Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Vertical Jump Volleyball
Vertical Jump Volleyball
Vertical Jump Volleyball
Departments of 1Volleyball; 2Sports Medicine, Faculty of Sport, University in Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia; and 3Motor
Control and Human Performance Laboratory Zagreb, School of Kinesiology, University of Zagreb, Croatia
ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION
V
Sattler, T, Hadžić, V, Dervišević, E, and Markovic, G. Vertical olleyball, one of the most popular team sports in
jump performance of professional male and female volleyball the world, is characterized by short and explo-
players: effects of playing position and competition level. sive movement patterns, agile and quick posi-
J Strength Cond Res 29(6): 1486–1493, 2015—Vertical jump tioning, jumps, and blocks. Apart from technical
(VJ) performance is an important element for successful volley- and tactical knowledge, appropriate morphological fea-
tures (e.g., lean body mass with advanced body height)
ball practice. The aims of the study were (a) to explore the overall
(13), and speed/agility (8), the jumping abilities are one
VJ performance of elite volleyball players of both sexes, (b) to
of the key elements in successful volleyball practice of
explore the differences in VJ performance among different com-
both sexes (2,6,25). The vertical jumps (VJs) in volleyball
petition levels and different playing positions, and (c) to evaluate
are related to serving, spiking, or blocking. The height of
the sex-related differences in the role of the arm swing and 3- VJ during a block jump (BJ) represents the potential for
step approach with arm swing on the jump height. We assessed a reduction in effectiveness of the attacking opponent.
the VJ capacity in 253 volleyball players (113 males and 140 Vertical jump height during serving or spiking (e.g., attack
females) from Slovenian first and second Volleyball Division. The jump, AJ) enables the player to achieve the contact with
height of squat jump (SJ), countermovement jump, block jump, the ball above the net, allowing better spiking or serving
and attack jump was tested using an Optojump system. We angles. Apart from sports success, VJ height is also corre-
observed significant differences (p # 0.05) in VJ height between lated with the increased susceptibility to patellar tendin-
different levels of play that were most pronounced in the SJ. opathy (12), which is the most common overuse injury
Position-related differences in VJ performance were observed in volleyball players. These findings highlight the
in male players between receivers and setters (p # 0.05), importance of testing and developing jumping abilities in
whereas in females, VJ performance across different playing volleyball.
Ziv and Lidor (27) have reviewed VJ performance in
positions seems equal. Finally, we found that male players sig-
male and female volleyball players. They have analyzed
nificantly better use the arm swing during VJ than females (p #
32 studies and have reported differences between players
0.05), whereas the use of eccentric part of the jump and
of different skill levels, changes in VJ performance over
approach before the spike to improve VJ performance seem to a season, factors affecting VJ performance, different jump-
be equally mastered activity in both sexes. These results could ing techniques, and relationship between success and VJ
assist coaches in the development of jumping performance in performance. The common denominators of the studies
volleyball players. Furthermore, presented normative data for presented in their review were relatively low number of
jump heights of elite male and female volleyball players could participants (range, 6–88 in females, and range, 5–74 in
be useful in selection and profiling of young volleyball players. males), low participation of high ranking volleyball players
according to the FIVB world ranking list (e.g., teams from
KEY WORDS muscle power, movement performance, sport- countries within the first 30/138 for males), as well as the
specific jump, functional testing fact that mostly reported were the values of countermove-
ment jump (CMJ) or squat jump (SJ), whereas reports of
more volleyball-specific jumps such as BJ and AJ were
Address correspondence to Goran Markovic, gmarkov@kif.hr. much less common.
29(6)/1486–1493 The main aim of this study was to explore the overall VJ
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research capacity of a large sample of male and female elite
Ó 2015 National Strength and Conditioning Association volleyball players investigating both general (CMJ and SJ)
the TM
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
the TM
and sport-specific type of jumps (BJ and AJ). We were reflect both the general and specific aspect of VJ ability in
particularly interested to study the differences in VJ volleyball.
performance among different levels of play and playing
Subjects
positions, as this issue was not addressed in previous studies
After the end of competitive season, we have evaluated VJ
(27). Finally, we explored the absolute and percentage dif-
ability in 253 volleyball players (113 males and 140 females)
ferences in jump height among selected VJ types to esti-
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCyw
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Vertical Jumping in Volleyball
The validity and reproducibility of VJ testing using Opto- arms from an initial position in front of the chest (Figure 1,
jump device proved to be excellent (9,22). Also, our recent panels C1 and C2) as they perform during the volleyball
study showed excellent reliability (intraclass correlation co- game/practice. For AJ, subjects had a 3-step approach
efficients $0.97; coefficients of variation #2.8%) of all 4 VJs (Figure 1, panels D1–D4), and they were allowed to use an
in professional volleyball players (22). arm swing as they perform for the spiking activities during
For SJ, subjects started a jump after a 3-second pause from the game/practice.
