EFFECT OF UNILATERAL, BILATERAL, AND COMBINED

PLYOMETRIC TRAINING ON EXPLOSIVE AND

ENDURANCE PERFORMANCE OF YOUNG
SOCCER PLAYERS
RODRIGO RAMÍREZ-CAMPILLO,1 CARLOS H. BURGOS,2 CARLOS HENRÍQUEZ-OLGUÍN,2
DAVID C. ANDRADE,2 CRISTIAN MARTÍNEZ,3 CRISTIAN ÁLVAREZ,4 MAURICIO CASTRO-SEPÚLVEDA,5
MÁRIO C. MARQUES,6,7 AND MIKEL IZQUIERDO8,9
1
Department of Physical Activity Sciences, University of Los Lagos, Osorno, Chile; 2Laboratory of Exercise Sciences, MEDS
Clinic, Santiago, Chile; 3Department of Physical Education, Sport and Recreation, University of La Frontera, Temuco, Chile;
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCywCX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC4/OAVpDDa8K2+Ya6H515kE= on 01/08/2021

4
Health Promotion Program, Family Health Center of Los Lagos, Los Lagos, Chile; 5Exercise Science Laboratory, School of
Kinesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Finis Terrae University, Santiago, Chile; 6Research Center in Sports, Health and Human
Development, Vila Real, Portugal; 7Department of Sport Sciences, University of Beira Interior, Covilha˜, Portugal; 8Faculty of
Cultura Fı´sica, Department of Recreation, Santo Tomas University, Bogota´ D.C, Colombia; and 9Public University of Navarra,
Department of Health Sciences, Pamplona, Spain

ABSTRACT whereas the UG and BG showed only 6 and 3, respectively.

Ramı́rez-Campillo, R, Burgos, CH, Henrı́quez-Olguı́n, C,
Andrade, DC, Martı́nez, C, Álvarez, C, Castro-Sepúlveda, M,
Marques, MC, and Izquierdo, M. Effect of unilateral, bilateral,
and combined plyometric training on explosive and endurance
performance of young soccer players. J Strength Cond Res
29(5): 1317–1328, 2015—The aim of the study was to com-
pare the effects of bilateral, unilateral, or combined bilateral
and unilateral plyometric training (PT) on muscle power output,
endurance, and balance performance adaptations in young soc-
cer players. Four groups of young soccer players (age 11.4 6
The current study showed that bilateral, unilateral, and combined
bilateral and unilateral PT ensured significant improvement in
several muscular power and endurance performance measures
in young soccer players. However, the combination of unilateral
and bilateral drills seems more advantageous to induce superior
performance improvements.
KEY WORDS explosive strength, stretch-shortening cycle,
football, children, strength training
INTRODUCTION

2.2 years) were divided into control group (CG; n = 14),
bilateral group (BG; n = 12), unilateral group (UG; n = 16),
and bilateral + unilateral group (B + UG; n = 12). Players were
measured in unilateral and bilateral countermovement jump with
arms, 5 multiple bounds test, 20-cm drop jump reactive strength
index, maximal kicking velocity, sprint and agility test time, endur-
ance, and balance performance. The PT was applied during 6
weeks, 2 sessions per week, for a total of 2,160 jumps. After
intervention, all PT groups showed a statistically significant (p #
0.05) change in all performance measures, with no statistically
significant differences between treatments. Among the 21 per-
formance measures, the B + UG showed a significantly (p #
0.05) higher performance change in 13 of them vs. the CG,
Address correspondence to Dr. Mikel Izquierdo, mikel.izquierdo@
gmail.com.
29(5)/1317–1328
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Ó 2015 National Strength and Conditioning Association
S
occer is the world’s most popular sport, and
because of its enormous popularity, multiple re-
searches have been conducted to understand the
fundamental skills required by a soccer player.
During the past 2 decades, soccer is becoming progressively
more athletic, and the capacity of soccer players to produce
varied forceful and explosive actions, such as sprinting,
jumping, tackling, kicking, turning, and changing pace, has
become crucial in many game situations (5,39). In modern
football approach, these considerations are increasingly
essential to optimal performance not only in adults but also
in young players because it has been previously reported in
notational game analyses (5,44). For instance, high-speed
sprinting contributes up to 3% of the total distance covered
in children’s games (5) and most crucial moments of the game,
such as winning ball possession, scoring, or conceding goals,
depend on it (39). Such explosive actions are integral elements
for success in soccer and have to be trained independently
from aerobic power with an optimal training stimulus (13).

VOLUME 29 | NUMBER 5 | MAY 2015 | 1317

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Plyometric Training in Young Soccer Players

Stretch-shortening cycle (SSC) muscle actions like plyo- per week), which incorporates unilateral, bilateral or unilateral
metric training (PT) exercises do provide such training stimuli plus bilateral exercises, affects jumping, sprinting, kicking,
and are well-established techniques for enhancing athletic endurance, agility, and balance performance measures in
performance in strength and power events (24,40,41). Here, young soccer players. To do this, we compared the effects
the effectiveness of a plyometric method could be attributed of 6 weeks of plyometric treatment in 4 groups of subjects.
to factors such as eccentric overloading, segmental coordi- Some initial tests were executed to establish a baseline.
nation, muscle power, and specificity according to joint angle After the initial measurements, subjects were randomly
and angular velocities (42). However, to the best of the au- assigned to a control group (CG, n = 14) or to 3 other groups
thors’ knowledge, a limited number of studies have estab- that completed bilateral jumps (BG, n = 12), unilateral jumps
lished optimum PT design for varied forceful and explosive (UG, n = 16), or combined bilateral and unilateral jumps (B +
actions, such as sprinting, jumping, kicking, turning, and UG, n = 12). Our study design (4 groups) permits us to deter-
changing pace (7). Additionally, as far as the effect of PT on mine the effect of the independent variables PT and type of PT
soccer player’s motor performance is concerned, research has (i.e., bilateral, unilateral, or combined bilateral + unilateral).
focused more upon determining its influence in adult soccer
Subjects
athletes rather in young children soccer players (17,28).
This study involved a group of sub-elite level (3 training
As specificity is important for training-induced adaptations,
sessions plus a competition game per week) young (aged
performance changes in explosive neuromuscular actions may
between 10 and 15 years) male soccer players (descriptive
require specific training strategies and must consider the
characteristics depicted in Table 1). Participants have a mean
multi-planar and unilateral nature of most competitive soccer
of 3–4 years of systematic soccer training and competition
actions (29). Therefore, there is a need for soccer-specific
experience and showed continuous soccer training in the 6-
strength training interventions that incorporate multi-
month period before intervention.
directional unilateral force production exercises. Although
None of the subjects had any background in regular
a background knowledge of single exercise characteristics is
strength training or competitive sports that involved any of
helpful when planning for training programs (23), it would be
the training methods used in the investigation. Subjects were
important to know the isolated and combined effect of uni-
reminded during each training session to maintain their
lateral and bilateral exercises because these modes of muscle
usual physical activity habits during the experiment. The CG
action are present during soccer games. Recently, it has been
did not perform the PT but performed their usual soccer
reported a significantly higher performance change in power
training, including 40 minutes of technical-tactical exercises
and jumping ability after 6 weeks of unilateral PT but not after
(e.g., ball control, ball pass, ball conduction and dribbling,
bilateral PT (23). Similarly, unilateral PT induced a higher
ball kicking, ball heading, defensive drills, offensive drills,
increase in jumping performance vs. bilateral PT (8). On the
corner kicks situations, penalty kicks), 20 minutes of small-
other side, compared with bilateral training, unilateral exer-
sided games and basic conditioning exercises, and 30 minutes
cises were equally effective to induce improvement of unilat-
of simulated competitive games.
eral and bilateral leg strength and power (27) or even induce
Exclusion criteria included subjects with (a) potential
significantly larger contact times, lower vertical ground reac-
medical problems or a history of ankle, knee, or back pathology
tion forces, and rate of force development (4). All these pre-
in the 3 months before the study, (b) medical or orthopedic
vious results may suggest that bilateral exercises can be a more
problems that compromised their participation or performance
specific power training drill for many reported sprint and
in the study, and (c) any lower extremity reconstructive surgery
jump actions that occur during soccer games. Aside from this
in the past 2 years or unresolved musculoskeletal disorders.
lack of results agreement, the effects of combined unilateral
Individuals were not eliminated if they had been taking
and bilateral PT exercises are not clear. Some have hypothe-
vitamins, minerals, or related natural supplements (other than
sized that combined unilateral and bilateral plyometric drills
creatine monohydrate). Institutional Review Board of Univer-
may offer higher benefits (3); however, to the best of the
sity of Los Lagos approval for our study was obtained, and all
authors’ knowledge, no studies have established the effect of
subjects (and their parents or guardians) were carefully
unilateral, bilateral, or the combination of both types of plyo-
informed about the experimental procedures and about the
metric exercises on explosive and endurance performance of
possible risk and benefits associated with participation in the
young soccer players. Thus, our objective was to determine
study, and an appropriate signed informed consent document
the effect of unilateral, bilateral, and combined unilateral +
has been obtained pursuant to law before any of the tests
bilateral plyometric drills on muscle power output, endurance,
and training was performed. We comply with the human and
and balance performance adaptations in young soccer players.
animal experimentation policy statement guidelines of the
METHODS American College of Sports Medicine.
Experimental Approach to the Problem Procedures
This study was designed to address the question of how The subjects were carefully familiarized with the test
a short-term PT program of moderate frequency (2 sessions procedures during several submaximal and maximal actions
the TM

