Comparison of Countermovement and Preferred-Style Jump Biomechanics in Male Basketball Players

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate and compare the biomechanics of countermovement (CMJ) and preferred-style (PrefJ) jumps. Eight male basketball players (age: 19 ± 1 year; height: 1.84 ± 0.14 m; mass: 92.8 ± 11.4 kg) participated in a cross-sectional study for which they performed max effort CMJ and PrefJ while motion capture and force plate data were recorded. The CMJ were performed according to common procedures. For the PrefJ, the eight players chose to use a short approach run and a step-in jump, with a clear lead and trail leg foot contact pattern. Vertical ground reaction forces (GRF), center-of-mass (COM) parameters, as well as hip, knee, and ankle flexion angles, extension velocities, net joint moments, powers, and work were all calculated and used for analysis. Bi-lateral data from the CMJ were averaged, whereas lead and trail leg data from the PrefJ were kept separated. The PrefJ was characterized by greater jump height and GRF and shorter contact times. Joint-level differences indicated that the PrefJ was characterized by larger joint kinetics. Importantly, very few biomechanical variables of the CMJ and PrefJ were correlated, which suggests that each jump type is characterized by unique movement strategies. Since PrefJ may better represent athlete- and sport-specific movement pattern, these findings could have implications for assessing and monitoring neuromuscular performance of basketball players.

Description

© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Keywords

Sports, Biomechanics, Performance, Movement Strategy

Citation

Kipp K, Krzyszkowski J, Smith T, Geiser C, Kim H. Comparison of Countermovement and Preferred-Style Jump Biomechanics in Male Basketball Players. Applied Sciences. 2021; 11(13):6092. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11136092

Collections