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCyw
RESULTS
Table 2 and Figure 2 depict
mean (SD) jump heights for
male and female volleyball play-
ers according to the level of
play with comparison to previ-
ous studies. The MANOVAs
revealed a significant multivari-
ate main effect for competition
level in males (F = 2.23; p ,
0.001; partial eta-squared =
0.09; power to detect the
effect = 0.92) and females (F =
3.4; p , 0.01; partial eta-
squared = 0.05; power to detect
the effect = 0.90). The subse-
Figure 1. Vertical jump testing using an Optojump device. A) Starting position for squat jump. B) Starting position
for countermovement jump. C) Starting position for block jump with countermovement phase. D) Three-step quent univariate analysis of var-
approach with arm swing and attack (spike) jump. iances have revealed that
players from first Division had
the TM
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
CX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC1y0abggQZXdgGj2MwlZLeI= on 06/07/2024
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCyw
TABLE 2. Mean vertical jump heights (SD) in centimeters according to the sex and competition level with comparison to previous studies.*
Testing
Author Proficiency N Sex Age Subgroups SJ (SD) CMJ (SD) BJ (SD) AJ (SD) device
Current study Slovenian National 113 M 22 First division 40.8† (5.6) 45.3 (4.9) 49.1 (5.6) 64.4 (6.9) OJ
League Second division 37.2 (4.1) 42.5 (5.2) 46.9 (6.0) 60.7 (7.4)
140 F 19 First division 28.5† (4.8) 31.7 (5.2) 33.4 (5.6) 42.9 (6.6)
Second division 25.8† (4.0) 29.9 (4.2) 32.1 (4.7) 40.6 (5.6)
Maffiuletti Italian Regional 10 M 22 Control 42.4 (6.0) 48.1 (6.0) 54.4 (4.8) OJ
et al. (14) League 10 M 22 Experimentalz 47 53 63
Lian et al. (12) Norwegian Regional 23 M 22 Healthy controls 36.0 (4.0) 40.3 (4.1) ECMS
League
Forthomme Belgium National 11 M 26 First division 56.5 (4.6) ECMS
et al. (6) League 8 M 21 Second division 51.2 (2.3)
Saez de Villarreal Spanish National 12 M 23 First divisionz 42–47 ECMS
et al. (21) League
Borras et al. (3) Spanish National 23 M 25 2006 team 46.5 (3.5) ECMS
Team 25 M 27 2007 team 43.9 (5.0) 47.3 (5.7) 56.8 (6.4) 66.3 (5.9)
*N = number of participants; SJ = squat jump; CMJ = countermovement jump; BJ = block jump (CMJ with arm swing); AJ = attack jump (alias spike jump, approach jump);
OJ = Optojump; ECMS = electronic contact mat system; NA = not available.
†Significant differences in jump height according to the level of play.
zData presented in graph only in original article.
TM
| www.nsca.com
1489
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Vertical Jumping in Volleyball
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCyw
CX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC1y0abggQZXdgGj2MwlZLeI= on 06/07/2024
Figure 2. Mean jump height in all 4 vertical jump tests in male (A) and female (B) volleyball players. Error bars denote SD.
higher jump heights than players from second Division for all 4 The MANOVAs also revealed significant differences in VJ
VJ types in both sexes. However, these differences were signif- performance according to the playing position in males (F =
icant only for SJ in males (F = 8.20; p = 0.005), and for SJ (F = 2.18; p = 0.005) but not in females. Significant position-
10.76; p = 0.001) and CMJ (F = 4.40; p = 0.038) in females. related differences observed in males were related to
TABLE 3. The absolute and percentage differences in jump height between different jump types.*
Male Countermovement (SJ vs. CMJ) 39.1 vs. 44.0 4.9 12.5
Arm swing (CMJ vs. BJ)† 44.0 vs. 47.90 3.9 9.0
Approach (BJ vs. AJ) 47.9 vs. 62.50 14.6 30.5
Arm swing and approach (CMJ vs. AJ)† 44.0 vs. 62.50 18.5 42.2
Female Countermovement (SJ vs. CMJ) 27.24 vs. 30.86 23.6 13.3
Arm swing (CMJ vs. BJ) 30.86 vs. 32.80 21.9 6.3
Approach (BJ vs. AJ) 32.80 vs. 41.80 29.0 27.4
Arm swing and approach (CMJ vs. AJ) 30.86 vs. 41.80 210.9 35.5
*SJ = squat jump; CMJ = countermovement jump; BJ = block jump (CMJ with arm swing from blocking motion); AJ = attack jump
(CMJ with 3-step approach and full arm swing as used for spiking).