1318 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

TABLE 1. Descriptive data of the CG, BG, UG, and B + UG.*

B + UG
CG (n = 14) BG (n = 12) UG (n = 16) (n = 12)

Age (y) 11.2 6 2.4 11.0 6 2.0 11.6 6 1.7 11.6 6 2.7
Height (cm) 143 6 17.7 146 6 13.7 147 6 11.1 144 6 17.5
Sit height (cm) 75.6 6 9.2 78.3 6 8.6 77.4 6 6.0 74.9 6 9.4
Body mass (kg) 41.8 6 12.7 43.5 6 14.9 45.0 6 9.3 42.2 6 16.9
Body mass index (kg$m22) 19.4 6 1.7 19.0 6 3.3 20.7 6 2.7 19.4 6 3.2
Predicted age of peak height velocity (y) 13.8 6 0.8 13.6 6 0.2 13.6 6 0.9 13.7 6 0.9
Predicted years from age of peak height 22.0 6 2.2 22.0 6 2.0 22.0 6 1.2 22.2 6 2.4
velocity (y)
Predicted adult height (cm) 173 6 7.2 177 6 5.4 175 6 7.3 174 6 5.4
Current percentage of predicted 83.4 6 9.1 84.8 6 7.6 83.1 6 5.1 82.8 6 8.8
adult height (%)
Body fat (%) 10.8 6 3.0 10.3 6 3.7 11.5 6 3.6 10.9 6 4.2
Body water (%) 66.4 6 4.7 65.4 6 6.2 63.7 6 5.4 64.4 6 7.4
Body muscle (%) 55.3 6 8.4 52.7 6 7.4 50.4 6 5.9 53.7 6 9.2
Body muscle (kg) 20.0 6 5.1 22.0 6 4.5 20.9 6 3.1 20.4 6 5.0
Bone mass (kg) 8.7 6 1.9 9.4 6 1.7 9.2 6 1.3 8.7 6 1.9
Trunk fat (%) 13.1 6 1.5 13.1 6 3.4 13.8 6 3.4 13.0 6 4.2
Legs fat (%) 8.1 6 1.9 8.1 6 3.2 8.9 6 3.7 8.8 6 4.7
Session rating of perceived exertion 360 6 98 380 6 140 375 6 216 320 6 98
Soccer experience (y) 3.9 6 2.4 3.8 6 3.3 3.4 6 1.8 3.8 6 3.4
Weekly non-soccer sport practice (h) 1.1 6 0.9 1.5 6 2.3 1.3 6 1.8 1.0 6 2.5

*CG = control group; BG = bilateral plyometric training group; UG = unilateral plyometric training group; B + UG = combined
bilateral + unilateral plyometric training group.

a few days before the performance measurements were
taken (4 learning sessions during 2 weeks) to reduce any
learning effects. Each subject also completed several
explosive-type actions to become familiar with the exercises
used during training. Measurements were applied 1 week
immediately before and 1 week immediately after interven-
tion. All tests were administered in the same order before
and after intervention by the same investigators. Anthropo-
metric measurements were completed between 10:00 and
12:00 hours, whereas performance measurement was con-
ducted between 12:00 and 18:00 hours. Testing sessions
were scheduled .48 hours following a competition or hard
physical training to minimize the influence of fatigue. All
subjects (and their parents or guardians) were instructed to
(a) have a good night’s sleep ($8 hours) before each testing
day and (b) have a meal rich in carbohydrates and to be well
hydrated before measurements. The participants were moti-
vated to give their maximum effort during performance
measurements. Tests were completed in 3 days. On day 1,
the following tests were completed: standing height, sitting
height, body mass, body composition, unilateral and bilateral
countermovement jump with arms (CMJA) for maximal ver-
tical and horizontal distance (in centimeters), 20-cm drop
jump reactive strength index (RSI20), and the multiple 5
bounds test (MB5) for maximal horizontal distance (in cen-
timeters). On day 2, the 15-m sprint test for acceleration and
30-m sprint test for maximal speed, the maximal kicking
velocity (MKV) test, and a soccer-specific agility test (30)
were carried out. On day 3, bilateral balance and the
Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test level 1 (Yo-Yo L1) were
completed. Ten minutes of standard warm-up (5 minutes
of submaximal running with several displacements and 2
submaximal jump exercises of 20 vertical and 10 longitudinal
jumps) were executed before each testing day. Subjects were
instructed to use the same athletic shoes and clothes during
the preintervention and postintervention testing. All tests
were conducted indoors on a wooden surface.
Anthropometric and Maturity Measures. Anthropometric
measurements were taken a week before performance
measurements, using a stadiometer (Bodymeter 206; SECA,
Hamburg, Germany) and an electrical bio-impedance scale
(BF 100_Body Complete; Beurer, Ulm, Germany). Corporal
composition, standing height (in centimeters), sitting height
(in centimeters), and mass (in kilograms) were measured, and
the athletes’ maturity status was determined using predicted
years from age of peak height velocity (i.e., PHV offset) (32).
Bilateral and Unilateral Vertical and Horizontal Countermovement
Jump With Arms. Bilateral and unilateral vertical and horizon-
tal CMJA tests were used to assess maximal jump height
performance requiring slow SSC action ($250 milliseconds).

