Selection procedure of measurement most objective methods of level jumping ability in sportsmen.
A high level of jumping ability is a prerequisite of success in many sports, e.g. track and field jumps, volleyball, basketball, handball, ice figure skating, rhythmic gymnastics. Thus, determining jumping ability is of paramount importance for assessing the athlete's motor potential. The height of vertical jump is associated with a large number of degrees of freedom, due to the involvement of many joints, thus being a task of a complex coordination (3). The height of a vertical jump depends on its performance (1,4,8,9), as well as on the knee flexion angle and swing range (2,7).
The methods used for measuring of jumping ability vary regarding their objectiveness and reliability as reported by many authors (2,6,9,10) who pointed out weak points in some of them which resulted in a decreased reliability (table 1). The reports comparing various methods of measuring of the jumping ability are rather scarce. Fidelus and Gradowska (6) studied the displacements of the centre of body mass in the jump tests of Sargent and Abalakov (9, 10) and found the results to diverge considerably, differences between both methods ranging from--5 to 6 cm. Those methods were compared with a modified test of Starosta (9, 10) and the latter was found to be more precise than the other two tests.
No published, comparative study has been found in the available literature, concerning the jumping ability. The aim of this work was thus to compare the results of measuring the jumping ability by two methods--a simple, direct method--Starosta's test (9, 10) and another one employing the Kistler's tensometric platform.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A total of 39 athletes--34 male and female ones, engaged in various sports (track and field jumps, volleyball, soccer, rowing and ice hockey), volunteered to participate in the study. Their training experience ranged from 3 to 14 years and their sport class--from the national (Class 2) to international elite. Basic characteristics of the subjects studied are presented in
Every subject performed 3 jumps on a recording device mounted on Kistler's tensometric platform. This enabled simultaneous recording of results by both methods. The mode of the jumping abilities test: wooden square platform (the jumping-meter) with each side 1m long, a leather belt with a centimetre tape placed on the cord. In the middle of the platform there was an opening with a tape passed through it. The tape was connected by a thin cord with a belt which was put on round the hips of the individual examined. A slack connection of the tape with the belt made impossible overstating of measurement results because of hips motion forward or back during the jump.
The test and the measurements: after mounting the belt with the tape, the individual examined stood barefoot on the jumping-meter with their ankles in a line with the opening for the tape. Then jumped upwards with a swing of arms, pulling out the tape from the opening. The result of the jump was the remainder between the numerical value of the tape after and before the jump. The place of landing was limited by two concentric circles (larger with 62cm in diameter for the youths and adults, smaller with 42cm in diameter for children). Crossing the limit of the appropriate circle made impossible to recognition of the test. In the opening for the tape there was the tape transport limiter fitted to eliminate pulling it out by force of inertia. Measurements were repeated three times and the best result was taken into consideration
The results of jump tests obtained by the direct method--Starosta's test and from the tensometric platform are presented in Table 3. Individual results obtained by those 2 methods were highly correlated (r=0.93 ; P<0.001) although the direct method rendered systematical higher results (by 15.8% on the average; P<0.001). Individual differences ranged from 3.8 to 16.4 cm, mean values for groups--from 7.7 to 11.1 cm (x = 8.8+2.3 cm). The following interrelationship was observed: the higher was result of jumping ability, the greater was difference of both methods results.
A high correlation (r=0.93) between the measurements of jumping ability obtained from tensometric platform and by a direct method evidences that both methods provide measures of the same trait. However, all individual results obtained by the direct method were considerably higher than those obtained from the tensometric platform due, probably, to different execution of the measurements. Namely, in the tensometric method, the moment of full take-off was recorded and thus the rise of heels and metatarsal support before the take-off did not affect the final result. That latter phase considerably improved the jump height (by 15.8%) measured by the direct method. The length of foot is probably another contributing factor. This rises the question whether the tensometric platform method, not taking into account the displacement of the center of gravity until the take-off adequately reflects the jumping ability.
There is also a question of applying jumping ability measurements in practice in view of the differences between tensometric measurements and those obtained by simpler techniques, e.g. that of Sargent or of Starosta (9,10). Tensometric platform produces accurate results but difficult to employ due to its high cost (cf. Table 1). For that reason, the test of Starosta (9,10) may be easily adopted, especially for screening purposes, monitoring the sport training, at schools, etc, owing to its simplicity, accuracy and low cost of the device.
AURA, O. VIITASALO, J.T. 1989, Biomechanical characteristics of jumping. Int. J. Sport Biomech. 5:89-98.
BARTOSIEWICZ, G., DANIELEWICZ, E. GAJEWSKI, J. TRZASKOMA, Z. WIT, A., 1990, Evaluation of strength-velocity characteristic in athletes. In: N.Berme, A.Capozzo (eds.) Proc. Study Inst. Conf. Biomechanics of Human Movement. Formia, Italy. Bertec Corp., Worthing ton OH, pp.426-430.
