RSImod = reactive strength index–modified; CMJ = countermovement
jump. *Statistically greater than women’s soccer and women’s tennis at
p , 0.001 level; +statistically greater than men’s tennis at p , 0.01
level; #statistically greater than men’s tennis at p # 0.05 level.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

statistical analyses could be completed, Levene’s test was

used. The initial statistical significance level was set at 0.05;

*SJ-JH = squat jump height; SJ-PP = squat jump peak power; SJ-Rel. PP = squat jump relative peak power; CMJ-JH = countermovement jump height; CMJ-PP = countermovement
CMJ-Rel. PP (W$kg21)
however, a Holm-Bonferroni sequential adjustment was
applied, as 7 separate one-way ANOVAs were performed.

8.0
7.6
7.0
7.3
4.8
4.9
All statistical analyses were completed using SPSS 22 (IBM,
Armonk, NY, USA).

6
6
6
6
6
6
58.0
55.7
49.2
53.7
42.2
38.1
RESULTS
The ICC values for JH, PP, and TTT ranged from 0.89 to 0.99,
while typical error ranged from 3.0 to 8.0% for all measure-
ments. No statistically significant differences in the homoge-
590.7
581.3
606.5
585.9
236.7
440.6 neity of variance existed among teams within the Levene’s
CMJ-PP (W)

test, and thus equal variances were assumed. The descriptive

6
6
6
6
6
6

JH, PP, and TTT data for each team are displayed in Table 1.
5,061.0
4,374.9
3,796.8
4,084.4
2,655.0
2,636.5

The PSAP-JH, PSAP-PP, EUR-JH, EUR-PP, RS-JH, RS-PP,

and RSImod differences between teams are displayed in Fig-
ures 1–7. Statistically significant differences in RSImod existed
between teams (F5,80 = 20.547, p , 0.001). In contrast, no
0.05
0.05
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.04
CMJ-JH (m)

statistically significant differences in PSAP-JH (F5,80 = 1.676,

p = 0.150), PSAP-PP (F5,80 = 1.498, p = 0.200), EUR-JH
6
6
6
6
6
6

(F5,80 = 1.676, p = 0.150), EUR-PP (F5,80 = 1.498, p =

0.37
0.34
0.28
0.35
0.24
0.19

0.200), RS-JH (F5,80 = 2.610, p = 0.031), or RS-PP (F5,80 =

1.075, p = 0.381) existed between teams. Post hoc analysis of
RSImod indicated that men’s soccer produced the greatest
SJ-Rel. PP (W$kg21)

RSImod values, which were statistically greater values as

8.6
8.9
6.9
6.8
4.8
4.0

compared with men’s tennis (p = 0.007, d = 1.56, 95% CI =

0.019–0.212), women’s soccer (p , 0.001, d = 2.40, 95% CI =
6
6
6
6
6
6
TABLE 2. Jump height and PP descriptive statistics for the SJ and CMJ (n = 86).*

0.087–0.231), and women’s tennis (p , 0.001, d = 3.11, 95%

57.0
52.2
48.6
52.9
40.9
35.5

CI = 0.130–0.303). Similarly, men’s baseball produced statis-

tically greater RSImod compared with men’s tennis (p =
0.041, d = 1.38, 95% CI = 0.002–0.189), women’s soccer
jump peak power; CMJ-Rel. PP = countermovement jump relative peak power.

(p , 0.001, d = 2.30, 95% CI = 0.071–0.207), and women’s

664.3
539.0
555.2
594.6
279.4
430.5

tennis (p , 0.001, d = 3.07, 95% CI = 0.113–0.280). Finally,

SJ-PP (W)

women’s volleyball produced a statistically greater RSImod

6
6
6
6
6
6

magnitude as compared with women’s soccer (p , 0.001,

4,974.4
4,194.1
3,766.3
3,998.1
2,613.2
2,484.4

d = 3.09, 95% CI = 0.051–0.228) and women’s tennis (p ,

0.001, d = 3.92, 95% CI = 0.096–0.298). No other statistically
significant differences existed between teams (p . 0.05).
The correlation values between PSAP-JH, PSAP-PP,
0.05
0.04
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.03

EUR-JH, EUR-PP, RS-JH, RS-PP, and RSImod are dis-

SJ-JH (m)

played in Table 2.
6
6
6
6
6
6

Values are expressed in mean 6 SD.

