Data Reliability From an Instrumented Vertical Jump Platform

Abstract

A Vertec jump measurement and training system measures vertical jump heights but not additional variables that would reveal how the performance was achieved. Technology advances to equipment now include additional variables that elucidate how jump performance is achieved. However, acceptance of new jump-related equipment is predicated on the reliability of the vertical heights it measures in relation to those assessed by the Vertec. Thus, our study compared vertical jump height reliability data from a newly created instrumented platform to those concurrently derived from the Vertec. Methods required subjects (n = 105) to perform 2 jump trials separated by at least 2 days of rest. Trials began with a warm-up, followed by 3 to 5 maximal-effort jumps. The Vertec was placed directly over the platform so, as jumps occurred, subjects took off and landed on the instrumented device. At the jump apex subjects contacted the highest Vertec slapstick possible to assess maximum height attained. Four height measurements were derived from each jump: 3 platform-based calculations (from subject's take-off, hang time, and landing) and 1 Vertec. The platform-based calculations were compared to Vertec data to assess the reliability of the instrumented device. Intraclass correlation coefficient (0.90), coefficient of variation (17.3%), standard error of measurement (0.9 cm), and smallest real difference (3.7 cm) results showed heights calculated from platform take-offs were most reliable to Vertec values. It was concluded take-off from the platform yielded jump heights that are a viable alternative to those derived from the Vertec. Practical applications suggest coaches may use the platform to derive reliable vertical jump data in addition to other variables to better understand the performance of their athletes.

The reliability of vertical jump tests between the Vertec and My Jump phone application

“…Given that relatively few field practitioners are using force plates to measure vertical jump height and that the goal of applied research is to provide data and recommendations that are likely to be adopted by practitioners, it was important to examine the reliability of My Jump compared to a more commonly used field measurement tool. Like the force plate, the Vertec has also been found to be a reliable vertical jump measurement tool ( Klavora, 2000 ; Caruso et al, 2010 ; Nuzzo, Anning & Scharfenberg, 2011 ), but unlike the force plate, the Vertec is amenable to multiple testing locations (e.g., laboratory, field, court, etc.) and thus, is more commonly used in “real-world” vertical jump test settings.…”

Neuromuscular Training Improves Movement Competency and Physical Performance Measures in 11–13-Year-Old Female Netball Athletes

“…The validity of the Vertec as a tool for determining vertical jump displacement has previously been reported to be a valid tool for the assessment of anaerobic power (4,16,20,30). The reliability of the assessment of vertical jump displacement using the Vertec has previously been reported to be excellent (ICCa = 0.94) (30).…”

Validation of the VERT wearable jump monitor device in elite youth volleyball players

“…Moreover, testing athletes using traditional tests and recording the results on paper sheets, one athlete at a time, requires time and dedicated staff to compile and present the data to the coaching staff. Furthermore, the assessment and validation of standard vertical jumping tests have been extensively performed [ 12 – 14 ] and may also present a time-consuming method for volleyball player assessment. For example, using motion-capture methods may provide accurate outcomes and be considered as the gold standard, but this method is time consuming and requires technical expertise and complex camera set up, as well as high equipment costs [ 15 ].…”