VOLUME 29 | NUMBER 5 | MAY 2015 | 1319

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Plyometric Training in Young Soccer Players

The CMJA tests were performed using an electronic con-
tact mat system (Globus Tester, Codogne, Italy) with a pre-
cision of 0.01 m during vertical CMJA, and for horizontal
CMJA, a fiber glass metric tape 5 m long endorsed to
a wooden floor was used. Subjects were instructed to use
their arms to aid in the jump, positioning their foot should-
ers wide apart for the bilateral test, and using 1 foot stand
(right and leg) for the unilateral test. In addition, subjects
were instructed to perform a fast downward movement
(approximately 1208 knee angle) followed by a maximal
effort jump. All subjects were instructed to land in an
upright position during vertical jumps and to bend their
knees after landing.
Twenty-Centimeter Drop Jump Reactive Strength Index. The
RSI20 was determined on a mobile contact mat (Ergojump;
Globus, Codogne, Italy) with arms akimbo. Take-off and
landing were standardized to full knee and ankle extension
on the same spot. The participants were instructed to
maximize jump height and minimize ground contact time
after dropping down from a 20-cm drop box. The RSI20 was
calculated as previously reported (22).
Multiple Five Bounds Test. The MB5 was started from
a standing position. Subjects performed a set of 5 forward
jumps with alternative left and right leg contacts to cover the
longest distance possible. The distance of the MB5 was
measured to the nearest 0.5 cm using a fiberglass tape
measure 20 m long.
Sprint and Agility Test. The 15- and 30-m sprint time were
measured to the nearest 0.01 second using single beam
infrared photoelectric cells (Globus Italia, Codogne, Italy).
The starting position was standardized to a still split standing
position with the toe of the preferred foot forward and
behind the starting line. Sprint start was given by a random
sound, which triggers timing. The photoelectric signal was
positioned at 15 and 30 m and set ;0.7 m above the floor
(i.e., hip level) to capture the trunk movement rather than
a false trigger from a limb. The agility test has been described

TABLE 2. Six-week plyometric training program.*

Set 3 repetitions (mode of execution)

Group Exercises†z Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6

BG (n = 12) Bilateral vertical 6 3 5 (C) 6 3 6 (C) 6 3 7 (C) 6 3 8 (C) 6 3 9 (C) 6 3 10 (C)

6 3 5 (A) 6 3 6 (A) 6 3 7 (A) 6 3 8 (A) 6 3 9 (A) 6 3 10 (A)
Bilateral horizontal 6 3 5 (C) 6 3 6 (C) 6 3 7 (C) 6 3 8 (C) 6 3 9 (C) 6 3 10 (C)
6 3 5 (A) 6 3 6 (A) 6 3 7 (A) 6 3 8 (A) 6 3 9 (A) 6 3 10 (A)
UG (n = 16) Vertical right leg 3 3 5 (C) 3 3 6 (C) 3 3 7 (C) 3 3 8 (C) 3 3 9 (C) 3 3 10 (C)
3 3 5 (A) 3 3 6 (A) 3 3 7 (A) 3 3 8 (A) 3 3 9 (A) 3 3 10 (A)
Vertical left leg 3 3 5 (C) 3 3 6 (C) 3 3 7 (C) 3 3 8 (C) 3 3 9 (C) 3 3 10 (C)
3 3 5 (A) 3 3 6 (A) 3 3 7 (A) 3 3 8 (A) 3 3 9 (A) 3 3 10 (A)
Horizontal right leg 3 3 5 (C) 3 3 6 (C) 3 3 7 (C) 3 3 8 (C) 3 3 9 (C) 3 3 10 (C)
3 3 5 (A) 3 3 6 (A) 3 3 7 (A) 3 3 8 (A) 3 3 9 (A) 3 3 10 (A)
Horizontal left leg 3 3 5 (C) 3 3 6 (C) 3 3 7 (C) 3 3 8 (C) 3 3 9 (C) 3 3 10 (C)
3 3 5 (A) 3 3 6 (A) 3 3 7 (A) 3 3 8 (A) 3 3 9 (A) 3 3 10 (A)
B + UG Horizontal left leg 2 3 5 (C) 2 3 6 (C) 2 3 7 (C) 2 3 8 (C) 2 3 9 (C) 2 3 10 (C)
(n = 12)
2 3 5 (A) 2 3 6 (A) 2 3 7 (A) 2 3 8 (A) 2 3 9 (A) 2 3 10 (A)
Horizontal right leg 2 3 5 (C) 2 3 6 (C) 2 3 7 (C) 2 3 8 (C) 2 3 9 (C) 2 3 10 (C)
2 3 5 (A) 2 3 6 (A) 2 3 7 (A) 2 3 8 (A) 2 3 9 (A) 2 3 10 (A)
Vertical left leg 2 3 5 (C) 2 3 6 (C) 2 3 7 (C) 2 3 8 (C) 2 3 9 (C) 2 3 10 (C)
2 3 5 (A) 2 3 6 (A) 2 3 7 (A) 2 3 8 (A) 2 3 9 (A) 2 3 10 (A)
Vertical right leg 2 3 5 (C) 2 3 6 (C) 2 3 7 (C) 2 3 8 (C) 2 3 9 (C) 2 3 10 (C)
2 3 5 (A) 2 3 6 (A) 2 3 7 (A) 2 3 8 (A) 2 3 9 (A) 2 3 10 (A)
Bilateral vertical 2 3 5 (C) 2 3 6 (C) 2 3 7 (C) 2 3 8 (C) 2 3 9 (C) 2 3 10 (C)
2 3 5 (A) 2 3 6 (A) 2 3 7 (A) 2 3 8 (A) 2 3 9 (A) 2 3 10 (A)
Bilateral horizontal 2 3 5 (C) 2 3 6 (C) 2 3 7 (C) 2 3 8 (C) 2 3 9 (C) 2 3 10 (C)
2 3 5 (A) 2 3 6 (A) 2 3 7 (A) 2 3 8 (A) 2 3 9 (A) 2 3 10 (A)

*BG = bilateral plyometric training group; C = cyclic; A = acyclic; UG = unilateral plyometric training group; B + UG = combined
bilateral + unilateral plyometric training group.
†The order of exercises execution was randomized in each training session.
zAll exercises were executed with the technique described as countermovement with arms.

the TM

1320 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

elsewhere (30). The timing system and procedures were
same as the 15- and 30-m sprint.
Maximal Kicking Velocity Test. Each player kicked a stationary
soccer ball for maximal velocity. Kicks were performed using
size 5 footballs (Nike Seitiro; FIFA certified). A previously
described protocol was used for the test (2). Basically, par-
ticipants performed a maximal instep kick with their domi-
nant leg after a run-up of 2 strides (the length of run-up was
self-determined) directed toward a goal net. Participants

TABLE 3. Training effects (with 90% confidence limits) for the jump performance variables for the CG (n = 14), BG
(n = 12), UG (n = 16), and B + UG (n = 12).*†z

Baseline Performance Magnitude of

mean 6 SD change (%) training effect

Vertical right leg CMJA (cm)

