Those who follow my training log will know that I started Assisted Jump Training today. As this training method is not commonly used, I wanted to share my video from today and begin to discuss the training method in more detail. Assisted Jump training is taken from the concept of over-speed training for improving sprinting speed. Here, the athlete will sprint at maximal velocity down a slope of 3-
Assisted Jump Training
-
-
Participant -
Member
not sure I am buying this
I don’t believe the same concepts that make us faster can also make us jump higher
I believe that in over-speed the rate and number of ground contacts (the speed in which you have to get back to the ground) while still maintaining stride length is which creates improvements
In order to apply this principle to jumping
we would have to be jumping with minimal resistance and yet get back to the ground at an accelerated rate. I feel there is just to much time in between attempts to make this relevant
Any one else see my point.
-
Participant
not sure I am buying this
I don’t believe the same concepts that make us faster can also make us jump higher
I believe that in over-speed the rate and number of ground contacts (the speed in which you have to get back to the ground) is which creates improvements….not the bungee or pulley.
To follow that same principle to jumping we would have to be jumping with minimal resistance and yet get back to the ground at an accelerated rate.
Any one else see my point.
During the actual over speed training session the body is doing something that it can not normally do correct? The same is true with assisted jump training…
This is going to have an affect on the body in some regard. Long term adaptation to the overspeed sprinting method has proved successful and unsuccessful, with certain athletes benefiting and others not.
In the few training studies which have been done on Assisted Jump Training the results have been brilliant compared to normal training methods.Much needs to be done in order to get this into the main stream of training methods, i understand that…i am a believer however…
-
Member
Yeah I debate…
Well if the idea is to have your body do something it can not normally do correctly than simply taking 1 step or 3 steps in a bungee would make us quicker. But no it is the continuous movement and this excessive rate of speed (toe off recover toe off recover…I mean crazy fast) which creates this adaptation.
Can you explain how this is achieved with assisted jumps by simply taking 1 jump at a time with such a long delay between jumps. Do you see what I am getting at? I just don’t see a natural correlation between the two. One requires rapid movement and recover where as 1 is simply the same as jumping on the moon.
But I would love more info on this
-
Participant
When i perform the exercise and what Irving Saladino’s group does as well are sets of 6-8 continuous jumps at a very high intensity…I believe this is the best method for neural adaptation to take place…
During studies previously done, 2×10 reps of jumps have increased verticals significantly.
I believe it is the creation of new timing programs in the CNS which really enhance performance. Obviously for long term effects, as with any training, continuous exposure is needed.
-
Participant
No, not that i’m aware…
Very little of any research exists.
-
Participant
During studies previously done, 2×10 reps of jumps have increased verticals significantly.
Increased vertical _____________? Velocities? Vertical Jump?
I am very interested to hear more because right now it strikes me as similar to other theory vs practical benefit tools.
-
KeymasterVideo of assisted jumps just added to the blog:
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Member
The differences between this and overspeed sprinting are huge. Overspeed exposes the body to higher than normally encountered forces and this is where the adaptation comes from. Overspeed jumps actually reduce the loading on the legs and are therefore not even comparable. The only people I could see this type of training working for is those who are speed-deficient or those who are not well practiced in generating voluntarily explosive efforts. For everyone else, depth jumps, bounds, and approach jumps will probably be more helpful.
-
Participant
The differences between this and overspeed sprinting are huge. Overspeed exposes the body to higher than normally encountered forces and this is where the adaptation comes from. Overspeed jumps actually reduce the loading on the legs and are therefore not even comparable. The only people I could see this type of training working for is those who are speed-deficient or those who are not well practiced in generating voluntarily explosive efforts. For everyone else, depth jumps, bounds, and approach jumps will probably be more helpful.
“higher than normally encountered forces” created by what body, applied at what point and in what direction?
-
Member
“higher than normally encountered forces” created by what body, applied at what point and in what direction?
As sprinting speed increases so does the amount of force relative to bodyweight generated against the ground at foot contact. This applies to uphill, downhill, and flat running. Since overspeed methods (tubes, downhill, etc.) increase speed, it would only make sense that force at ground contact would increase as well. As for direction, it’s most vertical at top speed, but there is a large enough horizontal component to overcome braking forces and wind resistance.
