See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/262903172

Effects of in-season short-term plyometric training on jumping and agility

performance of basketball players

Article  in  Sport Sciences for Health · December 2013

DOI: 10.1007/s11332-013-0159-4

CITATIONS READS

41 3,943

1 author:

Abbas Asadi
Payame Noor University
54 PUBLICATIONS   688 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Supplementation and immune-endocrine response View project

Plyometric training: how? why? View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Abbas Asadi on 29 September 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Author's personal copy
Sport Sci Health (2013) 9:133–137
DOI 10.1007/s11332-013-0159-4

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Effects of in-season short-term plyometric training on jumping

and agility performance of basketball players
Abbas Asadi

Received: 16 June 2013 / Accepted: 11 October 2013 / Published online: 29 October 2013
Ó Springer-Verlag Italia 2013

Abstract The purpose of this investigation was to Keywords Agility
Plyometric exercise
Jump

examine the effects of in-season plyometric training pro- Basketball
gram on power and agility performance in young male
basketball players. Twenty intermediate basketball players
(age 20.1 ± 1.3 years; height 181.1 ± 8.5 cm; body mass
78.8 ± 5 kg) from Division I province team volunteered to Introduction
participate in this study and were randomly divided into
two groups: plyometric training (PL; n = 10) and control In basketball, the ability to generate maximal strength
group (CG; n = 10). Plyometric training took place twice levels in the shortest period of time (muscular power) is
weekly for 6 weeks including three sets of 15 repetitions of necessary to gain high sport performance levels [1].
depth jump (from 45-cm box height), vertical jump, and Moreover, agility is a vital component for the success in
standing long jump, in addition to regular basketball basketball players [2]. Two methods, plyometric and
practice of the team. Vertical jump (VJ), standing long resistance training, are usually referred to in the literature
jump (SLJ), 4 9 9-m shuttle run, agility t test (ATT), as improving the most powerful strength characteristics
and Illinois Agility Test (IAT) were measured at pre- (explosive strength) in basketball players. Several studies
and post-training. The PL group showed significant have demonstrated the positive effects of plyometric and
improvement (P \ 0.05) in VJ (10.21 ± 2.72 cm), SLJ resistance training to increase the levels of strength and
(21.15 ± 8.10 cm), 4 9 9-m shuttle run (0.62 ± 0.28 s), power [3, 4].
ATT (1.16 ± 0.57 s), and IAT (1.17 ± 0.65 s) after a Plyometric exercise, such as jumping, bounding, and
6-week training period and compared to CG. It can be hopping, is a widely used training mode to improve muscle
concluded that a 6-week in-season plyometric training power [5]. Plyometrics consists of a rapid stretching of a
program has positive effects for improving power and muscle (eccentric phase) immediately followed by a con-
agility performance in young male basketball players and centric or shortening action of the same muscle and con-
this study provides support for coaches and basketball nective tissue, and this phenomenon is called stretch–
players who use this training method during competitive shortening cycle [5]. Plyometric training has been shown to
phase. improve jumping ability [4], agility [6], running economy
[7], and strength [8].
However, a large number of studies investigated the
effects of plyometric training efficacy on performance [2,
3, 6, 8–14]; only one study examined the effects of in-
season plyometric training in basketball players [11].
A. Asadi (&) Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to examine
Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, Payame
the effects of a 6-week in-season plyometric training pro-
Noor University, Tehran, P.O. Box 19395-3697, Islamic
Republic of Iran gram on muscular power and agility performance in young
e-mail: [email protected] male basketball players.