CG 19.1 6 1.8 1.8 (20.2 to 3.8) 0.15 (20.02 to 0.32)
BG 20.0 6 2.4 10.1 (5.7 to 14.6)a 0.56 (0.32 to 0.79)§
UG 18.9 6 1.6 13.7 (6.9 to 21.0)c 1.93 (1.01 to 2.86)k
B + UG 19.3 6 7.3 11.9 (5.9 to 16.2)c 1.55 (0.88 to 1.96)k
Vertical left leg CMJA (cm)
CG 19.0 6 2.8 1.5 (21.3 to 4.5) 0.13 (20.12 to 0.38)
BG 19.9 6 5.6 7.8 (22.1 to 18.7)a 0.25 (20.07 to 0.57)§
UG 19.3 6 1.7 14.4 (7.0 to 22.3)c,d 1.78 (0.90 to 2.66)k
B + UG 19.1 6 4.5 12.9 (5.7 to 16.2)c,d 1.27 (0.80 to 1.54)k
Vertical CMJA (cm)
CG 28.9 6 7.6 1.6 (212.7 to 18.2) 0.05 (20.45 to 0.55)
BG 31.1 6 2.0 18.7 (4.8 to 34.3)c,d 1.68 (0.46 to 2.90)k
UG 29.5 6 4.3 7.9 (3.9 to 12.1)a 0.58 (0.29 to 0.88)§
B + UG 30.5 6 9.3 15.4 (6.4 to 22.9)c,d 1.47 (0.22 to 1.72)k
Horizontal right leg CMJA (cm)
CG 131 6 17 0.0 (25.9 to 6.3) 0.0 (20.33 to 0.33)
BG 135 6 16 6.6 (3.2 to 10.0)a 0.41 (0.21 to 0.62)§
UG 130 6 20 14.2 (9.2 to 19.3)c,d 0.80 (0.53 to 1.07)¶
B + UG 131 6 32 12.9 (6.8 to 17.3)c,d 0.65 (0.36 to 0.94)¶
Horizontal left leg CMJA (cm)
CG 133 6 23 0.2 (213.2 to 15.6) 0.01 (20.62 to 0.64)
BG 142 6 33 7.3 (20.8 to 16.1)a 0.30 (20.04 to 0.63)§
UG 132 6 26 15.2 (6.7 to 24.5)b,d 0.94 (0.59 to 1.39)¶
B + UG 130 6 32 13.1 (4.1 to 23.3)b,d 0.69 (0.30 to 1.08)¶
Horizontal CMJA (cm)
CG 152 6 21 1.7 (25.3 to 9.2) 0.11 (20.35 to 0.56)
BG 166 6 33 17.4 (9.8 to 25.6)b,d 0.83 (0.48 to 1.18)¶
UG 153 6 22 8.9 (5.3 to 12.6)a 0.55 (0.33 to 0.77)§
B + UG 153 6 41 14.6 (8.4 to 21.2)b,d 0.64 (0.43 to 0.85)¶
20-cm drop jump reactive strength
index (mm$ms21)
CG 1.4 6 0.4 3.3 (26.6 to 14.1) 0.12 (20.25 to 0.48)
BG 1.3 6 0.5 18.9 (5.0 to 34.6)c,d 0.80 (0.44 to 1.26)¶
UG 1.2 6 0.3 10.0 (5.2 to 15.1)a 0.44 (0.23 to 0.64)§
B + UG 1.2 6 0.5 16.6 (5.6 to 28.6)c,d 0.63 (0.42 to 0.83)¶
Multiple 5 bounds test (cm)
CG 810 6 150 1.1 (24.7 to 7.3) 0.06 (20.24 to 0.36)
BG 858 6 159 5.8 (0.8 to 11.0)a 0.28 (0.04 to 0.53)§
UG 804 6 123 11.5 (9.6 to 13.4)c,d 0.73 (0.53 to 0.93)¶
B + UG 819 6 222 10.4 (8.0 to 12.8)c,d 0.64 (0.46 to 0.81)¶

*CG = control group; BG = bilateral plyometric training group; UG = unilateral plyometric training group; B + UG = combined
bilateral + unilateral plyometric training group; CMJA = countermovement jump with arms.
†Values in brackets represent 90% confidence limits.
za, b, and c: denote significant difference pretraining to posttraining (p # 0.05, p , 0.01, and p , 0.001, respectively); d and e:
denote significant difference with the CG posttraining (p # 0.05 and p , 0.01, respectively).
§Small standardized effect.
kLarge standardized effect.
¶Moderate standardized effect.

VOLUME 29 | NUMBER 5 | MAY 2015 | 1321

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Plyometric Training in Young Soccer Players

were specifically instructed to focus only on the maximum
kicking velocity, directing their kicks toward a vertical square
target (length 2 m 3 width 2 m; the “bull’s eye” placed in its
centre) positioned over the goal net. The distance between
the ball and the target was 4 m. Each participant was given 2
practice trials and 3 valid maximal trials. The best perfor-
mance trial was used for the subsequent statistical analysis.
Al least 1 minute of rest was permitted between trials. The
ball velocity was measured by a radar gun (Sports Radar
Speed Gun SR3600; Homosassa, FL, USA) positioned 2 m
behind the target and 0.7 m above the floor.
Bilateral Balance. As previously reported (1), all participants
completed 4 stability tests performed on a balance platform
at a sample rate of 1,000 Hz (Bertec BP5050 balance plate
platform; Bertec Corporation, Columbus, OH, USA): (a)
normal stance, eyes open (N-EO), (b) normal stance, eyes
closed (N-EC), (c) perturbed stance, eyes open (P-EO), and
(d) perturbed stance, eyes closed (P-EC). The perturbed
stance condition was defined as that obtained while standing
on a piece of foam 3 cm thick. The average of 2 balance trials
for each test was used for subsequent analysis and was ex-
pressed in centimeters. Both anterior-posterior and medial-
lateral data were collected during each trial.
Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level 1. The test was executed
as previously described (18). Basically, in the Yo-Yo L1, 2
markers were positioned at a distance of 20 m and the play-
ers perform repeated 20-m shuttle runs interspersed with 10
seconds of active recovery. The time allowed for a shuttle
was progressively decreased. Test result was determined as
the distance covered during the test. Before the test, all sub-
jects carried out a specific warm-up period consisting of the
first 4 running bouts in the test. Throughout all testing pro-
cedures, an investigator to subject ratio of 1:1 was main-
tained. Subjects were instructed to achieve maximal effort

TABLE 4. Training effects (with 90% confidence limits) for the soccer-specific explosive and endurance performance
variables for the CG (n = 14), BG (n = 12), UG (n = 16), and B + UG (n = 12).*†z

Baseline Performance Magnitude of

mean 6 SD change (%) training effect

Maximal kicking velocity (km$h21)

CG 59.1 6 14.2 1.0 (210.2 to 13.6) 0.04 (20.40 to 0.47)
BG 59.2 6 18.4 8.4 (2.6 to 14.5)a 0.26 (0.08 to 0.43)§
UG 59.9 6 10.8 14.0 (9.8 to 18.3)a,d 0.92 (0.74 to 1.09)k
B + UG 61.8 6 19.6 12.0 (8.0 to 16.1)a,d 0.62 (0.21 to 0.73)k
15-m sprint time (s)
CG 3.5 6 0.2 20.2 (24.0 to 3.8) 20.02 (20.55 to 0.51)
BG 3.3 6 0.3 23.8 (26.6 to 20.9)b 20.42 (20.74 to 20.10)§
UG 3.5 6 0.2 25.1 (211.9 to 2.1)c 20.47 (21.14 to 0.19)§
B + UG 3.5 6 0.2 25.9 (213.0 to 1.7)c 20.56 (21.27 to 0.16)§
30-m sprint time (s)
CG 6.1 6 0.6 0.4 (24.2 to 5.3) 0.03 (20.33 to 0.40)
BG 5.7 6 0.5 23.2 (210.4 to 4.5)a 20.31 (21.04 to 0.42)§
UG 6.1 6 0.4 26.2 (211.4 to 20.6)c 20.61 (21.17 to 20.06)k
B + UG 6.0 6 0.6 26.5 (211.6 to 21.2)b 20.53 (20.98 to 20.09)§
Agility test time (s)
CG 5.4 6 0.6 0.8 (22.9 to 4.7) 0.06 (20.23 to 0.36)
BG 5.4 6 0.5 23.9 (210.1 to 2.8)a 20.42 (21.13 to 0.29)§
UG 5.3 6 0.5 28.3 (212.7 to 23.7)c,d 20.80 (21.25 to 20.35)k
B + UG 5.2 6 0.6 28.3 (213.8 to 22.4)c,d 20.66 (21.13 to 20.18)k
Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test level 1 (m)
CG 711 6 252 1.6 (24.1 to 6.3) 0.11 (20.12 to 0.21)
BG 703 6 185 12.7 (2.9 to 23.5)b 0.35 (0.08 to 0.62)§
UG 813 6 477 17.4 (11.4 to 23.8)c 0.26 (0.17 to 0.34)§
B + UG 797 6 645 19.0 (21.9 to 44.4)c 0.21 (20.02 to 0.44)§

*CG = control group; BG = bilateral plyometric training group; UG = unilateral plyometric training group; B + UG = combined
bilateral + unilateral plyometric training group.
†Values in brackets represent 90% confidence limits.
za, b, and c: denote significant difference pretraining to posttraining (p # 0.05, p , 0.01, and p , 0.001, respectively); d and e:
denote significant difference with the CG posttraining (p # 0.05 and p , 0.01, respectively).
§Small standardized effect.
kModerate standardized effect.

the TM

1322 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

TABLE 5. Training effects (with 90% confidence limits) for the balance performance variables for the CG (n = 14), BG
(n = 12), UG (n = 16), and B + UG (n = 12).*†z