-
Participant
[quote author="Denis Eradiri (sizerp)" date="1242299663"]
“higher than normally encountered forces” created by what body, applied at what point and in what direction?As sprinting speed increases so does the amount of force relative to bodyweight generated against the ground at foot contact. This applies to uphill, downhill, and flat running. Since overspeed methods (tubes, downhill, etc.) increase speed, it would only make sense that force at ground contact would increase as well. As for direction, it’s most vertical at top speed, but there is a large enough horizontal component to overcome braking forces and wind resistance.[/quote]
Downhill increases speed differently from using tubes.
With downhill, the time of exposure to g with no normal force (the ground) acting on the body is longer, so the downward speed of the body increases more. That increases the body’s total momentum, which leads to greater forces at the feet upon impact with the ground.The tubing however does not, or at least should not if tied at the other end at the same height as tied on the runner, create significant forces outside the horizontal plane. Therefore, the only additional force, and therefore acceleration, the body experiences is in the horizontal plane. The result is greater breaking forces upon foot plant, however I think it is the runner’s job and objective to plant as close to COM as possible, and minimize those breaking forces. This task is facilitated by the pull of the tubing, because one does not have to pay too much attention to pushing backwards, and hence is more relaxed and able to let stride frequency happen. I think my point could be better illustrated if you imagine the tubing is tied behind the athlete – then the ground contact force will indeed increase, because of the backwards spring force of the tubing, and also because of the way the leg is constructed, which makes it impossible to increase horizontal force into the ground without significantly increasing vertical force at the ground as well, the increase in the ground contact force will be in both horizontal and vertical direction. In light of this, it seems there is a probability that, when using tubing for overspeed, vertical forces decrease as stride frequency increases enough to enable foot-plant to happen sufficiently close to COM in order to minimize breaking forces. Also, g is constant, while the pulling force from the tubing is likely to decrease as the tubing returns to its prestretched state.
-
Participant
This is good stuff. It’s not like it’s going to hurt.
Nik,
I think people criticize it because it’s too inconvenient for them to set up. Overspeed anything seems to get a bad rap, however I have seen nothing but positive results from it (overspeed running, towed bounding, what you’re doing, etc). -
Participant
When i perform the exercise and what Irving Saladino’s group does as well are sets of 6-8 continuous jumps at a very high intensity…I believe this is the best method for neural adaptation to take place…
During studies previously done, 2×10 reps of jumps have increased verticals significantly.
I believe it is the creation of new timing programs in the CNS which really enhance performance. Obviously for long term effects, as with any training, continuous exposure is needed.
This is very interesting Nick. (Well done just quietly).
Do you have a reference for the assisted jumps 2×10 reps in terms of vertical jump height and compared to what other protocol?
Have you completed a study on it yet or are we doing it live?
I presume you are using this as a method to improve long jump? If so what are the reasons for choosing a two legged movement in a vertical jump?
Any EMG recordings comparing the assisted vertical jump to a standard vertical jump? -
Participant
Do you think most of the benefits of this are actually coming from the way down? The bungee from the ceiling is basically jumping with just less body weight so you end up going higher and turn it into a depth jump. I am not saying this isn’t a useful tool, but I don’t think you can apply the same principles to over speed horizontally with something vertically.
-
Participant
Do you think most of the benefits of this are actually coming from the way down? The bungee from the ceiling is basically jumping with just less body weight so you end up going higher and turn it into a depth jump. I am not saying this isn’t a useful tool, but I don’t think you can apply the same principles to over speed horizontally with something vertically.
It is actually the opposite…the benifits and reason it is simular to over speed is because of the concentric (upwards) portion of the exercise…
Overspeed = running faster than normal becuase of an external pull or downward slope
AJT = concentric part of the jump is much faster because of an external pull
I’ll reply to others later when i have a bit more time…
-
Participant
I tried tube assisted overspeed with my older daughter (who was not a track athelte) several years ago. There are no suitable hills nearby, so we used simple inexpensive surgical tubing, climbing ties (no metal anywhere) a weight belt, and a quick release (and raquetball glasses for eye protection, just in case). We both loved it. Our training method was to get her speed up to faster than ‘max unassisted speed’, then pull the release and try to maintain faster than normal speed for as long as possible. We compared her normal flying 20 to a flying 20 that began 10m after the release.
When we first started, there was obvious breaking after release, but with practice, she could maintain good form and was able to maintain higher than normal speed for the 10m lead in and for the 20m fly. Since there were no outside forces acting on her during those 30m, I always felt that she was being forced to maintain the increased turnover and/or stride length on her own in order to maintain that speed.
