(24) RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN PERCEIVED READINESS AND COUNTERMOVEMENT JUMP PERFORMANCE IN NCAA DIVISION 1 MEN’S BASKETBALL PLAYERS

The countermovement jump (CMJ) is often used to estimate athletes’ adaptations to training or other related interventions. However, the level of readiness at the time of testing is often ignored, which could have implications on CMJ outcomes.

Purpose: We examined the relationship between perceived readiness and CMJ performance in basketball players.

Methods: Thirteen NCAA Division 1 men’s basketball players performed three CMJ trials with and without arm swing on multiple days (3 to 11 test days depending on the athlete) while ground reaction force (GRF) data were obtained using two force platforms. Athletes’ perceived readiness was assessed immediately prior to the CMJ trials on each test day using a custom visual-analog scale (1 [full readiness] – 16 [no readiness]). From the GRF data, jump height (jump height = V_Takeoff²/2g) and time to takeoff (TTT) were calculated. Correlation coefficients (± 0-0.1< trivial < small 0.3 < moderate 0.5 < large < 0.7 < very large 0.9) were used to demonstrate the relationship between perceived readiness and jump height or TTT (α = 0.05).

Results: Mean ± standard deviation and relative variability (i.e., coefficient of variation; CV%) jump height, TTT and perceived readiness data were calculated across players, with a total of 110 CMJ trials without arm swing and 66 CMJs with arm swing. The jump height, TTT, CV% and correlation statistics are provided in Table 1. For CMJs without arm swing, a small-significant relationship (r = -0.26; p = 0.01) was detected between perceived readiness and jump height, while the relationship between perceived readiness and TTT was trivial (r = 0.01; p = 0.89). For CMJs with arm swing, the relationships between perceived readiness and jump height and TTT were trivial-to-small and non-significant (jump height: r = -0.14; p = 0.28; TTT: r = -0.16; p = 0.21).

Conclusions: Decreases in athletes’ perceived readiness for training appears associated with reduced jump height only when CMJs are performed without arm swing. The time required to perform the CMJ with and without arm swing does not appear associated with athlete’s perceived readiness. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Strength and conditioning professionals should account for athlete readiness when conducting CMJ tests where arm swing is prohibited. Without accounting for athlete readiness, practitioners may be inclined to conclude that athletes’ failed to demonstrate targeted training adaptations with respect to the CMJ.

Acknowledgements: None