Effects of a sprint and plyometric warm-up protocol on vertical jump height and power in adolescent fe-male volleyball players. A randomized crossover study

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the immediate effects of a plyometric warm-up protocol (PWU) and a sprint warm-up protocol (SWU) on jumping performance in female volleyball players aged 14-16 years. Through a cross-over experimental design, 18 female players were randomly divided into two groups, each receiving both warm-up protocols (PWU and SWU). Before and after each protocol, height and jumping power were evaluated in squat jump (SJ), countermovement jump (CMJ), and Abalakov (ABK) tests using the DM jump® contact mat. Both warm-up protocols significantly improved SJ, CMJ, and ABK performance (p<.05), although mainly for jump height. The comparison between both warm-up protocols in the post-test showed no significant differences (p>.05), although the greatest percentage increase in jump height and power was obtained with the SWU. The ANOVA showed significant differences in group 1 (initially assigned to PWU) for all tests except for CMJ and ABK power. In group 2 (initially assigned to SWU), the ANOVA also showed significant differences, except for SJ and CMJ power. It is concluded that both warm-up protocols improve jump height and power; however, SWU shows a more favorable trend than PWU. From a practical perspective, the preliminary findings of this pilot study can provide useful guidelines for the warm-up process; however, further randomized controlled studies with adequate statistical power are required for more robust conclusions. Keywords: warm-up exercise, volleyball, muscle strength, athletic performance, adolescent

Plyometric training for physical education university students

“…The highest percentage is below nine years of experience practicing their sport of choice. In Figure 3, we have the results of the item that deals with the method used by the university student to exercise whose answers were given by multiple options where the student could choose more than one method to train, so the highest preference was: M1: exercise alone and at home (481), M2: exercise in spaces available in the vicinity of his home (209), M3: exercising outdoors (85), M4: running in a recreational park, sports ground or stadium (126), M5: walking outdoors in non-public facilities (87), M6: borrowing equipment from a sports institute or organization (20), M7: training in the gym (124), M8: training in a sports academy or institute (72) and M9: other types of methods (120). This section shows the responses to dimension two which deals with the training practices performed by the university student in the professional career of physical education.…”

“…The plyometric training protocol has been compared with different training protocols in order to ana lyze the immediate differences in the performance of athletes [20]. Some studies have attempted to compare the benefits of plyometric train in g with those offered by weight training [21].…”