I stopped using overspeed after reading so much negative commentary on the forums, but have always felt that properly done, there could be benefits.
Having said that, I’m not as confident that assisted jumping is a good analogy, because the jumper is not forced to jump with maximum explosiveness. Reduced ground contact times and higher jumps could just be the result of the outside forces, and the actually input by the athlete could be slower and less powerful than normal. I’m not sure how you could differentiate.
-
Participant
I have been reading your training log entries for awhile but I can not recall if you do “resisted” jumps training…asking since if this concept is from ideas about overspeed training, will you then be looking for that combination of body weight jumps, assisted jumps and resisted jumps (whatever form that takes, I am thinking weight vest while jumping or more or less what the assisted jump set up is but attached to the ground)?
-
Participant
In my opinion it provides some of same the effects of depth jumping, on the way down, since you are landing from a higher height which is not negligible.
But then when using this technique,regarding volume and intensity and recovery, me must consider that landing from higher heights is more stessful on the system just as well as depth jumps.BTW The same effect can be created with 2 poeple assisting the jumper…by standing on each side and then you grab the jumper with both hands at the waist just after the arm swing begins its way up.
We tried that for a while a few years ago when I was playing basketball in college and didn’t see any real improvements due to that technique though…maybe it’s better with a harness for some reason,who knows?just my 2 cents.
-
Participant
[quote author="Nick Newman" date="1242293292"]During studies previously done, 2×10 reps of jumps have increased verticals significantly.
Increased vertical _____________? Velocities? Vertical Jump?
I am very interested to hear more because right now it strikes me as similar to other theory vs practical benefit tools.[/quote]
Both…increased vertical jump from pre to post test…more than with traditional methods
-
Participant
I tried tube assisted overspeed with my older daughter (who was not a track athelte) several years ago. There are no suitable hills nearby, so we used simple inexpensive surgical tubing, climbing ties (no metal anywhere) a weight belt, and a quick release (and raquetball glasses for eye protection, just in case). We both loved it. Our training method was to get her speed up to faster than ‘max unassisted speed’, then pull the release and try to maintain faster than normal speed for as long as possible. We compared her normal flying 20 to a flying 20 that began 10m after the release.
When we first started, there was obvious breaking after release, but with practice, she could maintain good form and was able to maintain higher than normal speed for the 10m lead in and for the 20m fly. Since there were no outside forces acting on her during those 30m, I always felt that she was being forced to maintain the increased turnover and/or stride length on her own in order to maintain that speed.
I stopped using overspeed after reading so much negative commentary on the forums, but have always felt that properly done, there could be benefits.
Having said that, I’m not as confident that assisted jumping is a good analogy, because the jumper is not forced to jump with maximum explosiveness. Reduced ground contact times and higher jumps could just be the result of the outside forces, and the actually input by the athlete could be slower and less powerful than normal. I’m not sure how you could differentiate.
For it to be benificial the jumps needs to jump with maximal force. The same can be said when doing weights with 40% loads…if you don’t try to move it max effort the lift can be very easy and worthless…(this method should be used for experienced more mature athletes)
The benifits are acute and chronic…Yesterday for example, after my last set and waited for a few mins and attempted 1 max effort vertical jump just to see how it would feel…
It was amazing how much quicker my lift was…and i hit 37 inches pretty easily… -
Participant
I have been reading your training log entries for awhile but I can not recall if you do “resisted” jumps training…asking since if this concept is from ideas about overspeed training, will you then be looking for that combination of body weight jumps, assisted jumps and resisted jumps (whatever form that takes, I am thinking weight vest while jumping or more or less what the assisted jump set up is but attached to the ground)?
Yes we do resisted jumps in training…pretty much all throughout the year. Jump squats.
And yes, we do resisted jumps, BW jumps, static jumps, dynamic jumps, vertical and horizontal jumps and now assisted jumps…
for everyone,
If we KNOW body weight jumping AND resisted jumping improves power…
Why wouldn’t Assisted jumps also improve power?
-
Participant
In my opinion it provides some of same the effects of depth jumping, on the way down, since you are landing from a higher height which is not negligible.
But then when using this technique,regarding volume and intensity and recovery, me must consider that landing from higher heights is more stessful on the system just as well as depth jumps.BTW The same effect can be created with 2 poeple assisting the jumper…by standing on each side and then you grab the jumper with both hands at the waist just after the arm swing begins its way up.