Baseline Performance Magnitude of

Balance condition mean 6 SD change (%) training effect

Anterior-posterior normal stance

eyes open (cm)
CG 0.50 6 0.15 21.5 (22.0 to 1.0) 20.01 (20.05 to 0.02)
BG 0.50 6 0.18 28.1 (29.5 to 26.7)a 20.40 (20.47 to 20.33)§
UG 0.45 6 0.20 29.8 (211.2 to 28.4)a 20.21 (20.24 to 20.18)§
B + UG 0.51 6 0.17 219.6 (226.4 to 212.1)b 20.61 (20.86 to 20.36)k
Medial-lateral normal stance
eyes open (cm)
CG 0.34 6 0.11 22.9 (28.7 to 3.1) 20.07 (20.20 to 0.07)
BG 0.31 6 0.11 212.5 (214.6 to 210.3)b 20.28 (20.33 to 20.23)§
UG 0.32 6 0.11 29.1 (211.9 to 26.3)a 20.23 (20.30 to 20.15)§
B + UG 0.34 6 0.14 216.3 (217.7 to 214.9)c 21.17 (21.18 to 20.97)k
Anterior-posterior normal stance
eyes closed (cm)
CG 0.70 6 0.20 22.5 (210.9 to 6.7) 20.06 (20.27 to 0.15)
BG 0.70 6 0.15 215.3 (218.0 to 212.5)a 20.57 (20.8 to 20.54)§
UG 0.74 6 0.24 211.5 (216.1 to 26.8)a 20.35 (20.49 to 20.2)§
B + UG 0.66 6 0.22 221.1 (227.9 to 213.6)c,d 20.62 (20.85 to 20.38)k
Medial-lateral normal stance
eyes closed (cm)
CG 0.34 6 0.10 21.3 (25.4 to 3.0) 20.04 (20.15 to 0.08)
BG 0.30 6 0.13 214.4 (217.7 to 211.0)b 20.29 (20.37 to 20.22)§
UG 0.34 6 0.07 27.1 (29.9 to 24.3)a 20.35 (20.49 to 20.21)§
B + UG 0.31 6 0.08 217.8 (224.9 to 210.1)c 20.77 (21.12 to 20.42)k
Anterior-posterior perturbed
stance eyes open (cm)
CG 0.58 6 0.19 21.1 (212.3 to 11.5) 20.04 (20.46 to 0.38)
BG 0.55 6 0.20 213.1 (218.4 to 27.3)b 20.33 (20.47 to 20.18)§
UG 0.63 6 0.24 29.9 (215.4 to 23.9)a 20.24 (20.39 to 20.09)§
B + UG 0.59 6 0.26 218.7 (227.0 to 29.5)c,d 20.47 (20.56 to 20.18)§
Medial-lateral perturbed stance
eyes open (cm)
CG 0.52 6 0.13 25.6 (28.0 to 23.2)a 20.20 (20.29 to 20.11)§
BG 0.52 6 0.23 216.1 (220.6 to 211.5)c 20.35 (20.46 to 20.24)§
UG 0.52 6 0.16 215.2 (220.9 to 29.1)c 20.51 (20.73 to 20.30)§
B + UG 0.53 6 0.21 224.9 (230.4 to 219.0)c 20.68 (20.85 to 20.50)k
Anterior-posterior perturbed stance
eyes closed (cm)
CG 0.92 6 0.25 23.3 (212.4 to 6.6) 20.1 (20.4 to 0.2)
BG 0.67 6 0.33 213.2 (217.8 to 28.4)c 20.69 (20.95 to 20.42)k
UG 0.90 6 0.19 212.9 (215.8 to 29.8)b 20.44 (20.55 to 20.33)§
B + UG 0.91 6 0.37 224.6 (231.0 to 217.5)c,d 20.61 (20.80 to 20.42)k
Medial-lateral perturbed stance
eyes closed (cm)
CG 0.65 6 0.21 25.5 (215.2 to 10.2) 20.12 (20.44 to 0.31)
BG 0.68 6 0.43 215.2 (220.5 to 29.5)a 20.22 (20.30 to 20.13)§
UG 0.64 6 0.27 210.9 (215.5 to 26.1)a 20.21 (20.29 to 20.11)§
B + UG 0.64 6 0.28 220.6 (226.8 to 213.8)c 21.12 (21.43 to 20.81)k

*CG = control group; BG = bilateral plyometric training group; UG = unilateral plyometric training group; B + UG = combined
bilateral + unilateral plyometric training group.
†Values in brackets represent 90% confidence limits.
za, b, and c: denote significant difference pretraining to posttraining (p # 0.05, p , 0.01, and p , 0.001, respectively); d: denotes
significant difference with the CG posttraining (p # 0.05).
§Small standardized effect.
kModerate standardized effect.

VOLUME 29 | NUMBER 5 | MAY 2015 | 1323

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Plyometric Training in Young Soccer Players

during testing (610% of predicted maximal heart rate). Data
of subjects who did not achieve this condition were excluded
from final analysis.
Internal Training Load Determination. To assure that all soccer
players receive the same soccer training load during
intervention, the session rating of perceived exertion was
determined as previously described (16). In this study, the
Chilean translation of the 10-point category ratio scale mod-
ified by Foster et al. (10) was used. This scale was modified
to better reflect the Chilean idiomatic English.
Treatment
The BG and UG executed bilateral and unilateral exercises,
respectively, whereas the B + UG group combined bilateral
and unilateral jumps. The plyometric interventions were cre-
ated based on previous research experience from our
research team (37). The basic execution technique for the
different exercises was the one described previously as
CMJA, combining cyclic and acyclic jumps. Subjects were
asked to produce maximal intensity vertical height and hor-
izontal distance for acyclic jumps and with minimum ground
contact time for cyclic jumps. Maximal intensity during plyo-
metric drills execution was verified in a randomly assigned
subsample of soccer players (2 from each PT group; n = 6)
during 2 randomly assigned training sessions, by measuring
contact times, height and distance of jumps drills using an
electronic contact mat system (Globus Tester) with a preci-
sion of 0.01 m. A detailed description of the training pro-
gram is depicted in Table 2.
The current experiment was completed during the mid
portion of their competition period. Previous to the
competitive period, subjects completed 6 weeks of summer
pre-season training. The PT groups performed plyometric
drills as a substitute for some technical-tactical soccer drills
within the usual 90-minute practice twice per week for 6
weeks. Because players did not have any history of formal
plyometrics, before beginning the training period, subjects
were instructed to properly execute all the exercises to be
done during this 6-week period. Aside from the formal
training intervention, all participants attended to their
regular physical education classes. All groups completed
the same amount of total jumps during intervention, using
the same surface and time of day for training, with the
same rest intervals between jumps, series, and training
sessions.
Statistical Analyses
All values are reported as mean 6 SD. Relative changes (in
percentage) in performance and standardized effects (SEs)
are expressed with 90% confidence limits. Normality and
homoscedasticity assumptions for all data before and after
intervention were checked, respectively, with Kolmogorov-
Smirnov and Levene tests. To determine the effect of
intervention (i.e., PT) on performance adaptations, a 2-way
variance analysis with repeated measurements (4 groups 3
the TM
2 times) was applied. When a significant F value was
achieved across time or between groups, Sheffe post hoc
procedures were performed to locate the pairwise differen-
ces between the means. The a level was set at p # 0.05 for
statistical significance. All statistical calculations were per-
formed using STATISTICA statistical package (Version
8.0; StatSoft, Inc., Tulsa, OK, USA). In addition to this null
hypothesis testing, these data were also assessed for clinical
significance using an approach based on the magnitudes of
change. Threshold values for assessing magnitudes of SE
(changes as a fraction or multiple of baseline SD) were 0.20,
0.60, 1.2, and 2.0 for small, moderate, large, and very large,
respectively (15). We obtained high intraclass correlation
coefficients for the different performance measurements,
varying between 0.80 and 0.94.
RESULTS
Despite not pair-matching individuals based on an indepen-
dent variable, there were no significant differences between
groups’ descriptive data (Table 1).
Before training, no significant differences were observed
between groups in CMJA, RSI20, MB5 (Table 3), MKV, 15-
and 30-m sprint time, agility time, Yo-Yo L1 endurance
(Table 4), or balance (Table 5) test performance.
No significant changes in the CG were observed, except for
an increase in 1 (of 8) balance performance measure (Table 5),
with a small clinically significant change (20.20 SE).
After training, all experimental groups showed a significant
(p # 0.05) increase and a similar small-to-large SE in CMJA,
RSI20, MB5 (Table 3), MKV, 15- and 30-m sprint, agility,
Yo-Yo L1 endurance (Table 4), and balance performance
(Table 5), with no statistically significant differences between
groups.
In comparison with the CG, the UG and B + UG showed
a significantly (p # 0.05) higher performance change in ver-
tical CMJA with left leg, horizontal CMJA with right and left
leg, MB5 (Table 3), MKV, and agility test (Table 4). Similarly,
the BG and B + UG revealed a significantly (p # 0.05)
superior performance change in vertical CMJA, horizontal
CMJA, and RSI20 test vs. the CG (Table 3). Only the B +
UG expressed a significantly (p # 0.05) higher performance
change in anterior-posterior balance performance vs. the CG
(Table 5).
DISCUSSION
Our results indicate a specificity training effect, where the
use of unilateral PT exercises induced a significantly greater
increase in performance tests where unilateral dominance
was preferred, whereas the use of bilateral PT exercises
induced a significantly greater increase in performance tests
where bilateral dominance was preferred. Also, the results
indicate that compared with soccer training alone, only the
combination of bilateral and unilateral PT exercises induce
a significantly greater increase in balance performance.
Finally, our results showed that the combination of soccer

