Relationship between Wingate test and vertical jump in young female volleyball players

Abstract

Aims: Maximum vertical jump is an important component in performing spike and block skill in volleyball and is a reflection of explosive muscle strength(Bosco et al. 1983). The Wingate test (WT is used to evaluate anaerobic performance by measuring muscle power during short-term, high-intensity exercise(Bar-Or 1987). The aim of this study was twofold: to investigate the possible relationship between power performance on the Wingate test (WT) and explosive leg strength performed during a vertical counter-movement jump test(CMJ) and whether anaerobic power assessed could identify players with the best performance. Methods: 14 young female volleyball players, age 16–26 years, were grouped by performance (those with a CMJ >75th that was >38 cm were grouped as high-performance group while those with a CMJ <38 cm. were classified as low-performance). Wingate Test was completed, and peak power(PP), average power (AP), time-to peak power (tPP), and power drop(PD) were collected for each athlete. Results: Athletes with the best performance were lighter, had lower BMI and fat mass respect to low-performance group. Average power indexed was significantly higher in high-performance respect to lowperformance group. By ROC analysis, fat mass was able to perfectly discriminate between 2 groups(AUC 1.0, sensitivity and specificity 100 %). Among anaerobic power parameters, average power > 6.99 had the highest accuracy (AUC 0.79, Sensitivity 100 %, Specificity 75 %). Conclusions: Anthropometric characteristics, especially fat mass, are critical to determine performance in female volleyball players. Anaerobic power, as assessed by average power at Wingate test, is higher in best performance athletes and is significantly associated to vertical counter movement jump test. References Bosco et al (1983) A simple method for measurement of mechanical power in jumping. Eur J Appl Physiol 50:273–282. Bar-Or O (1987) The Wingate anaerobic test: an update on methodology, reliability and validity. Sports Med 4:381–394.