BOBBERT M.F., SCHENAU J.I. 1988, Coordination in vertical jumping. J .Biomech. 3:249-262.
DOWLING, J.J., VAMOS, L., 1993, Identification of kinetics and temporal factors related to vertical jump performance. J. Appl. Biomech. 9:95-110.
DWORAK, L.B., 1991, Niektore metody badawcze biomechaniki i ich zastosowanie w sporcie, medycynie i ergonomii. (Some biomechanical research methods and its application in sport, medicine and ergonomics). Skrypty AWF Poznah 91:51-54.
FIDELUS, K., GRADOWSKA, T., 1965, Porownawcza ocena danych o wyskoku dosiqznym. (Comparative evaluation of results in vertical reach jump). Materialy Szkoleniowe PKOI 5:56-62.
HARLEY, R.A., DOUST, J.H., 1994, Effects of different degrees of knee flexion during continuous vertical jumping on power output using the Bosco formula. J. Sports Sci. 12:139-140.
KOMI, P.V., BOSCO, C., 1978, Utilization of stored elastic energy in leg extensor muscles by men and women. Med. Sci. Sports. 10:261-265.
RADZINSKA, M., STAROSTA, W., 2002, The importance, kinds and structures of the jumping ability and its determining factors. International Association of Sport Kinetics, University School of Physical Education in Poznah--Institute of Physical Culture in Gorzow.
STAROSTA, W., 1978, Nowy sposob pomiaru tzw. skocznosci. (New method of measurement of jumping ability). Monografie AWF Poznah 96:351-355.
(1) WLODZIMIERZ STAROSTA, (2) MARIOLA RADZINSKA
(1) University School of Physical Education in Bialystok, Institute of Physical Culture in Gorzow, POLAND
(2) University School of Physical Education in Poznah , POLAND
Table 1: Methods of measuring jumping ability--an overview Sargent Abalakov Starosta Tensometric platform Disadvantages --Imprecision --Subject's feet --Frequent re- --Unavailable of initial set in position placement of for screening measurement relative to the the tap purpose (rising the tape shoulder --Frequent --Expensive worsens the --Indeterminate control of tie equipment jump results jump--down tape fastening (6) point (9,10) point and --Heat--and fastening belt moisture- --Fear of --Raised sensitive hitting the shoulder at --Subject has wall jump may to be --Erroneous increase the instructed in results after --Touching the result detail as to prolonged use board too late the jump (5) or too early --Pelvic technique (increases motions (9,10) --Not simple in measurement forwards or use error (6) backwards may improve the --Fixed board result (9,10) is of some disadvantage Advantages --Simple and --Simple and --Simple and --High easy in use easy in use easy in use reliability --Inexpensive --Inexpensive --Equipment --Universal equipment equipment inexpensive and power supply easy to set up and amplifiers --Enables --Enables screening screening --Enables --Optional measurements measurements screening remote control measurements in diverse, even --Simultaneous primitive recording of conditions many variables (5) --Fixed place and position of feet before and after jump --Fixed orientation of feet to one another --Belt arid tape fixed to subject s hips --Tape protected against pulling out by hip motions (9,10) Table 1: The basic characteristics of the studies subjects (n = 39) n Discipline of sport Sport Class Training experience (years) 15 Track arid Field First and second 6-10 5 Volleyball First 7-13 5 Rowing Master 8-14 (National Team) 6 Soccer Second 4-10 8 Ice hockey First (Junior 3-5 National Team) Table 3: Mean values (SD) of basic characteristics of jump tests recorded in male (M) and female (F) athletes Variable Track & Field M(n=10) F(n=5) Age (years) 23,2 [+ or -] 3,3 22,8 [+ or -] 3,4 Body height (cm) 181,1 [+ or -] 3,4 171,0 [+ or -] 5,2 Body mass (kg) 72,5 [+ or -] 4,0 59,6 [+ or -] 6,4 Athletes experience 6,1 [+ or -] 2,4 8,4 [+ or -] 1,1 (years) Direct test-- 