1324 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

drills and specific power training with no additional training
time in-season optimize general and soccer-specific explo-
siveness and endurance performance in young soccer
players.
All PT groups show a significant increase in CMJA
performance, with a small-to-large SE (Table 3). In the pres-
ent study, the magnitude change in CMJA was similar or
even higher than previously reported for similar slow SSC
muscle actions (SE = 0.50–0.87) (9,30,46) after explosive
training with young soccer players using interventions of
similar duration or number of sessions. It was interesting to
note that the PT groups that incorporate unilateral jump
drills (i.e., UG and B + UG) showed a significantly higher
performance change in unilateral CMJA performance vs.
CG, in both dominant and nondominant leg, and a higher
SE (Table 3). Similarly, PT groups that incorporate bilateral
jump drills (i.e., BG and B + UG) show a significantly (p #
0.05) higher performance change in bilateral CMJA perfor-
mance vs. CG, in both vertical and horizontal plane, and
a higher SE (Table 3). These results can be highly supported
because of the fact that the effectiveness of PT depends on
factors such as eccentric overloading, segmental coordina-
tion, muscle power, and specificity (42).
All PT groups show a significant increase in RSI20
performance, with a small-to-moderate SE (Table 3). The
magnitude change in RSI20 was similar than previously re-
ported (SE = 0.46–0.68) (36) after PT with young soccer
players. Considering the necessity to produce a high rate
of force development in explosive actions, the improvement
in RSI may have enhanced physical parameters of game
performance. The improvement observed could have been
induced by various neuromuscular adaptations (25); how-
ever, because no physiological measurements were made,
only speculations are possible. It is interesting to note that
PT groups that incorporate bilateral jumps (i.e., BG and U +
BG) show a significantly (p # 0.05) higher performance
change in RSI20 performance vs. CG (Table 3), which can
be attributed to the training principle of specificity (38).
All PT groups show a statistically significant increase in
MB5 performance, with a small-to-moderate SE (Table 3).
The magnitude change in MB5 in this study was similar than
that previously reported (SE = 0.44–0.86) (9,30) after explo-
sive training with young soccer players. An increase in MB5
after PT may be achieved by motor coordination adaptations
that can be related to the specificity of movements used
during training (9), therefore the PT effects are higher for
the jumps in which athletes have been specially trained. The
greater magnitude of training effect in MB5 in the UG and
B + UG vs. BG would support such contention, considering
the unilateral nature of the MB5.
To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first
study to compare the effects of unilateral, bilateral, and com-
bined unilateral + bilateral PT in MKV in young soccer play-
ers. All PT groups show a statistically significant increase in
MKV performance, with a small-to-moderate SE (Table 4).
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com
Although differences in type of training program applied
make comparisons between different studies difficult, others
have found similar significant increases in kicking perfor-
mance after PT incorporating unilateral and vertical jumps
in preadolescent soccer players (31). Interestingly, only the
UG and B + UG demonstrated a significantly higher perfor-
mance change vs. CG (Table 4); in addition, the UG and B +
UG show a moderate SE, whereas the BG achieves only
a small SE. These results suggest that PT incorporating uni-
lateral exercises may induce higher MKV performance
changes in young soccer players. Because PT may induce
motor coordination adaptations, related to the specificity
of movements used during training (9), the unilateral nature
of the instep kick may help explain the higher PT effects
observed in athletes who were specially trained with unilat-
eral drills (i.e., UG and B + UG). The increased MKV per-
formance in young soccer players after PT may be attributed
to increased strength and power of legs’ extensor muscles
and these changes could be attributed solely to neuromus-
cular adaptations (31). It may be that these neuromuscular
and strength-power adaptations had an effect on the biome-
chanical factors related to kicking performance, such as max-
imum linear velocity of the toe, ankle, knee, and hip at ball
contact (20), which may have cumulatively or individually
contributed to a higher ball kicking velocity.
Sprint performance may not only be important at youth
level (12,45) but also at a later stage of a player’s career (19)
and need to be developed from a young age. Our results
show that all PT groups show a significant increase in 15-
and 30-m sprint performance, with a small-to-moderate SE
(Table 4). To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the
first study to compare the effects of unilateral, bilateral, and
combined unilateral + bilateral PT in 15- and 30-m sprint
times in young soccer players submitted to a PT intervention
that replace some of their soccer drills during the in-season
period. Although differences in type of training program
applied make comparisons between different studies difficult,
others have found similar significant increases in sprint per-
formance after PT incorporating unilateral and vertical
jumps in preadolescent soccer players (31). As the training
stimulus in our study incorporates horizontal stimulus, this
might have increase the chances to gain adaptations, con-
sidering the importance of horizontal force production and
application in sprint performance (33). This agrees with pre-
vious studies where vertical PT fails to improve sprint per-
formance in young soccer players (36). In contrast to the
positive explosive adaptations observed in the experimental
groups, the CG did not exhibit a significant improvement in
their sprint performance. Other studies have shown that
during the in-season period, young soccer players submitted
to soccer-only training may even reduce their sprint perfor-
mance (36). These observations reinforce the value of an
independent power training program to enhance accelera-
tion and maximal sprint ability of young soccer players dur-
ing their in season.
VOLUME 29 | NUMBER 5 | MAY 2015 | 1325
 Plyometric Training in Young Soccer Players
Although some evidence show no difference in explosive
strength (i.e., jump) between elite and recreational youth
soccer players (6), multiple studies show that power-related
qualities (like agility) may differentiate youth elite and sub-
elite players vs. non-elite players (12,39,45). Our results show
that all PT groups achieve a significant increase in agility
performance, with a small-to-moderate SE (Table 4). How-
ever, only the experimental groups that incorporate unilat-
eral jump drills (i.e., UG and B + UG) showed a significantly
(p # 0.05) higher performance change in agility performance
vs. CG. Also, the UG and the B + UG show a moderate SE,
whereas the BG shows only a small SE. The important
differences between agility tests used among studies difficult
a comparative analysis with our results; however, the agility
performance change in this study (at least in the groups that
incorporate unilateral jump drills) was similar than previ-
ously reported (29.6%) (30), where the same agility test
was used to asses this quality after explosive training with
young soccer players. It must be acknowledged that PT
groups completed a training program with several plyomet-
ric exercises designed to induce short contact times; and
a reduction in contact time with PT may increase RSI, which
may predict the ability to change directions while running
(47). In addition, an improved agility performance may be
related to power development changes or an increase in
eccentric strength of the lower limbs, which can impact
changes of direction performance during the deceleration
phase (43). These observations suggest that compared with
bilateral exercises, unilateral exercises may induce greater
adaptations in agility performance in young soccer players.
Our results show that all PT groups achieve a significant
increase in Yo-Yo L1 endurance performance, with a small
SE (Table 4), whereas the CG shows no changes. Although
we did not determine the reliability of the Yo-Yo test, sub-
jects achieve a mean of 207 b$min21 at the end of the test,
suggesting maximal effort during testing. In young soccer
players, PT may not induce a significant increase in V_ O2max
(31) or lactate threshold (11) but may increase the perfor-
mance during an intermittent test that implicates repeated
and sudden changes of direction (46), increase that may be
related to improved neuromuscular and anaerobic character-
istics. Also, an increased neuromuscular ability (i.e., RSI)
may be transferred into improved running economy (26)
that, independent of V_ O2max, lactate threshold, among
others “aerobic” indicators, may affect endurance (35).
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that
analyzed the effect of unilateral, bilateral, and unilateral +
bilateral PT on balance performance in young soccer players.
Also, another unique feature of our study was the isolated
application of PT in young soccer players, which expand the
limited knowledge available about this topic. Our results
show that the CG achieves a statistically significant increase
only in medial-lateral P-EO, with a small SE. On the other
side, our results show that all PT groups achieve a statistically
significant increase in all measures of medial-lateral and
the TM
1326 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
anterior-posterior balance, with a small-to-moderate SE
(Table 5). Improvement in balance has been observed in
previous PT interventions that incorporate unilateral and
bilateral exercises in young athletes (34) and intervention
periods of 6 weeks seem to be appropriate to induce these
changes (48), including PT interventions with young athletes
(17,34). Because balance improvement may not only result in
an increased athletic performance but also in reduced lower
extremity injury risk in soccer players (48), our results rein-
force the value of PT as an effective strategy to reduce injury
risk in young athletes. From the specificity point of view, it is
not rare to observe in our results that the B + UG show
a significantly higher performance change vs. CG in
anterior-posterior balance (Table 5) but not in medial-
lateral balance because during PT intervention, plyometric
drills were executed in the former direction but not in the
latter. Also, it is worth of noting that the significantly higher
balance performance change in the B + UG vs. CG may be
related with the fact that the former group incorporates an
integrated training protocol (i.e., a combination of unilateral
and bilateral plyometric drills) that may be the most effective
training model (3). This observation may reinforce the
necessity to include combination of plyometric drills to
induce optimum training adaptations not only of unilateral
and bilateral nature but also in different planes in young
soccer players. The improvement in balance performance
may be related to improved cocontraction of lower extrem-
ity muscles (21) or changes in proprioception and neuro-
muscular control (14).
In conclusion, although BG, UG, and B + UG achieve
statistically significant change and small-to-large SE in
explosive and endurance performance measures, because
the B + UG showed a significantly (p # 0.05) higher change
in 13 of 21 performance measures vs. the CG, whereas the
UG and BG showed only 6 and 3, respectively, it is con-
cluded that the combination of unilateral and bilateral jump
drills seems more advantageous to induce significant perfor-
mance improvements during high-intensity, short-term
explosive training in young male soccer players.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
The replacement of some soccer drills with high-intensity
plyometric exercises may positively affect jump, sprint,
kicking, agility, endurance, and balance performance in
young soccer players during the in-season period. These
adaptations can be achieved in the short term and may
potentially increase competitive performance and may
reduce injury risk. However, to maximize adaptations, it is
recommended that during training soccer players combine
unilateral and bilateral drills, executed in different planes (i.e.,
vertical, horizontal, lateral). Although because training
adaptations demonstrated a specificity effect, in sports where
performance depend mostly on unilateral or bilateral move-
ments, then a high portion of drills should be executed with
this movement pattern. Also, a combination of cyclic and