We tried that for a while a few years ago when I was playing basketball in college and didn’t see any real improvements due to that technique though…maybe it’s better with a harness for some reason,who knows?just my 2 cents.
Same effect yes, but same consistency no…
The method seems to be dependant on percentage decrease of weight…
10-20% is all that has be shown to work right now. There is no way, you can determine how much lighter you are making the person by simply holding them around the waste and throwing them up…it wouldn’t work.
-
Participant
[quote author="Nick Newman" date="1242293292"]When i perform the exercise and what Irving Saladino’s group does as well are sets of 6-8 continuous jumps at a very high intensity…I believe this is the best method for neural adaptation to take place…
During studies previously done, 2×10 reps of jumps have increased verticals significantly.
I believe it is the creation of new timing programs in the CNS which really enhance performance. Obviously for long term effects, as with any training, continuous exposure is needed.
This is very interesting Nick. (Well done just quietly).
Do you have a reference for the assisted jumps 2×10 reps in terms of vertical jump height and compared to what other protocol?
Have you completed a study on it yet or are we doing it live?
I presume you are using this as a method to improve long jump? If so what are the reasons for choosing a two legged movement in a vertical jump?
Any EMG recordings comparing the assisted vertical jump to a standard vertical jump?[/quote]I will go further into the research during part 2…i do have references though yes…
The study will start next semester…
Benifits for me will be seen in long jump yes, mainly because that’s my event…
But overall power will improve a long with much shorter coupling times…Why the 2 legged jump? Well, Nelio Moura has been doing it like this with Saladino and others for many years and all research suggests this method. Somewhere down the line (maybe my PHD) i might compared different kinds of jumps using this method (single leg jump, split jumps, dynamic step ups for example)
EMG is something i will look for my study.
-
Participant
Nick, May 14, 4:07:
The benifits are acute and chronic…Yesterday for example, after my last set and waited for a few mins and attempted 1 max effort vertical jump just to see how it would feel…
It was amazing how much quicker my lift was…and i hit 37 inches pretty easily…See, this makes it even more interesting as it also relates to other articles and past discussions about strength training relative to other training (before/after), the more immediate time frame in terms of benefits (actual or perceived and the last hard effort before competition, during warm up, how hard and how long is it relative to run)…I seem to remember as a teen jumping on a large trampoline and then trying to jump when back on the ground immediately after…it felt like you put in max effort but went nowhere 😆
-
Participant
And too be honest…there was a small part of me that thought, hmmm maybe it harder for me to jump now (after the assisted jumps)
But it didn’t work that way…instead the potentiation effect made the speed of movement increase which i’m sure relates closly to jump height in a max effort jump.
-
Participant
Same effect yes, but same consistency no…
The method seems to be dependant on percentage decrease of weight…
10-20% is all that has be shown to work right now. There is no way, you can determine how much lighter you are making the person by simply holding them around the waste and throwing them up…it wouldn’t work.[/quote]
You are totaly right about that…I was just sharing our experience for those interested,not making a scientific point in any way,it’s just anecdotal.
Our method wasn’t the most scientific way to measure results as it was impossible to control those variables or measure the added intensity to the jump,you are right.Maybe this may have explained the lack of positive results with our method,I don’t know.
Take it for what it’s worth but our experience was inconclusive.I sure hope that with your system,which is far more elaborate,you’ll see better results as we did back then.And I just wanted to share an alternative or similar way to do it with those who don’t have access to theses kind of installations and maybe wanted to try what it feels like first…
The way I see it,the idea behind it seems logical but in reality I’m not sure that you can really apply that same theory we apply with overspeed running to a jump and I believe
that RJ24 summed it up perfectly in his firt reply.
And yes you are producing higher speed of movement but you are also unloading the last part of the jump at the same time and to me it’s the same as tapping your feet on the ground as fast as you can (while not moving forward/running)in order to improve sprinting speed…much like star61’s post in the”plyo for sprinters” thread:”Replicating GCT only replicates GCT, and does not necessarily train the body to produce greater forces in shorter periods of time, IMHO. As an example, I can tap my foot with much shorter GCT than I can run, but it would obviously do absolutely nothing to improve sprinting.”
