Body Acceleration from Muscle Force of Countermovement Jumps in Comparison to Squat Jumps

1467 Words3 Pages

The main theories behind why muscle forces accelerate the body upwards greater in countermovement jumps in comparison to squat jumps: a brief review

Throughout literature countermovement jumps (CMJ) are seen to be higher in contrast to squat jumps (SJ) (Bobbert et al. 1996; Kubo et al. 1999; Bobbert et al. 2005). However present literature regarding the key potential mechanisms behind why greater muscle forces are seen accelerating the body upwards in CMJ in comparison to SJ is somewhat unclear. A CMJ can be defined as a positioning starting upright, beginning the descending motion in advance of the upward motion in contrast to a SJ where the start position is squatted with no preparatory countermovement (Akl 2013). The higher jump heights seen in CMJ in comparison to SJ are apparent even if at the start of propulsion phase the body configuration is identical (Bobbert et al. 1996). In past literature three main mechanisms have looked to provide an explanation for the greater muscle forces seen in CMJ than the SJ. The first plausible theory is that the muscle stretch in CMJ increases the production of force capability of the contractile machinery (Edman et al. 1978; Ettema et al. 1992; Herzog et al. 2003). Secondly the assumption that the muscle fibres are on the descending limb of their force–length relationship at the start of propulsion in the CMJ and SJ, however in CMJ the stretching of a chain of elastic components, they are not as far past optimum length therefore allowing a greater force over the initial phase of their shortening range, with the stretching of sequences of elastic components, this then causes the storage of elastic energy that is then reutilized in the propulsion phase (Ettema et al. 1992). The final explan...

... middle of paper ...

...act to vertical force production is not hindered. However this was not seen by Babbert et al. (1996), as movement disintegration was not present in the SJ and toe off location in CMJ and SJ remained the same.

In conclusion, this brief review suggests that the literature is contradictory in the theory that muscle fibres during a CMJ are less beyond optimum length in comparison to SJ, in turn allowing an increased force during the initial part of their shortening, causing the storage of elastic energy that can then be reutilized during the propulsion phase, therefore further research is necessary. However, it does seem that from a biomechanical perspective the active state development during the preparatory countermovement in a CMJ may increase force by the hip extensors and more work during shortening in CMJ and therefore a greater vertical force and jump height.

More about Body Acceleration from Muscle Force of Countermovement Jumps in Comparison to Squat Jumps

Open Document