123
 Author's personal copy
134 Sport Sci Health (2013) 9:133–137

Materials and methods trained test leaders carried out the entire test procedure
using identical order and protocol. Before testing, subjects
Participants performed 10-min warm-up protocol consisting of sub-
maximal jogging, and active stretching. There was a 5-min
Twenty young basketball players volunteered to participate rest in between tests to ensure recovery.
in this study and were randomly assigned to plyometric
group (PL; n = 10; age 20.2 ± 1 years; height Vertical jump
182.1 ± 9.2 cm; and body mass 78.5 ± 5.5 kg) and con-
trol group (CG; n = 10; age 20.1 ± 1.5 years; height The vertical jump (VJ) was assessed using Vertec (Power
180.1 ± 7.2 cm; and body mass 79.5 ± 4.5 kg). The par- Systems, Knoxville, TN 22550, USA). The Vertec was
ticipants were Division I province team and trained tech- adjusted to match the height of the individual subject by
nical and tactical basketball practice three sessions a week having him stand with the dominant side to the base of the
for 90 min. The participants were healthy, free from any testing device. The dominant hand was raised and the
lower body injuries and they had no medical and ortho- Vertec was adjusted so that the hand was the appropriate
pedic problems. Before data collection, the participants distance away from the marker based on markings on the
were informed about the benefit and possible risk associ- device itself. On verbal ‘‘GO’’ command, the volunteers
ated with the study and provided written informed consent. flexed their knee joints (*90°) and jumped as high as
The research project was conducted in accordance with the possible. The difference between initial value and maximal
Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the Univer- jump height value was calculated to determine VJ height.
sity Review Board for use of Human Subjects. Each test was performed twice, and the best value of the
two measurements was used for the analysis [13, 14].
Plyometric training and design
Standing long jump
Plyometric training program was performed twice weekly
for 6 weeks (on Monday and Friday). The intensity and The standing long jump was used as a test of bilateral leg
volume of plyometric training was based on recommen- power. Arm movements were permitted for support during
dations of Chu [5] and Stemm and Jacobson [15]. Partici- the take-off movements. Trials were only evaluated when
pants in the PL group trained depth jump (from 45-cm box the subjects landed properly on their feet while not falling
height), vertical jump, and standing long jump, respec- back. The distance between the toes at start and the heels at
tively. The training protocol consisted of three sets of landing was used as a testing criterion. The best of the two
15-reps separated by a 2-min rest for each exercise. Plyo- SLJs was used for the statistical analysis [16].
metric training sessions were added with regular basketball
practice and lasted 55 min, and began with a standard 49 9-m shuttle run
10-min warm-up, including 5-min jogging, 5-min ballistic
exercises and stretching; 40-min main training, and 5-min The shuttle run test was included as a measure of the ability
cool down. Subjects in PL group were instructed to per- to sprint and change direction. With the 4 9 9-m shuttle
form exercises in each training session with maximal run, the subjects stood behind the starting line and on
effort. During the intervention of 6 weeks, PL and CG command, they started the 9-m run. At the end of the 9-m
continued their normal basketball training, and were not section, the subjects were asked to stop with one foot
allowed to perform any other training (such as: resistance beyond a marker, while reversing the running direction and
training and or plyometric training) that would impact the sprinting back to the start where the same reversing of
results. A week pre- and post-training period, vertical jump movement direction was required. After the fourth 9-m
(VJ), standing long jump (SLJ), 4 9 9-m shuttle run, section, when the subjects crossed the finish line, the time
agility t test (ATT), and Illinois Agility Test (IAT) were was stopped. A hand-held stopwatch was used to measure
measured. the sprint time to the nearest 0.01 s (Joerex, ST4610-2,
China). The best value of two consecutive trials was used
Dependent variables for the statistical analysis. Three minutes rest between
attempts was provided for each subject [16].
To evaluate the effects of plyometric training on agility,
and power, five tests including VJ, SLJ, 4 9 9-m shuttle Agility t test
run, ATT, and IAT were measured, respectively. Before
initial testing, each player was familiarized with the testing Subjects’ agility was evaluated using the ATT according to
protocol. To standardize testing procedures, the same the method of Miller et al. [6]. The t test was performed on

123
 Author's personal copy
Sport Sci Health (2013) 9:133–137 135

the basketball court. A hand-held stopwatch was used to

take the subjects’ time to the nearest 0.01 s. The subjects
were instructed to sprint from a standing starting position
to a cone 10 m away, followed by a side-shuffle left to a
cone 5 m away. After touching the cone, the subjects side-
shuffled to the cone 10 m away and then side-shuffled back
to the middle cone. The test was concluded by back-ped-
aling to the starting line. The test score was recorded as the
best time of three trials, to the nearest 0.01 s. A 5-min rest
period was allowed between each trial [2].