I see the same thing happening in this situation,here it’s the force component that is lessened just before takeoff.If not enough force or more force is applied to the ground,it won’t make you run faster in real life no matter how fast you can tap your feet.Your CNS is already able to produce these kind of faster speed by itself under lighter loads and the way I see it when unloading a jump in order to increase speed of movement,you only reproduce the same effect as tapping your feet.
-
Participant
Same effect yes, but same consistency no…
The method seems to be dependant on percentage decrease of weight…
10-20% is all that has be shown to work right now. There is no way, you can determine how much lighter you are making the person by simply holding them around the waste and throwing them up…it wouldn’t work.[/quote]
You are totaly right about that…I was just sharing our experience for those interested,not making a scientific point in any way,it’s just anecdotal.
Our method wasn’t the most scientific way to measure results as it was impossible to control those variables or measure the added intensity to the jump,you are right.Maybe this may have explained the lack of positive results with our method,I don’t know.
Take it for what it’s worth but our experience was inconclusive.I sure hope that with your system,which is far more elaborate,you’ll see better results as we did back then.And I just wanted to share an alternative or similar way to do it with those who don’t have access to theses kind of installations and maybe wanted to try what it feels like first…
The way I see it,the idea behind it seems logical but in reality I’m not sure that you can really apply that same theory we apply with overspeed running to a jump and I believe
that RJ24 summed it up perfectly in his firt reply.
And yes you are producing higher speed of movement but you are also unloading the last part of the jump at the same time and to me it’s the same as (I don’t recall exactly who posted this in another thread recently regarding sprinting but…)tapping your feet on the ground as fast as you can while not moving forward in order to improve sprinting speed…if not enough force is applied to the ground,it won’t make you run faster in real life no matter how fast you can tap your feet.(If I can find back the exact quote,I’ll edit later)Your CNS is already able to produce these kind of faster speed by itself under lighter loads and the way I see it when unloading a jump in order to increase speed of movement,you only reproduce the same effect as tapping your feet.[/quote]either your not understanding the concept or something else is wrong becuase your logic is way off on this..
Comparing this method with tapping your feet? Are you kidding me?
For it to be AT ALL simular, you would have to unload to about 95% body weight…Which would be completely pointless…
We are unloading 10-20% that’s it. It is very intense an exercise, i was exhausted after 4 sets of 8 jumps.
Remember, for training adaptation to take place, the body must work behind its threshold for a period of time. How can this be achieved by tapping your feet?
It certianly is achieved through this training method. -
Participant
This was quite an interesting blog, thank you for sharing. I am also interested in the reaction as I think it shows some very close-minded thinking. Things I think are worth considering with assisted jumps are:
1. What is the relative load?
I think a lot of people traditionally see the force velocity curve stopping at a load of bodyweight but in most events it is considered very important to train over and under competition velocity/weight, e.g. throwers using different weights, and middle and long distance runners train at speeds both above and below race pace.
Similarly, it only makes sense for “bodyweight” power athletes to use both slow movements i.e. squats and cleans and faster movements i.e. assisted jumps. What really needs to be determined is what specific training methods to use. The specific load in jumping and sprinting is bodyweight.
If a 70kg athlete has a 140kg squat, bodyweight jumps are still 33.3%1RM of the squat (i.e. 70/210). Also, when setting loads, while it standard to suggest %1RM of squats for jump squats to get max power output, this isn’t really ideal for transfer to jumps as the movements and position of load/stabilisation is very different.
Why not consider from a basis or metric of bodyweight as our “100%” load or velocity of contraction at bodyweight as “100%”? (So squats are 200-300% at 1-2XBW, Assisted Jumps are 80-90%) I think the old method of basing loads off a max squat for “power training” is not so applicable when the event load is nowhere near this, power in a specific event is specific to load.
2. What do we really mean by “assisted jumps” or “overspeed training”?
In my opinion its all relative to the event, a sprinter can most likely hit a higher max velocity doing flying 30’s off a very long run in, is this not then “overspeed”? Could a jumper jump further than he might in a competition by using a wind tunnel (indoors obviously) or by using a downhill run in, which levels back down just prior to take off in order to increase approach velocity?
3. What are we really trying to achieve with assisted jumps or overspeed training?
If it is just a “muscular” effect then obviously we can ignore overspeed event simulation like towing and use methods like the assisted jumps discuseed. This is probably my preference for jumps/sprints as much like squats I think they provide a general stimulus and its best not to mess with event mechanics too much.