†Significant sex-related difference in mean percentage difference (both p , 0.001).
the TM
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
the TM
TABLE 4. Sex-specific normative centile values of vertical jump performance measured by Optojump.
Percentiles
Males Squat jump (cm) 31.60 32.68 35.58 38.90 42.40 45.90 48.79
Countermovement jump (cm) 36.40 37.20 41.40 43.70 48.10 50.40 53.30
Block jump (cm) 39.04 40.70 44.78 48.30 53.60 55.70 56.67
CX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC1y0abggQZXdgGj2MwlZLeI= on 06/07/2024
Attack jump (cm) 52.77 55.56 59.70 62.90 66.43 73.81 76.50
Females Squat jump (cm) 18.38 20.03 23.65 27.25 30.92 33.97 36.84
Countermovement jump (cm) 21.91 24.01 27.72 30.95 34.80 38.20 41.49
Block jump (cm) 23.20 26.50 29.40 33.10 38.00 39.70 41.24
Attack jump (cm) 29.32 32.05 38.90 41.95 45.90 49.36 53.69
differences in CMJ heights between receivers and setters (e.g., using contact mat or OptoJump device). Note that our
(p # 0.05). The mean difference in CMJ between receivers results compare well with previously reported data for both
and setters in favor of receivers was 4.38 cm (p = 0.028). sexes. Specifically, CMJ height in previous research ranged
Significant multivariate sex-related differences (F = 8.59, from 40.3 to 49.7 cm and from 28.9 to 34.6 cm for male and
p , 0.001) were observed in percentage differences in VJ female volleyball players, respectively. In this study, these
height between different jump types (Table 3). On univariate values ranged from 42.5 to 45.3 cm in male players, and from
level, the differences were significant for CMJ vs. BJ (F = 29.9 to 31.7 cm in female players, respectively. Table 2 also
20.6; p , 0.001) and CMJ vs. AJ (F = 25.7; p , 0.001), depicts that only Borras et al. (3) reported jumping perfor-
whereas there were no significant sex-related differences in mance of male volleyball players for all jump types, whereas
CMJ vs. SJ and AJ vs. BJ. These results indicate that both in female volleyball players, only data for SJ and CMJ were
sexes use an eccentric part of the jump equally good to reported so far.
improve the jump height; however, males seem to have As hypothesized, players from the first Division demon-
a better capacity to use the arm swing to further increase strated better VJ performance than the second Division
VJ height. players, regardless of VJ type or sex. These rather robust
Finally, Table 4 reports sex-specific normative centile val- findings are in concordance with findings of other authors.
ues for performance in all 4 VJ tests. In particular, Barnes (1) also reported that female NCAA
Division I athletes had significantly greater CMJ heights than
DISCUSSION Division III, and the effect size comparisons showed large-
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that magnitude differences between Division I and both Divisions
comprehensively evaluated VJ performance of male and II and III for jump height. Furthermore, Fry et al. (7) re-
female professional volleyball players with respect to the ported significant differences in physical characteristics
competition level and playing position for 4 different VJ between female starters and nonstarters even within the
types. The main results of our study are as follows: (a) there same level of play (NCAA Division I). Interestingly, in this
exist significant differences in VJ height between different study, the most pronounced and statistically significant dif-
competition levels, and those differences are particularly ferences in VJ performance according to the level of play
accentuated in SJ, (b) significant position-related differences were found in SJ (Table 2). The SJ is an unnatural
exist only in male players between receivers and setters, concentric-only ballistic movement that requires an exten-
whereas in females, the jumping capacity across different sive practice before it can be performed correctly (10). We
playing positions seems equal, (c) the better use of arm swing believe that this may explain the sensitivity of SJ to discrim-
in males seems to be their main advantage over females, inate among players playing at different quality levels. These
whereas the use of eccentric part of the jump (i.e., results, together with previous research, highlight VJ ability
countermovement) and approach before the spike to as a very important motor quality in professional volleyball.
improve VJ performance seems to be equally mastered In that regard, training modalities that enhance jumping per-
ability in both sexes. formance like heavy-resistance strength training (5), ballistic
To compare our results with previously reported data power training (20), and plyometric training (15,16) could be
(Table 2), we have analyzed only those studies recommended for volleyball players.