Illinois agility test

The subjects’ agility was assessed using the IAT according

to the method of Miller et al. [6]. A hand-held stopwatch
was used to take the subjects’ time to the nearest 0.01 s.
The run started with a standing start on the command
‘‘GO’’ and subjects sprinted 10 m, turned, and returned to
the starting line. When the subjects reached the starting
Fig. 1 Changes in vertical jump and standing long jump at pre- and
line, they zigzagged in between four markers and com- post-training. Values are mean ± SD. *Significantly different
pleted two 10 m sprints. The fastest time of the three trials (P B 0.05) from all other conditions
was noted as the final agility time. A 5-min rest period was
allowed between each trial [2].
Discussion
Statistical procedures
We tested that whether 6 weeks of in-season plyometric
All data are presented as mean ± SD. A 2 9 2 analysis of training would lead to improvement in performance in
variance (ANOVA) was used to determine significant dif- young male basketball players. It was observed that ath-
ferences between groups. When a significant F ratio was letes who added plyometric training to their regular bas-
found, Tukey post hoc tests were used for pairwise com- ketball practice were able to achieve improvements in
parisons. A criterion a level of P B 0.05 was used to lower body power and agility when compared with subjects
determine statistical significance. All statistical analyses who participated in a basketball practice without plyo-
were performed through the use of a statistical software metric training.
package (SPSSÒ, Version 16.0, SPSS., Chicago, IL). In the present study, the plyometric training group
increased VJ and SLJ (24.1 and 9.4 %, respectively),
whereas control group showed no improvement. Many
Results studies indicated significant improvements in VJ following
plyometric training program [12–17], especially in bas-
No injuries occurred throughout the study period, and the ketball players [2–4, 9–11]. In basketball players, some
testing and training procedures were well tolerated by the studies examined the effect of plyometric training program
subjects. on VJ performance. For example, Brown et al. [3] exam-
There were no significant differences between PL and ined the influence of three sets of ten drop jumps three
CG at pre-training. After 6 weeks of training, the PL group times weekly for 6 weeks and found 11.1 % increases in
made significant (P \ 0.05) improvements in VJ (from VJ following plyometric training. Also, Matavulj et al. [4]
41.31 ± 3.40 to 51.25 ± 2.11 cm; 24.1 %), SLJ compared two groups of basketball players. One group
(214.82 ± 9.20 to 235.11 ± 8.42 cm; 9.4 %), 4 9 9-m performed drop jumps from a 50-cm box height and
shuttle run (from 9.65 ± 0.31 to 9.01 ± 0.24 s; 6.7 %), another group performed drop jumps from a 100-cm box
ATT (from 12.01 ± 0.56 to 10.97 ± 0.61 s; 8.6 %), and height. Both groups demonstrated significant increases in
IAT (from 17.36 ± 0.48 to 16.14 ± 0.51 s; 7.1 %) per- VJ height (12.4 %). In this study, we found that in-season
formance in comparison to pre-training and CG. Jump test plyometric exercise (such as depth jump, vertical jump, and
(VJ and SLJ) results are presented in Fig. 1, while agility standing long jump) at two times a week for 6 weeks can
(4 9 9-m shuttle run, ATT, and IAT) evaluations are increase 24.1 and 9.4 % VJ and SLJ, respectively.
reported in Table 1. Although, previous authors addressed positive effects of

123
 Author's personal copy
136 Sport Sci Health (2013) 9:133–137

Table 1 Agility performance at pre- and post-training

Variable Group Pre-training Post-training % changes

4 9 9-m shuttle run Plyometric 9.65 ± 0.31 9.01 ± 0.24* 6

Control 10.02 ± 0.35 10.14 ± 0.24 -1
Agility t test Plyometric 12 ± 0.56 10.97 ± 0.61* 8
Control 12.15 ± 0.57 12.57 ± 0.68 -3
Illinois agility test Plyometric 17.36 ± 0.48 16.14 ± 0.5* 7
Control 17.48 ± 0.6 17.41 ± 0.49 0.4
Data are presented as the mean ± SD
* Significantly different (P B 0.05) from all other conditions