4. Are we achieving anything we cannot achieve with simpler means or means we are already using?
– Application: I don’t mean to be too harsh on the video since its obviously initial attempts with modifications to be made. However when you have an external assistance force like the harness there are issues when the athlete moves as was the case in the video, as the line of pull will change (once in front of the platform the athlete is pulled backwards). I think it comes back to why you are using the movement, which for me seems to as a general stimulus (hence two legged standing vertical vs single leg long jump take off with long run in), and as such I have a few suggestions which I think make the idea more practical and much more accessible.
Initially, I’d take the arms out of the movement (in the video they are all over the place) and if this reduces take off velocity significantly then maybe increase assistance (as higher hip/knee/ankle extensor contraction velocity is the target), as I think this is a major source of moving away from starting point (forward/ backward) by:
a) Arms behind head or b) A non-jumping exercise.
I see two primary ways to achieve this:
1. Band-Assisted Jumps – Attach band to high point (height depends on how high subject can jump), athletes pulls band down and holds band behind head, with assistance usually at 10-20% of bodyweight, this will not be difficult to hold in place. Powerlifting bands can easily account for 10-20% of a jumpers bodyweight (7-18kg?) in tension.
2. Leg Press Throws – Obviously this is less specific, and it will probably be better to use a supine rather than seated leg press for better hip extension but there are two big advantages in that a) Load is easily modified to whatever % below athletes bodyweight and b) You accelerate a constant load rather than having varied loading as with bands (bodyweight being constant in normal jumping).
If assisted jumping with the harness were to be investigated, I prefer to see these methods given as a control as they are far more accessible and easy to set up.
It is also worth noting that “hang time” will INCREASE at a given jump height as the harness does not just speed up the take off, it slows the fall as well. The athlete in the video seemed a little uncomfortable/perturbed with this effect and looking down/bending forward whilst in the air will effect landing mechanics and when doing repeated jumps will also effect subsequent jumps. This loss of posture in the air is probably as much as anything to blame for the moving around.
One big advantage I see in the Band-Assisted Jumps I described (or any jumps with hands behind the head) is that upper body posture will be better regulated and consistent, which is crucial for consistency when doing repeated jumps. Bosco and others who have done a lot of jump research often use this technique as I would imagine it gives much better reproducibility and reliability.
-
Participant
I’m interested to know what people don’t like about this?
As far as i know there is only one elite jumo group in the world that does this as a major part of their training. they happen to be the best jumps group in the world. And have DEVELOPED great jumpers year after year…
That was initially why i got interested…isn’t this enough?
-
Participant
I’m interested to know what people don’t like about this?
As far as i know there is only one elite jumo group in the world that does this as a major part of their training. they happen to be the best jumps group in the world. And have DEVELOPED great jumpers year after year…
That was initially why i got interested…isn’t this enough?
Its certainly enough to justify interest. I’d like to see you continue researching and reporting back on this. I’d actually like to see another round of discussion on overspeed as well.
-
Participant
(I don’t recall exactly who posted this in another thread recently regarding sprinting but…)tapping your feet on the ground as fast as you can while not moving forward in order to improve sprinting speed…if not enough force is applied to the ground,it won’t make you run faster in real life no matter how fast you can tap your feet.(If I can find back the exact quote,I’ll edit later)Your CNS is already able to produce these kind of faster speed by itself under lighter loads and the way I see it when unloading a jump in order to increase speed of movement,you only reproduce the same effect as tapping your feet.
Tapping your feet so that it involves the shortest time of muscle contraction (i.e. release of calcium and uptake of calcium) is the closest we can get to transforming the muscle fibre into faster twitching fibre. Of course to be of any use the amount of fibre we need to transform needs to be greater than our current composition which means we need to provide a progressive overload to develop more fibres into faster twitching fibres and then train them to recruit explosively for sprinting.
I’m interested to know what people don’t like about this?
As far as i know there is only one elite jump group in the world that does this as a major part of their training. they happen to be the best jumps group in the world. And have DEVELOPED great jumpers year after year…
That was initially why i got interested…isn’t this enough?
Likewise to get the muscles to produce force faster than previously we need to train it to do so. Ultimately strengthening only the agonist muscle might produce more force (in the training exercise) but the restricting effects of the antagonist muscle subdue any gain of the agonistic strength during explosive movements. Practising unloaded exercise allows a more understanding motor control reduction in antagonist restriction.