(3,6,12,14,17,19,21) where the same methodology (27), Regarding the position-related differences, the results only
namely the flight time, was used to calculate the jump height partly support our hypothesis. Specifically, we found
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Vertical Jumping in Volleyball
significant position-related differences only in male volley- concluded that greater increase in jump height for the
ball players, with setters having significantly lower CMJ men when using the arm swing could be because of greater
height than receivers. These differences could have impor- upper-body strength of men compared with women (26). It
tant implications for effective defensive activities during is likely that the upper-body strength in female volleyball
a game. The contribution of setters in the defensive players represents an important reserve for the improve-
blocking activities is more or less same in comparison with ment of their jumping capacity and that additional strength
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCyw
receivers and corrections. Depending on the court situa- training with the emphasis on shoulder musculature would
tion, setters are active in supportive jumps to block the first warrant such an improvement. Indeed, biomechanical
tempo, but they also participate in regular block while models suggest that shoulder musculature is directly
CX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC1y0abggQZXdgGj2MwlZLeI= on 06/07/2024
moving laterally to block the attack on their side, or they responsible for approximately one-third of the performance
are running across to form a triple block when the enhancement associated with arm swing (4).
opponent attack is on the side opposite to their position In summary, this is the first study that comprehensively
on the court. During a game, setters are rarely jumping to evaluated VJ ability of male and female volleyball players,
attack, and even then they try to simulate the setting with particular emphasis on competition level, playing
(rather than spiking) activity, to avoid blocking by oppo- position, and sex. We observed significant differences in VJ
nent central blockers. In those cases, setters usually just height between different levels of play that were most
suddenly pass the ball over the net into the undefended part pronounced in SJ. Furthermore, significant position-
of the opponent’s field. Marques et al. (18) found significant related differences in VJ height were observed in male
anthropometric and strength differences among playing players between receivers and setters, but not in female.
positions in elite male volleyball players, with setters having Finally, our results indicate that male players significantly
significantly poorer parallel squat performance than the better use the arm swing during VJ than females, whereas
outside and opposite hitters. This finding compares well the use of eccentric part of the jump and approach before
with our results and suggests that additional strength and the spike to improve VJ height seem to be equally
plyometric training may warrant a better jump perfor- mastered ability in both sexes. These findings also
mance (23) for setters to improve their efficacy in blocking emphasize the importance of using both the general and
and attack activities during a game. sport-specific VJs in the evaluation of jumping capacity in
Our second hypothesis was also only partly supported. volleyball.
Specifically, we found no sex-related differences in the use
of countermovement to facilitate VJ height, and on average PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
(regardless of the sex), the countermovement accounted for Vertical jump performance represents an important fitness
approximately 13.6% increase in jump height in CMJ component in many individual and game sports, including
compared with SJ. Similar results were reported in previous volleyball. From practical point of view, our results suggest
volleyball studies (Table 2) where the average augmenta- that male and female professional volleyball players play-
tion of jump height with countermovement amounted to ing at a higher level have a better VJ performance, thereby
;12%. Earlier study (11) on this topic reported different emphasizing the importance of developing lower extrem-
results (i.e., greater capacity to use countermovement in ity strength and power qualities in volleyball players.
females compared with males). However, the subjects in Although position-related differences in VJ performance
this study were not professional athletes with high profi- were less pronounced in this study, it seems that male
ciency in VJ. Thus, additional studies performed on male setters could benefit from additional strength and plyo-
and female athletes specialized in jumping-type activities metric training to improve this motor quality and partic-
are needed to verify this finding. Contrary to prestretch, ipate more efficiently in blocking and attack activities
the use of arm swing for VJ height augmentation proved during the game. When it comes to sport-specific aspects
to be significantly better in male vs. female volleyball play- of VJ, male and female volleyball players have the same
ers, thereby supporting our hypothesis. Specifically, male capacity to use countermovement and approach for VJ
players increased their CMJ height by 9 and 42.2% in BJ height augmentation; however, the use of arm swing in VJ
(arm swing) and AJ (combination of arm swing and height increase is less efficient in female volleyball players,
approach), whereas the corresponding increase in CMJ possibly due to less developed upper-body mass and
height in female players was 6.3 and 35.5%, respectively. strength (26). Thus, additional upper-body strength in
These findings are also in line with the results of previous female volleyball players could be of benefit for augment-
studies (Table 2). Notably, we found no sex-related differ- ing VJ performance through a more effective use of arm
ences in jump height augmentation with 3-step approach swing. Finally, given that our study was performed on
(BJ vs. AJ difference), which is unique characteristic of the a large sample of high-standard professional volleyball
AJ. Thus, we may conclude that the major difference players of both sexes, presented normative data for jump
between men and women jump heights lies in the arm heights (Table 4) could be used in selection and profiling of
swing. This finding is supported by Walsh et al. who young volleyball players.
the TM
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
the TM
3. Borras, X, Balius, X, Drobnic, F, and Galilea, P. Vertical jump professional volleyball players during the in-season: A case study.
assessment on volleyball: A follow-up of three seasons of a high- J Strength Cond Res 22: 1147–1155, 2008.
level volleyball team. J Strength Cond Res 25: 1686–1694, 2011.
18. Marques, MC, van den Tillaar, R, Gabbett, TJ, Reis, VM, and
4. Domire, ZJ and Challis, JH. An induced energy analysis to
CX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC1y0abggQZXdgGj2MwlZLeI= on 06/07/2024
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.