different types of plyometric exercise such as sagittal and differences between groups in the agility tests (t test and
frontal plane and added load during plyometric exercise on Illinois agility test). They reported 4.9 and 2.9 %
jump performance [2, 8–10], a few studies examined in- improvements in t test and Illinois agility test, respectively,
season plyometric training on muscular performance in but we found higher than 7 % improvement. The difference
basketball players [11]. In accordance with our findings, in percentage of improvements could be discrepancy in
Santos and Janeira [11] found that 10-week in-season training intensity and fitness level of participants or train-
plyometric training could improve explosive power in ing status [16]. Perhaps trained subjects gain greater
adolescent basketball players. The improvement in jump increase in agility performance with regard to their back-
height indicates that adaptations relating to increases in leg ground and familiarization with training. These findings
power have occurred. The adaptations of training are likely demonstrated the necessity of plyometric training program
to be neural because these predominate in the early stages for enhancing performance in activities which involve
of strength and power training [18] and have been shown to acceleration, deceleration, and a change of direction. In
be the main adaptation to plyometric exercise [19]. Many addition, the plyometric training program may improve the
authors suggested that muscular performance gains after eccentric strength of the lower limb and resulting increases
plyometric training are attributed to a neural adaptation in agility performance [25]. It has been well documented
located in the nervous system [20, 21]. With regard to these that agility requires development of muscle factors (e.g.,
authors, neuromuscular factors such as increasing the strength and power) to improve change of direction and it
degree of muscle coordination and maximizing the ability appears that, agility has high relationship with strength and
to use the muscles’ stretch–shortening cycle appear to be power [25]. Perhaps increases in the power performance
more important for the improvement in jump performance became one of the important variables for the enhancement
(VJ and SLJ) following high-intense plyometric training of agility. Also, neural adaptations and enhancement of
[20, 21]. motor unit recruitment are other mechanisms which can
The unique findings of the present study are positive lead to increase in agility tests [6]. However, we could not
effects of in-season plyometric training on agility perfor- exactly determine that neural adaptations occurred or better
mance (4 9 9-m shuttle run 6.7 %, t test 8.6 %, and Illi- facilitation of neural impulse to spinal cord; therefore,
nois agility test 7.1 %) in basketball players. These results further studies are necessary to determine mechanisms of
are in line with previous researchers who found increases agility improvement by plyometric training. Also, future
in quickness and agility via plyometric training [2, 6]. In a study should use subjects with differing training status for
study of tennis players, the authors used a t test and dot determining muscular performance responses to plyometric
drill test to determine speed and agility [22]. They found training.
that the players became quicker and more agile; enabling In conclusion, the result of this study highlights the
them to get to more balls and be more effective tennis potential of using in-season plyometric training to improve
players. Renfro [23] measured agility using the t test with power and agility, especially in young male basketball
plyometric training, while Robinson and Owens [24] used players (19–20 years old). It is recommended that, coaches
vertical, lateral, and horizontal plyometric jumps and design plyometrics in competitive phase for young athletes,
showed improvements in agility. Miller et al. [6] also because this type of training can be an effective method for
examined the effects of a 6-week plyometrics on agility. improving performance. Since coaches and athletes are often
They used PL and control groups, and found significant restricted to a short preseason, this is beneficial for coaches
differences in PL after training, but no significant or athletes during collegiate or logical competitions.