0.32
0.29
0.25
0.31
0.20
0.15

DISCUSSION
This study compared 4 different methods of assessing SSC
utilization between 6 different intercollegiate sport teams.
Women’s volleyball (n = 9)
Women’s soccer (n = 12)
Men’s baseball (n = 28)

The primary findings of this study are as follows. Based on

Women’s tennis (n = 8)
Men’s soccer (n = 21)

the PSAP and EUR JH and PP values, women’s tennis play-

Men’s tennis (n = 6)

ers may use the SSC more effectively compared with the
other teams examined. Reactive strength JH and PP values
indicate that men’s soccer players may use the SSC more
Sport team

effectively than any of the other teams. Finally, RSImod

values indicate that men’s soccer, baseball, and volleyball
teams may use the SSC more effectively than other teams.
To the knowledge of the authors, this is the first study to
examine the relationships between PSAP-JH, PSAP-PP,

VOLUME 30 | NUMBER 2 | FEBRUARY 2016 | 551

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Comparing Methods of SSC Utilization
EUR-JH, EUR-PP, RS-JH, RS-PP, and RSImod. The
relationships between PSAP, EUR, and RS measures were
all statistically significant and ranged from strong to nearly
perfect. This should come as no surprise, as the calculations
of PSAP, EUR, and RS are very similar and use the exact
same variables. In contrast, most of the relationships
between PSAP, EUR, and RS measures and RSImod were
trivial to small. This may provide an indication that PSAP,
EUR, and RS measures and RSImod are not necessarily
providing the same information about the athlete’s use of the
SSC. However, it should be noted that a strong relationship
existed between RS-JH and RSImod (r = 0.623). The expla-
nation of this relationship may be due to the inclusion of the
CMJ-JH variable used in each calculation. Future research
may consider examining the relationship between these 2
measures.
A unique finding of this study was that the relationships
between PSAP-JH and EUR-JH as well as PSAP-PP and
EUR-PP were “perfect” (r = 1.000). Furthermore, the statis-
tical comparisons between teams using PSAP and EUR
measures also yielded identical p values and effect sizes, indi-
cating that PSAP and EUR likely provide the exact same
information expressed in 2 different forms (i.e., percentage
vs. ratio). Based on these findings, the discussion of PSAP
and EUR below will be grouped together. From a practical
standpoint, the use of either PSAP or EUR while monitoring
athletes should be determined based on the understanding of
the individuals who must explain and interpret the data. For
example, a strength and conditioning practitioner may
understand what the percentages of PSAP mean, while sport
scientists may understand what the ratios of EUR mean to
a greater extent. Therefore, it is suggested that the use of
either PSAP or EUR is consistent with the involved parties
so that there is no misinterpretation of the data.
The results of this study indicated that there were no
statistically significant differences between teams regarding
PSAP-JH, PSAP-PP, EUR-JH, or EUR-PP. The greatest
PSAP-JH and EUR-JH were produced by women’s tennis
and were followed in order by men’s soccer, men’s baseball,
women’s volleyball, women’s soccer, and men’s tennis
teams. Although no statistically significant differences ex-
isted between the PSAP-JH or EUR-JH produced by wom-
en’s tennis and the other teams examined, moderate-to-large
effect sizes (Cohen’s d: 0.84–1.70) were present, indicating
that practical significance existed. The greatest PSAP-PP and
EUR-PP were produced by women’s tennis and were fol-
lowed in order by men’s soccer, women’s volleyball, men’s
baseball, women’s soccer, and men’s tennis. Similar to the
PSAP-JH and EUR-JH findings, practical significance existed
between women’s tennis and the other examined teams with
small-to-moderate effect sizes existing with differences in
PSAP-PP and EUR-PP (Cohen’s d: 0.30–0.81). Based on
PSAP-JH, PSAP-PP, EUR-JH, and EUR-PP effect size re-
sults of this study, it seems that women’s tennis players
may use the SSC more effectively than all of the other teams
the TM
552 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
examined in this study. However, it should be noted that the
women’s tennis team produced the lowest values of SJ-JH
and PP as compared with the rest of the teams in this study.
If an individual or team has a poor SJ performance for any
number of reasons (e.g., lack of strength, inexperience with
the movement, etc.) (3), any moderate CMJ performance
will alter the PSAP or EUR calculation in favor of an
enhanced ability to use the SSC. From a sport specificity
standpoint, tennis players are required to frequently change
directions in a small playing area in order to be successful in
their sport. It is possible that the training stimulus from prac-
tice and matches contributed to their ability to use the SSC,
albeit in lateral planes of motion. However, it should be
noted that there is a limited vertical component in tennis
matches, which may ultimately contribute to a decreased
vertical SSC performance compared with other sports (21).
Using only outcome and instantaneous variables may be
viewed as a shortcoming of the PSAP and EUR calculations.
However, it should be noted that sport coaches and strength
and conditioning practitioners may have a greater interest in
the use of outcome variables. In any case, sport scientists
should be aware of the implications of using or not using
the PSAP or EUR calculations for monitoring and reporting
athlete performance measures. These measures, if used,
should be assessed on an individual basis because of the
potential issue mentioned above.
Previous research has indicated that large differences
between SJ and CMJ performance may be expected in
subjects who develop force slowly (2). The differences
between SJ and CMJ performance may be assessed using
RS measurement. (23) The greatest RS-JH was produced
by men’s soccer, men’s baseball, and women’s volleyball
and followed in order by women’s tennis, men’s tennis,
and women’s soccer. However, no statistically significant
differences in RS-JH existed between teams in this study. It
should be noted that practical differences in RS-JH were
present between teams as indicated by small-to-moderate
effect sizes (Cohen’s d effect sizes ranged from 0.45 to
0.78). There were no statistically significant differences in
RS-PP between teams in this study. The greatest RS-PP
was produced by men’s soccer and followed in order by
women’s tennis, men’s baseball, women’s volleyball, wom-
en’s soccer, and men’s tennis. Trivial-to-moderate effect sizes
were present for RS-PP differences between teams (Cohen’s
d effect sizes ranged from 0.13 to 0.67). This is likely due to
the large SDs that were present within each team. It should
be noted that every team included at least 1 athlete who
produced a greater PP value during the SJ as compared with
the CMJ. This was a surprising result, as previous research
has indicated that subjects produce greater PP during CMJs
as compared with SJs (3).
The results of this study indicated that there were
statistical differences in RSImod between the teams exam-
ined. The greatest RSImod magnitude was produced by
men’s soccer and followed in order by men’s baseball,