acyclic jumps (with a moderate increase in volume across
time) may optimize performance adaptations. Also, although
PT can induce an increase in explosive, endurance, and
balance performance in young soccer players, to optimize
training adaptations, this training strategy should be ade-
quately applied in a more complex training plan that
incorporates other explosive (e.g., sprints), endurance, tech-
nical, and tactical-oriented training methods.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors disclose professional relationships with com-
panies or manufacturers who will benefit from the results of
this study. The results of this study do not constitute
endorsement of the product by the authors of the National
Strength and Conditioning Association. The authors dis-
close funding received for this work from any of the
following organizations: National Institutes of Health,
Welcome Trust, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and
other(s).
REFERENCES
1. Bellew, JW, Yates, JW, and Gater, DR. The initial effects of low-
volume strength training on balance in untrained older men and
women. J Strength Cond Res 17: 121–128, 2003.
2. Berjan Bacvarevic, B, Pazin, N, Bozic, PR, Mirkov, D, Kukolj, M, and
Jaric, S. Evaluation of a composite test of kicking performance.
J Strength Cond Res 26: 1945–1952, 2012.
3. Brown, TN, Palmieri-Smith, RM, and McLean, SG. Comparative
adaptations of lower limb biomechanics during uni-lateral and bi-
lateral landings after different neuromuscular-based ACL injury
prevention protocols. J Strength Cond Res 28: 2859–2871, 2014.
4. Cappa, DF and Behm, DG. Training specificity of hurdle vs.
countermovement jump training. J Strength Cond Res 25: 2715–2720,
2011.
5. Castagna, C, D’Ottavio, S, and Abt, G. Activity profile of young
soccer players during actual match play. J Strength Cond Res 17: 775–
780, 2003.
6. Chrisman, SP, O’Kane, JW, Polissar, NL, Tencer, AF, Mack, CD,
Levy, MR, and Schiff, MA. Strength and jump biomechanics of elite
and recreational female youth soccer players. J Athl Train 47: 609–
615, 2012.
7. de Villarreal, ES, Kellis, E, Kraemer, WJ, and Izquierdo, M.
Determining variables of plyometric training for improving vertical
jump height performance: A meta-analysis. J Strength Cond Res 23:
495–506, 2009.
8. Delcore, G, Mathieu, W, Salazar, W, and Hernandez, J. Comparison
between one-leg and two-leg plyometric training on vertical jump
performance [Abstract]. Med Sci Sports Exerc 30: 615, 1998.
9. Diallo, O, Dore, E, Duche, P, and Van Praagh, E. Effects of
plyometric training followed by a reduced training programme on
physical performance in prepubescent soccer players. J Sports Med
Phys Fitness 41: 342–348, 2001.
10. Foster, C, Florhaug, JA, Franklin, J, Gottschall, L, Hrovatin, LA,
Parker, S, Doleshal, P, and Dodge, C. A new approach to
monitoring exercise training. J Strength Cond Res 15: 109–115, 2001.
11. Gorostiaga, EM, Izquierdo, M, Ruesta, M, Iribarren, J, Gonzalez-
Badillo, JJ, and Ibanez, J. Strength training effects on physical
performance and serum hormones in young soccer players. Eur J
Appl Physiol 91: 698–707, 2004.
12. Hansen, L, Bangsbo, J, Twisk, J, and Klausen, K. Development of
muscle strength in relation to training level and testosterone in
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com
young male soccer players. J Appl Physiol (1985) 87: 1141–1147,
1999.
13. Helgerud, J, Engen, LC, Wisloff, U, and Hoff, J. Aerobic endurance
training improves soccer performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc 33:
1925–1931, 2001.
14. Hewett, TE, Paterno, MV, and Myer, GD. Strategies for enhancing
proprioception and neuromuscular control of the knee. Clin Orthop
Relat Res: 76–94, 2002.
15. Hopkins, WG, Marshall, SW, Batterham, AM, and Hanin, J.
Progressive statistics for studies in sports medicine and exercise
science. Med Sci Sports Exerc 41: 3–13, 2009.
16. Impellizzeri, FM, Rampinini, E, Coutts, AJ, Sassi, A, and
Marcora, SM. Use of RPE-based training load in soccer. Med Sci
Sports Exerc 36: 1042–1047, 2004.
17. Johnson, BA, Salzberg, CL, and Stevenson, DA. A systematic review:
Plyometric training programs for young children. J Strength Cond Res
25: 2623–2633, 2011.
18. Krustrup, P, Mohr, M, Amstrup, T, Rysgaard, T, Johansen, J,
Steensberg, A, Pedersen, PK, and Bangsbo, J. The yo-yo intermittent
recovery test: Physiological response, reliability, and validity. Med
Sci Sports Exerc 35: 697–705, 2003.
19. le Gall, F, Carling, C, Williams, M, and Reilly, T. Anthropometric
and fitness characteristics of international, professional and amateur
male graduate soccer players from an elite youth academy. J Sci Med
Sport 13: 90–95, 2010.
20. Lees, A, Asai, T, Andersen, TB, Nunome, H, and Sterzing, T. The
biomechanics of kicking in soccer: A review. J Sports Sci 28: 805–817,
2010.
21. Lloyd, DG. Rationale for training programs to reduce anterior
cruciate ligament injuries in Australian football. J Orthop Sports Phys
Ther 31: 645–654, 2001; discussion 661.
22. Lloyd, RS, Oliver, JL, Hughes, MG, and Williams, CA. The effects
of 4-weeks of plyometric training on reactive strength index and leg
