This study aimed to investigate the contributions of kinetic and kinematic parameters to inter-individual variation in countermovement jump (CMJ) performance. Two-dimensional kinematic data and ground reaction forces during a CMJ were recorded for 18 males of varying jumping experience. Ten kinetic and eight kinematic parameters were determined for each performance, describing peak lower-limb joint torques and powers, concentric knee extension rate of torque development and CMJ technique. Participants also completed a series of isometric knee extensions to measure the rate of torque development and peak torque. CMJ height ranged from 0.38 to 0.73 m (mean 0.55 ± 0.09 m). CMJ peak knee power, peak ankle power and take-off shoulder angle explained 74% of this observed variation. CMJ kinematic (58%) and CMJ kinetic (57%) parameters explained a much larger proportion of the jump height variation than the isometric parameters (18%), suggesting that coachable technique factors and the joint kinetics during the jump are important determinants of CMJ performance. Technique, specifically greater ankle plantar-flexion and shoulder flexion at take-off (together explaining 58% of the CMJ height variation), likely influences the extent to which maximal muscle capabilities can be utilised during the jump.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the post-activation potentiation (PAP) effects following eccentric overload (EOL) and traditional weightlifting (TW) exercise on standing long jump (SLJ), countermovement jump (CMJ), and 5 m sprint acceleration performance. Ten male athletes were involved in a randomized, crossover study. The subjects performed 3 sets of 6 repetitions of EOL or TW half squat exercise followed by SLJ, CMJ, and 5 m sprint tests at 1 min, 3 min and 7 min, in separate sessions using a randomized order. Bayes factor (BF₁₀) was reported to show the strength of the evidence. Differences were found using EOL for SLJ distance at 3 min (BF₁₀ = 7.24, +8%), and 7 min (BF₁₀ = 19.5, +7%), for CMJ at 3 min (BF₁₀ = 3.25, +9%), and 7 min (BF₁₀ = 4.12, +10.5%). Differences were found using TW exercise for SLJ at 3 min (BF₁₀ = 3.88, +9%), and 7 min (BF₁₀ = 12.4, +9%), CMJ at 3 min (BF₁₀ = 7.42, +9.5%), and 7 min (BF₁₀ = 12.4, +12%). No meaningful differences were found between EOL and TW exercises for SLJ (BF₁₀ = 0.33), CMJ (BF₁₀ = 0.27), and 5 m sprint (BF₁₀ = 0.22). In conclusion, EOL and TW exercises acutely increase SLJ and CMJ, but not 5 m sprint performance. The PAP time window was found between 3 min and 7 min using both protocols. This study did not find differences between EOL and TW exercises, and so both methodologies can be used to stimulate a PAP response.

Purpose: To summarize the evidence on postactivation potentiation (PAP) protocols using flywheel eccentric overload (EOL) exercises. Methods: Studies were searched using the electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, and Institute for Scientific Information Web of Knowledge. Results: In total, 7 eligible studies were identified based on the following results: First, practitioners can use different inertia intensities (eg, 0.03–0.11 kg·m²), based on the exercise selected, to enhance sport-specific performance. Second, the PAP time window following EOL exercise seems to be consistent with traditional PAP literature, where acute fatigue is dominant in the early part of the recovery period (eg, 30 s), and PAP is dominant in the second part (eg, 3 and 6 min). Third, as EOL exercises require large force and power outputs, a volume of 3 sets with the conditioning activity (eg, half-squat or lunge) seems to be a sensible approach. This could reduce the transitory muscle fatigue and thereby allow for a stronger potentiation effect compared with larger exercise volumes. Fourth, athletes should gain experience by performing EOL exercises before using the tool as part of a PAP protocol (3 or 4 sessions of familiarization). Finally, the dimensions of common flywheel devices offer useful and practical solutions to induce PAP effects outside of normal training environments and prior to competitions. Conclusions: EOL exercise can be used to stimulate PAP responses to obtain performance advantages in various sports. However, future research is needed to determine which EOL exercise modalities among intensity, volume, and rest intervals optimally induce the PAP phenomenon and facilitate transfer effects on athletic performances.