women’s volleyball, men’s tennis, women’s soccer, and
women’s tennis. Specifically, the men’s soccer RSImod mag-
nitude was 4.8, 4.8, 29.3, 45.7, and 68.8% greater than that in
the men’s baseball, women’s volleyball, men’s tennis, wom-
en’s soccer, and women’s tennis teams, respectively. These
findings are similar to those reported by Suchomel et al. (21).
However, the RSImod results are in direct contrast with the
PSAP and EUR findings that suggested that the women’s
tennis team used the SSC most effectively, which may indi-
cate that these measures may not examine the same charac-
teristics of an athlete. This is supported by the small
relationships that exist between RSImod and PSAP and
EUR measurements.
Although PSAP, EUR, RS, and RSImod may be used as
indicators of an athlete’s ability to use the SSC, the present
results indicate that the calculations may not provide the
same information to the practitioner. This may be because
of how each measurement is calculated. The only variable
included in the PSAP, EUR, and RS calculations is the out-
come variable of either JH or PP. Although this may provide
a sport scientist with information regarding the magnitude of
the difference between the SJ and CMJ, it may be questioned
whether these calculations are actually measuring the SSC
utilization of the athlete or being influenced by other factors.
The PSAP, EUR, and RS calculations fail to incorporate
a time component indicating the length of the SSC. In con-
trast, the RSImod calculation includes the TTT of an athlete
and relates it to their JH during a CMJ. From a practical
standpoint, this may indicate, at least to a greater degree,
how an athlete uses the SSC, specifically whether an athlete
uses a long or short period of time to produce a specific JH.
Thus, future research may consider examining how RSImod
changes over the course of a season, training year, career, or
in response to specific training interventions in order to
examine the SSC characteristic changes of athletes.
There are some limitations to this study that should be
disclosed. The sample size of the individual teams and the
sex of the subjects were not equal. It should be noted
however that the sample size of each team was representa-
tive of the size of an entire team. For example, a baseball
team typically has more athletes on their roster as compared
with a sport such as tennis. Given the differences in sample
size for each sport and sex, sport scientists and practitioners
should interpret our results with care. While it is possible
that equal sample sizes of the individual sports and sexes
may remove sampling bias, it may be impractical to test the
necessary number of teams to equate the sample size of each
team. It should be noted that several previous studies have
included sample sizes of varying size with regard to sport
and sex to discuss differences in performance (1,13,17,19–21).
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
Practitioners should be aware that PSAP, EUR, RS, and
RSImod values may show vastly different results when
comparing individuals and a team’s ability to use the SSC
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com
effectively. It is recommended that practitioners and coaches
should consistently use only one of the aforementioned
measures when evaluating their players’ and team’s use of
the SSC for the most accurate information regarding
changes in ability. Because of the incorporation of a timing
component (i.e., TTT), RSImod may provide more informa-
tion about how athletes use the SSC as compared with
PSAP, EUR, and RS. Therefore, it is recommended that
sport scientists and practitioners could use RSImod to mon-
itor the SSC performance of their athletes. Although mea-
suring RSImod may require instrumentation, the use of force
plates and switch mat devices is becoming more common in
strength and conditioning, making RSImod a promising ath-
lete monitoring variable for the future.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors thank the athletes who participated in this study
and made this project possible. The results of this study do
not constitute endorsement of the product by the authors or
the National Strength and Conditioning Association. There
are no conflicts of interest. There are no professional relation-