stiffness in male youths. J Strength Cond Res 26: 2812–2819, 2012.
23. Makaruk, H, Winchester, JB, Sadowski, J, Czaplicki, A, and
Sacewicz, T. Effects of unilateral and bilateral plyometric training on
power and jumping ability in women. J Strength Cond Res 25: 3311–
3318, 2011.
24. Markovic, G. Does plyometric training improve vertical jump
height? A meta-analytical review. Br J Sports Med 41: 349–355, 2007;
discussion 355.
25. Markovic, G and Mikulic, P. Neuro-musculoskeletal and
performance adaptations to lower-extremity plyometric training.
Sports Med 40: 859–895, 2010.
26. Marta, C, Marinho, DA, Barbosa, TM, Izquierdo, M, and
Marques, MC. Effects of concurrent training on explosive strength and
VO2max in prepubescent children. Int J Sports Med 34: 888–896, 2013.
27. McCurdy, KW, Langford, GA, Doscher, MW, Wiley, LP, and
Mallard, KG. The effects of short-term unilateral and bilateral lower-
body resistance training on measures of strength and power.
J Strength Cond Res 19: 9–15, 2005.
28. McKay, D and Henschke, N. Plyometric training programmes
improve motor performance in prepubertal children. Br J Sports Med
46: 727–728, 2012.
29. Meylan, C, Cronin, J, Oliver, J, Hughes, M, and Manson, S. An
evidence-based model of power development in youth soccer. Int J
Sports Sci Coach 34: 1241–1264, 2014.
30. Meylan, C and Malatesta, D. Effects of in-season plyometric training
within soccer practice on explosive actions of young players.
J Strength Cond Res 23: 2605–2613, 2009.
31. Michailidis, Y, Fatouros, IG, Primpa, E, Michailidis, C, Avloniti, A,
Chatzinikolaou, A, Barbero-Alvarez, JC, Tsoukas, D, Douroudos, II,
Draganidis, D, Leontsini, D, Margonis, K, Berberidou, F, and
Kambas, A. Plyometrics’ trainability in preadolescent soccer
athletes. J Strength Cond Res 27: 38–49, 2013.
VOLUME 29 | NUMBER 5 | MAY 2015 | 1327
 Plyometric Training in Young Soccer Players
32. Mirwald, RL, Baxter-Jones, AD, Bailey, DA, and Beunen, GP. An
assessment of maturity from anthropometric measurements. Med Sci
Sports Exerc 34: 689–694, 2002.
33. Morin, JB, Bourdin, M, Edouard, P, Peyrot, N, Samozino, P, and
Lacour, JR. Mechanical determinants of 100-m sprint running
performance. Eur J Appl Physiol 112: 3921–3930, 2012.
34. Myer, GD, Ford, KR, Brent, JL, and Hewett, TE. The effects of
plyometric vs. dynamic stabilization and balance training on power,
balance, and landing force in female athletes. J Strength Cond Res 20:
345–353, 2006.
35. Noakes, TD. Implications of exercise testing for prediction of
athletic performance: A contemporary perspective. Med Sci Sports
Exerc 20: 319–330, 1988.
36. Ramirez-Campillo, R, Meylan, C, Alvarez, C, Henriquez-Olguin, C,
Martinez, C, Canas-Jamett, R, Andrade, DC, and Izquierdo, M.
Effects of in-season low-volume high-intensity plyometric training
on explosive actions and endurance of young soccer players.
J Strength Cond Res 28: 1335–1342, 2014.
37. Ramirez-Campillo, R, Meylan, CM, Alvarez-Lepin, C, Henriquez-
Olguin, C, Martinez, C, Andrade, DC, Castro-Sepulveda, M,
Burgos, C, Baez, EI, and Izquierdo, M. The effects of interday rest on
adaptation to 6-weeks of plyometric training in young soccer
players. J Strength Cond Res, 2013 Oct 21 [Epub Ahead of Print].
38. Randell, AD, Cronin, JB, Keogh, JW, and Gill, ND. Transference of
strength and power adaptation to sports performance-horizontal
and vertical force production. Strength Cond J 32: 100–106, 2010.
39. Reilly, T, Bangsbo, J, and Franks, A. Anthropometric and
physiological predispositions for elite soccer. J Sports Sci 18: 669–
683, 2000.
the TM
1328 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
40. Saez de Villarreal, E, Requena, B, and Cronin, JB. The effects of
plyometric training on sprint performance: A meta-analysis.
J Strength Cond Res 26: 575–584, 2012.
41. Saez-Saez de Villarreal, E, Requena, B, and Newton, RU. Does
plyometric training improve strength performance? A meta-analysis.
J Sci Med Sport 13: 513–522, 2010.
42. Schmidtbleicher, D. Training for Power Events. P. Komi, ed. Oxford,
United Kingdom: Blackwell Science Ltd, 1992. pp. 381–395.
43. Sheppard, JM and Young, WB. Agility literature review:
Classifications, training and testing. J Sport Sci 24: 919–932, 2006.
44. Stroyer, J, Hansen, L, and Klausen, K. Physiological profile and
activity pattern of young soccer players during match play. Med Sci
Sports Exerc 36: 168–174, 2004.
45. Vaeyens, R, Malina, RM, Janssens, M, Van Renterghem, B,
Bourgois, J, Vrijens, J, and Philippaerts, RM. A multidisciplinary
selection model for youth soccer: The Ghent youth soccer project.
Br J Sports Med 40: 928–934, 2006; discussion 934.
46. Wong, PL, Chamari, K, and Wisloff, U. Effects of 12-week on-field
combined strength and power training on physical performance
among U-14 young soccer players. J Strength Cond Res 24: 644–652,
2010.
47. Young, WB, James, R, and Montgomery, I. Is muscle power related
to running speed with changes of direction? J Sports Med Phys Fitness
42: 282–288, 2002.
48. Zech, A, Hubscher, M, Vogt, L, Banzer, W, Hansel, F, and
Pfeifer, K. Balance training for neuromuscular control and
performance enhancement: A systematic review. J Athl Train 45:
392–403, 2010.