123
 Author's personal copy
Sport Sci Health (2013) 9:133–137 137

Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank all the partic- 12. Adams K, O’Shea J, O’Shea K, Climstein M (1992) The effects
ipants for their cooperation in this study. of six weeks of squat, plyometric and squat-plyometric training
on power development. J Appl Sports Sci Res 6:36–41
Conflict of interest None. 13. Holcomb WR, Lander JE, Rutland RM, Wilson GD (1996) A
biomechanical analysis of the vertical jump and three modified
plyometric depth jumps. J Strength Cond Res 10:83–88
14. Saez–Saez De Villarreal E, Gonzalez-Badillo JJ, Izquierdo M
(2008) Low and moderate plyometric training frequency produce
References greater jumping and sprinting gains compared with high fre-
quency. J Strength Cond Res 22:715–725
1. Klinzing JE (1991) Training for improved jumping ability of 15. Stemm JD, Jacobson BH (2007) Comparison of land and aquatic
basketball players. Nat Strength Cond Ass J 13:27–32 based plyometric training on vertical jump. J Strength Cond Res
2. Arazi H, Coetzee B, Asadi A (2012) Comparative effect of land 21:568–571
and aquatic based plyometric training on the jumping ability and 16. Markovic G, Jukic I, Milanovic D, Metikos D (2007) Effects of
agility of young basketball players. S Afr J Res Sport Phys Edu sprint and plyometric training on muscle function and athletic
Rec 34:1–14 performance. J Strength Cond Res 21:543–549
3. Brown ME, Mayhew JL, Boleach LW (1986) Effect of plyo- 17. Saez–Saez de Villarreal E, Kellis E, Kraemer WJ, Izquierdo M
metric training on vertical jump performance in high school (2009) Determining variables of plyometric training for
basketball players. J Sports Med Phys Fit 26:1–4 improving vertical jump height performance: a meta analysis.
4. Matavulj D, Kukolj M, Ugarkovic D, Tihanyi J, Jaric S (2001) J Strength Cond Res 23:495–506
Effects of plyometric training on jumping performance in junior 18. Sale DG (1988) Neural adaptation to resistance training. Med Sci
basketball players. J Sports Med Phys Fit 41:159–164 Sports Exerc 20:135–145
5. Chu DA (1998) Jumping into plyometric. Human Kinetics, 19. Hakkinen K, Alen M, Komi PV (1985) Changes in isometric
Champaign force and relaxation-time, electromyographic and muscle fibre
6. Miller MG, Herniman TJ, Ricard MD et al (2006) The effects of a characteristics of human skeletal muscle during strength training
6-week plyometric training program on agility. J Sport Sci Med and detraining. Acta Physiol Scand 125:573–585
5:459–465 20. Maffiuletti NA, Dugnani S, Folz M, Dipierno E (2002) Effects of
7. Spurrs RW, Murphy AJ, Watsford ML (2003) The effect of combined electro stimulation and plyometric training on vertical
plyometric training on distance running performance. Eur J Appl jump height. Med Sci Sports Exerc 34:1638–1644
Physiol 89:1–7 21. Potteiger JA, Lockwood RH, Haub MD, Dorezal BA, Almuzaini
8. Arazi H, Asadi A (2011) The effect of aquatic and land plyo- KS, Schroeder JM, Zebas CJ (1999) Muscle power and fiber
metric training on strength, sprint, and balance in young bas- characteristics following 8 weeks of plyometric training.
ketball players. J Hum Sport Exerc 6:101–111 J Strength Cond Res 13:275–279
9. Khlifa R, Aouadi R, Hermassi S, Chelly MS, Jlid MC, Hbacha H, 22. Parsons LS, Jones MT (1998) Development of speed, agility and
Castagna C (2010) Effects of a plyometric training program with quickness for tennis athletes. Strength Cond J 20:14–19
and without added load on jumping ability in basketball players. 23. Renfro G (1999) Summer plyometric training for football and its
J Strength Cond Res 24:2955–2961 effect on speed and agility. Strength Cond J 21:42–44
10. King JA, Cipriani DJ (2010) Comparing preseason frontal and 24. Robinson BM, Owens B (2004) Five-week program to increase
sagittal plane plyometric programs on vertical jump height in agility, speed, and power in the preparation phase of a yearly
high-school basketball players. J Strength Cond Res 24: training plan. Strength Cond J 26:30–35
2109–2114 25. Sheffard JM, Young W (2006) Agility literature review: classi-
11. Santos EJ, Janeira MA (2011) The effects of plyometric training fication, training and testing. J Sports Sci 24:919–932
followed by detraining and reduced training periods on explosive
strength in adolescent male basketball players. J Strength Cond
Res 25:441–452

123

View publication stats