E-textiles have emerged as a fast-growing area in wearable technology for sports and fitness due to the soft and comfortable nature of textile materials and the capability for smart functionality to be integrated into familiar sports clothing. This review paper presents the roles of wearable technologies in sport and fitness in monitoring movement and biosignals used to assess performance, reduce injury risk, and motivate training/exercise. The drivers of research in e-textiles are discussed after reviewing existing non-textile and textile-based commercial wearable products. Different sensing components/materials (e.g., inertial measurement units, electrodes for biosignals, piezoresistive sensors), manufacturing processes, and their applications in sports and fitness published in the literature were reviewed and discussed. Finally, the paper presents the current challenges of e-textiles to achieve practical applications at scale and future perspectives in e-textiles research and development.

The forehand jump smash is an essential attacking stroke within a badminton player’s repertoire. A key determinate of the stroke’s effectiveness is post-impact shuttlecock speed, and therefore awareness of critical technique factors that impact upon speed is important to players/coaches. Three-dimensional kinematic data of player, racket and shuttlecock were recorded for 18 experienced players performing maximal effort forehand jump smashes. Joint angles and X-factor (transverse plane pelvis-thorax separation) were calculated at key instants: preparation, end of retraction, racket lowest point, turning point and shuttlecock contact. Peak shoulder, elbow, and wrist joint centre linear velocities, phase durations and jump height were also calculated. Correlational analyses were performed with post-impact shuttlecock speed, revealing significant correlations to peak wrist joint centre linear velocity (r = 0.767), acceleration phase duration (r = −0.543), shoulder internal/external rotation angle at shuttlecock contact (r = 0.508) and X-factor at the end of retraction (r = −0.484). Multiple linear regression analysis revealed 43.7% of the variance in shuttlecock speed could be explained by acceleration phase duration and X-factor at the end of retraction, where shorter acceleration phase durations and more negative X-factor at end of retraction caused greater shuttlecock speeds. These results suggest that motions of the proximal segments (shoulder and pelvis–thorax separation) are critical to developing greater distal linear velocities, which subsequently lead to greater post-impact shuttlecock speed.

Beato, M, De Keijzer, KL, Leskauskas, Z, Allen, WJ, Dello Iacono, A, and McErlain-Naylor, SA. Effect of postactivation potentiation after medium vs. high inertia eccentric overload exercise on standing long jump, countermovement jump, and change of direction performance. J Strength Cond Res 35(9): 2616–2621, 2021—This study aimed to evaluate the postactivation potentiation (PAP) effects of an eccentric overload (EOL) exercise on vertical and horizontal jumps and change of direction (COD) performance. Twelve healthy physically active male subjects were involved in a crossover study. The subjects performed 3 sets of 6 repetitions of EOL half squats for maximal power using a flywheel ergometer. Postactivation potentiation using an EOL exercise was compared between a medium (M-EOL) vs. high inertia (H-EOL) experimental condition. Long jump (LJ) was recorded at 30 seconds, 3, and 6 minutes after both EOL exercises and compared with baseline values (control). The same procedure was used to assess countermovement jump (CMJ) height and peak power and 5-m COD test (COD-5m). A fully Bayesian statistical approach to provide probabilistic statements was used in this study. Long jump performance reported improvements after M-EOL and H-EOL exercise (Bayes factor [BF ₁₀ ] = 32.7, strong ; BF ₁₀ = 9.2, moderate ), respectively. Countermovement jump height (BF ₁₀ = 135.6, extreme ; BF ₁₀ > 200, extreme ), CMJ peak power (BF ₁₀ > 200, extreme ; BF ₁₀ = 56.1, very strong ), and COD-5m (BF ₁₀ = 55.7, very strong ; BF ₁₀ = 16.4, strong ) reported improvements after M-EOL and H-EOL exercise, respectively. Between analysis did not report meaningful differences in performance between M-EOL and H-EOL exercises. The present outcomes highlight that PAP using an EOL (M-EOL and H-EOL) improves LJ, CMJ height, CMJ peak power, and COD-5m in male athletes. The optimal time window for the PAP effect was found for both EOL conditions from 3 to 6 minutes. However, M-EOL and H-EOL produce similar PAP effect on LJ, CMJ, and COD-5m tasks.