I’m all for assisted jumps (show me a better study then Hakkinen et al.) especially if the program includes similar explosive movements at force-velocity relationships closer to the actual event.
-
Participant
I’m interested to know what people don’t like about this?
As far as i know there is only one elite jumo group in the world that does this as a major part of their training. they happen to be the best jumps group in the world. And have DEVELOPED great jumpers year after year…
That was initially why i got interested…isn’t this enough?
Nick, I don’t think the topic is uninteresting, but the fact that one successful group uses it does not vaidate it as a training method. Also, at the end of the day if it is to be “interesting” to a broad audience it needs to have acessibilty and ease of use for athletes at many levels.
I gave what I thought was a fairly constructive post with ideas on why the training means may be justified and useful, feedback on the video posted as well as suggestions for ways of achieving a similar effect. Since you decided to completely ignore this, I wouldn’t be complaining about scepticism or a lack of constructive feedback.
-
Participant
Ignore what? It’s an open discussion. Plus, it’s finals week for me, i don’t have time to go through every single post and reply just yet sorry…
Research has proven this method to work, common sense to me, also suggests it works…But it isn’t JUST becuase Saladinos group uses it…
The system, cost under $200 and was very easy to build as well…
-
Participant
Looks good Nick!
Have you tried it with depth jumps? Would it be possible to use it that way?
How do you measure 10-20% unloading?There is a video on Nelio Mouras homepage where they use it the same way you do.
And I know W.Ritzdorf is also a believer in “speed plyos”. Don’t know if they use
suspension training though. -
Participant
Yeah Rizdorf was one of the first people to use suspension training as a training method…
No idea about depth jumps…i expect there isn’t much differenc.
I am standing on a force platform while doing the jumps, it acts as a weighing scales as well…so i just minus 15% body weight by pulling the rope etc…its very easy. Take me about 2 mins to set up…
-
Member
I actually think this is more like overspeed training than people are giving it credit for. For jumping, in the LJ there is only one jump, obviously. When you do overspeed training you are sprinting and taking several steps, here Nick is a jumper- and his focus is on that final actual jump step… so it correlates very specifically to what he is trying to focus on, beside doing 4×8 jumps should, over time, should give the body enough motor memory to get a sense for a quicker takeoff.
Keep us posted on your AJT and look forward to reading the 2nd part.
-
Participant
It is def an overspeed concept. I am working with many PHD Kines guru’s on this and they all agree it’s an overspeed concept. Even Carl called it overspeed jumps. Which is a good name for it too…
-
Keymaster
The differences between this and overspeed sprinting are huge. Overspeed exposes the body to higher than normally encountered forces and this is where the adaptation comes from. Overspeed jumps actually reduce the loading on the legs and are therefore not even comparable. The only people I could see this type of training working for is those who are speed-deficient or those who are not well practiced in generating voluntarily explosive efforts. For everyone else, depth jumps, bounds, and approach jumps will probably be more helpful.
This is similar to my take on the assisted jumps as well. It’s definitely not the same stimulus as overspeed running. That isn’t to say that it can’t be of benefit though and there is some research to indicate that it might be helpful. For me this implementation is a little bit of an experiment. I know it’s not going to HURT anything and there’s a decent chance it might help. At the very least it’s a novel stimulus in a familiar task that is widely recognized as beneficial.
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Keymaster
To clarify on my last point I think that overspeed running can in some cases prove beneficial because the towing device actually increases the initial eccentric loading that the athlete encounters at ground contact. From what I’ve seen many people actually don’t run faster when towed because ground contact and amortization increases. IF the athlete even does manage to run faster than normal, it’s because they’re being pulled through the air faster and not so much due to any super speed that the athlete is producing. So basically, what is considered overspeed running might be more appropriately called eccentric overload running. And while the load will be decreased in the latter stages of ground contact (and could possibly produce a benefit similar to assisted jumps) I don’t think this is the primary benefit.
In the case of the jumps, the load is actually decreased the entire time. The athlete should be able to have shorter amortization times and faster contractile velocities. In my opinion, it’s more akin to a baseball player swinging a light bat to develop speed.
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Member
This sounds to me like it could work a lot more then most people are giving it credit for.
Nick when is part two expected to be finished? I would love to see what you found. You also said it was not that expensive to set up. If your findings come up with something good I hope I could be one of the first to add it to my workouts.
-
Viewing 45 reply threads
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.