60,2 [+ or -] 9,4 51,0 [+ or -] 4,2 Starasta's test (cm) Kistlers's platform 50,5 [+ or -] 9,1 42,9 [+ or -] 3,4 (cm) Difference (cm) * 9,7 [+ or -] 2,0 8,1 [+ or -] 2,3 Correlation 1,944 0,921 significant Track & Field Variable M(n=10) F(n=5) Age (years) 23,2 [+ or -] 2,3 22,8 [+ or -] 3,4 Body height (cm) 181,1 [+ or -] 3,4 171,0 [+ or -] 5,2 Body mass (kg) 72,5 [+ or -] 4,0 59,6 [+ or -] 6,4 Athletes experience 6,1 [+ or -] 2,4 8,4 [+ or -] 1,1 (years) Direct test-- 60,2 [+ or -] 9,4 51,0 [+ or -] 4,2 Starosta's test (cm) Kistlers's platform 50,5 [+ or -] 9,1 42,9 [+ or -] 3,4 (cm) Difference (cm) * Correlation 9,7 [+ or -] 2,0 8,1 [+ or -] 2,3 significant 0,944 0,921 Variable Volleyball Rowing M(n=5) M(n=5) Age (years) 23,4 [+ or -] 2,2 23,6 [+ or -] 2,7 Body height (cm) 176,8 [+ or -] 8,6 190,2 [+ or -] 4,1 Body mass (kg) 71,8 [+ or -] 10,6 84,6 [+ or -] 1,8 Athletes experience 6,6 [+ or -] 1,3 8,0 [+ or -] 2,6 (years) Direct test-- 57,2 [+ or -] 9,3 58,8 [+ or -] 7,7 Starasta's test (cm) Kistlers's platform 49,1 [+ or -] 9,3 47,7 [+ or -] 6,0 (cm) Difference (cm) * 8,1 [+ or -] 2,0 11,1 [+ or -] 2,0 Correlation 0,921 0,920 significant Volleyball Rowing Variable M(n=5) M(n=5) Age (years) 23,4 [+ or -] 2,2 23,6 [+ or -] 2,7 Body height (cm) 176,8 [+ or -] 8,6 190,2 [+ or -] 4,1 Body mass (kg) 71,8 [+ or -] 10,6 84,6 [+ or -] 1,8 Athletes experience 6,6 [+ or -] 1,3 8,0 [+ or -] 2,6 (years) Direct test-- 57,2 [+ or -] 9,3 58,8 [+ or -] 7,7 Starosta's test (cm) Kistlers's platform 49,1 [+ or -] 9,3 47,7 [+ or -] 6,0 (cm) Difference (cm) * Correlation 8,1 [+ or -] 2,0 11,1 [+ or -] 2,0 significant 0,921 0,928 Variable Soccer Ice Hockey M(n=6) M(n=8) Age (years) 18,2 [+ or -] 4,2 15 [+ or -] 0,2 Body height (cm) 177,2 [+ or -] 5,2 173,0 [+ or -] 5,5 Body mass (kg) 62,7 [+ or -] 5,9 59,4 [+ or -] 6,5 Athletes experience 4,7 [+ or -] 3,6 4,7 [+ or -] 0,7 (years) Direct test-- 51,7 [+ or -] 4,5 51,5 [+ or -] 4,8 Starasta's test (cm) Kistlers's platform 43,2 [+ or -] 4,6 43,8 [+ or -] 6,3 (cm) Difference (cm) * 8,5 [+ or -] 2,9 7,7 [+ or -] 2,2 Correlation 0,937 0,934 significant Soccer Ice Hockey Variable M(n=6) M(n=8) Age (years) 18,2 [+ or -] 4,2 15 [+ or -] 0,2 Body height (cm) 177,2 [+ or -] 5,2 173,0 [+ or -] 5,5 Body mass (kg) 62,7 [+ or -] 5,9 59,4 [+ or -] 6,5 Athletes experience 4,7 [+ or -] 3,6 4,7 [+ or -] 0,7 (years) Direct test-- 51,7 [+ or -] 4,5 51,5 [+ or -] 4,8 Starosta's test (cm) Kistlers's platform 43,2 [+ or -] 4,6 43,8 [+ or -] 6,3 (cm) Difference (cm) * Correlation 8,5 [+ or -] 2,9 7,7 [+ or -] 2,2 significant 0,937 0,934 Variable AH athletes X (n=39) Age (years) 20,7 [+ or -] 4,2 Body height (cm) 178,3 [+ or -] 7,7 Body mass (kg) 68,1 [+ or -] 10,3 Athletes experience 6,2 [+ or -] 2,5 (years) Direct test-- 55,3 [+ or -] 7,8 Starasta's test (cm) Kistlers's platform 46,5 [+ or -] 7,4 (cm) Difference (cm) * 8,8 [+ or -] 2,3 Correlation 0,931 * significant All athletes Variable X (n=39) Age (years) 20,7 [+ or -] 4,2 Body height (cm) 178,3 [+ or -] 7,7 Body mass (kg) 68,1 [+ or -] 10,3 Athletes experience 6,2 [+ or -] 2,5 (years) Direct test-- 55,3 [+ or -] 7,8 Starosta's test (cm) Kistlers's platform 46,5 [+ or -] 7,4 (cm) Difference (cm) * Correlation 8,8 [+ or -] 2,3 significant 0,931 * * All differences between results of jump tests was significant (P<0,001)
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Author:||Starosta, Wlodzimierz; Radzinska, Mariola|
|Publication:||Ovidius University Annals, Series Physical Education and Sport/Science, Movement and Health|
|Date:||Jun 1, 2010|
|Previous Article:||Identifying the physiomotor predispozitions considered as favourable for practicing speed skating.|
|Next Article:||Research on the empathy situations of the trainers according to different professions.|