ships with companies or manufacturers who will benefit from
the results of this study for each author.
REFERENCES
1. Beckham, GK, Suchomel, TJ, Bailey, CA, Sole, CJ, and Grazer, JL.
The relationship of the reactive strength index-modified and
measures of force development in the isometric mid-thigh pull.
Paper presented at: XXXIInd International Conference of
Biomechanics in Sports; Johnson City, TN; July 12–16, 2014.
2. Bobbert, MF and Casius, LJ. Is the effect of a countermovement on
jump height due to active state development? Med Sci Sports Exerc
37: 440–446, 2005.
3. Bobbert, MF, Gerritsen, KGM, Litjens, MCA, and Van Soest, AJ.
Why is countermovement jump height greater than squat jump
height? Med Sci Sports Exerc 28: 1402–1412, 1996.
4. Cavagna, GA, Saibene, FP, and Margaria, R. Effect of negative work
on the amount of positive work performed by an isolated muscle.
J Appl Physiol 20: 157–158, 1965.
5. Cormie, P, McGuigan, MR, and Newton, RU. Changes in the
eccentric phase contribute to improved stretch-shorten cycle
performance after training. Med Sci Sports Exerc 42: 1731–1744, 2010.
6. Dowling, JJ and Vamos, L. Identification of kinetic and temporal
factors related to vertical jump performance. J Appl Biomech 9: 95–
110, 1993.
7. Ebben, WP and Petushek, EJ. Using the reactive strength index
modified to evaluate plyometric performance. J Strength Cond Res
24: 1983–1987, 2010.
8. Haff, GG, Ruben, R, Molinari, M, Painter, K, Ramsey, MW,
Stone, ME, and Stone, MH. The relationship between the eccentric
utilization ratio, reactive strength, and pre-stretch augmentation and
selected dynamic and isometric muscle actions. J Strength Cond Res
24: 1, 2010.
9. Henry, FM. “Best” versus “average” individual scores. Res Quart 38:
317–320, 1967.
10. Hopkins, WG. Measures of reliability in sports medicine and
science. Sports Med 30: 1–15, 2000.
11. Hopkins, WG. A scale of magnitude for effect statistics. Available at:
http://sportsci.org/resource/stats/effectmag.html. Accessed April
2015.
VOLUME 30 | NUMBER 2 | FEBRUARY 2016 | 553
 Comparing Methods of SSC Utilization
12. Komi, PVand Bosco, C. Utilization of stored elastic energy in leg extensor
muscles by men and women. Med Sci Sports Exerc 10: 261–265, 1978.
13. Laffaye, G, Wagner, PP, and Tombleson, TIL. Countermovement
jump height: Gender and sport-specific differences in the force-time
variables. J Strength Cond Res 28: 1096–1105, 2014.
14. Lees, A, Vanrenterghem, J, and Clercq, DD. Understanding how an
arm swing enhances performance in the vertical jump. J Biomech 37:
1929–1940, 2004.
15. Linthorne, NP. Analysis of standing vertical jumps using a force
platform. Am J Phys 69: 1198–1204, 2001.
16. Markovic, G, Dizdar, D, Jukic, I, and Cardinale, M. Reliability and
factorial validity of squat and countermovement jump tests.
J Strength Cond Res 18: 551–555, 2004.
17. McGuigan, MR, La Doyle, T, Newton, M, Edwards, DJ,
Nimphius, S, and Newton, RU. Eccentric utilization ratio: Effect of
sport and phase of training. J Strength Cond Res 20: 992–995, 2006.
18. Norman, RW and Komi, PV. Electromechanical delay in skeletal
muscle under normal movement conditions. Acta Physiol Scand 106:
241–248, 1979.
the TM
554 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
View publication stats
19. Sato, K, Bazyler, C, Beckham, GK, Gray, H, Hornsby, G,
Kavanaugh, A, MacDonald, C, Mizuguchi, S, Stone, M, and
Stone, MH. Force output comparison between six u.s.
collegiate athletic teams. Presented at: XXXth International
Conference of Biomechanics in Sports; Melbourne, Australia;
July 2–6, 2012.
20. Suchomel, TJ, Bailey, CA, Sole, CJ, Grazer, JL, and Beckham, GK.
Using reactive strength index-modified as an explosive performance
measurement tool in Division I athletes. J Strength Cond Res 29: 899–
904, 2015.
21. Suchomel, TJ, Sole, CJ, Bailey, CA, Grazer, JL, and Beckham, GK.
A comparison of reactive strength index-modified between six
U.S. collegiate athletic teams. J Strength Cond Res 29: 1310–1316,
2015.
22. Walshe, AD, Wilson, GJ, and Murphy, AJ. The validity and
reliability of a test of lower body musculotendinous stiffness. Eur J
Appl Physiol 73: 332–339, 1996.
23. Young, WB. Laboratory strength assessment of athletes. New Stud
Athl 10: 89–96, 1995.