Presence of an Overhead Goal Does Not Improve the Effectiveness of Jump Training

Akbas, A, Marszalek, W, and Krol, H. Presence of an overhead goal does not improve the effectiveness of jump training. J Strength Cond Res 37(4): e280-e288, 2023-This study investigated the effectiveness of jump training with and without an overhead goal (OG) on a modified countermovement jump (CMJ) tested in a similar manner, with and without OG. Fifty-two men divided into 3 groups-trained with OG, trained without OG, and untrained-were examined: before the commencement of training; after 2, 4, and 6 weeks of training; and 2 weeks after the discontinuation of training. Each session consisted of 50 modified CMJ and was performed 3 times per week. Countermovement jump height, mean power, peak power, countermovement depth, and take-off phase time were quantified, and the statistical level was set at p < 0.05. Although the results showed the beneficial effect of OG on jump height (p < 0.01), the training with OG did not bring significantly better results than training without OG. In addition, the group trained without OG improved after 2 weeks in both testing conditions (with and without OG), whereas the group trained with OG improved after 2 weeks when tested with OG and only after 6 weeks when tested without OG. We believe the use of OG in jump training may be detrimental when the OG is withdrawn from the testing procedure because of its strong motivational and feedback features. Consequently, athletes in disciplines which require them to jump toward an object located over their head during a game, e.g., a ball or crossbar, should be tested with the presence of OG. Despite this, OG is still an important factor in maximizing jump performance.