Depth jumps are pretty safe when the athlete is carefully prepared before their introduction in the training program, and their prescription (volume, methodology, drop heights, technique ) is sound, and in accordance with the athlete preparedness.
But rushing into depth jumps without a solid preparedness for their introduction is indeed
asking for trouble.
Heres some more information i dug up from another site,
[b]Verkhoshanksy, the father of shock & depth jumps, concluded in his studies that:
to obtain the highest vertical displacement of the body during a depth jump, one must land soft (instead of as fast as possible), and jump as high as possible to reach a vertical stimulus in the air.
here’s the man himself discussion vertical stimuli, speed of landing, etc (this is from www.verkhoshanksy.com forum):
"Dear Matt Barr,
The aim of Shock Method Depth (Drop) Jump is to increase the explosive strength and reactive capacity. The increasing of explosive strength and reactive capacity depend on the increasing of the height reached during the subsequent jump. The landing/ amortisation time is a parameter of the Deth Jump execution.
In one of my experiments I tried to understand how could be changed the Depth Jump height and the lending time in the relation with the formulating of the aim of the exercise:
to drop in low and to jump in aloft
Result: h - 69 cm t - 0.24 s.
to drop in low and to jump in aloft as high as possible with more fast lending amortization
Result: h - 58 cm t - 0.20 s
to drop in low and to jump in aloft as high as possible with more slow lending amortization.
Result: h - 73 cm, t - 0.31 s
So, when the athlete try to minimize the lending/amortization time in Depth Jump execution, he cannot realize the maximal explosive strength effort.
The best Depth Jump result was obtained when I asked only ?~@~ o lend softly and to jump in aloft as high as possible?~@~]. From the results of experiment we can observe that the execution technique and the result of Depth Jump depend on the formulating of the aim of the exercise. If the athlete try to obtain the maximal jump height he performs the Depth jump with the maximal height and with the optimal landing time. If the athlete tries to obtain the minimal lending time he performs the Dept jump with minimal lending time, but the jump height could not be maximal. [/b]
"
Heres one more article related article,
… changing the “goal” mentally, can have a profound effect on the training effect of this exercise.
Use of an Overhead Goal Alters Vertical Jump Performance and Biomechanics
Kevin R. Ford1, 4, Gregory D. Myer1, Rose L. Smith2, Robyn N. Byrnes2, Sara E. Dopirak2, and Timothy E. Hewett1, 3, 2
Options:
Search Google Scholar for:
[b]Ford, K.R., G.D. Myer, R.L. Smith, R.N. Byrnes, S.E. Dopirak, and T.E. Hewett. Use of an overhead goal alters vertical jump performance and biomechanics. J. Strength Cond. Res. 19(2):394–399. 2005.—This study examined whether an extrinsic motivator, such as an overhead goal, during a plyometric jump may alter movement biomechanics. Our purpose was to examine the effects of an overhead goal on vertical jump height and lower-extremity biomechanics during a drop vertical jump and to compare the effects on female (N = 1Cool versus male (N = 17) athletes. Drop vertical jump was performed both with and without the use of an overhead goal. Greater vertical jump height (p = 0.002) and maximum takeoff external knee flexion (quadriceps) moment (p = 0.04) were attained with the overhead goal condition versus no overhead goal. Men had significantly greater vertical jump height (p < 0.001), maximum takeoff vertical force (p = 0.009), and maximum takeoff hip extensor moment (p = 0.02) compared with women. A significant gender × overhead goal interaction was found for stance time (p = 0.02) and maximum ankle (p = 0.04) and knee flexion angles (p = 0.04), with shorter stance times and lower angles in men during overhead goal time. These results indicate that overhead goals may be incorporated during training and testing protocols to alter lower-extremity biomechanics and can increase performance.
so performing the depth jump with a soft landing, while trying to obtain maximum height, while trying to touch a vertical stimulus, is definitely the way to go when it comes to maximizing the depth jump[/b]
http://youtube.com/watch?v=XKMy8hiuGnY
Above is a link to a video of Dick from jump stretch showing how to use the bands to strengthen and stretch the ankle calf complex. This would definetly benefit an athlete that is prehabing for depth jumps or rehabing after a cycle.
Anyone else is is familair with usage of depth jumps and the shock method in training, a couple questions
What surfaces do you prefer to use when using depth jumps from a .55cm to .75cm range, right now I am debating between using the track surface vs a wooden indoor basketball court surface (Target is either rim or vertec with the goal of both improving reactive strength and explosive strength)? James, I believe you used the track if I am not mistaken for you pro day guys? Will you have your football players do any depth jumps this summer at all?
I know that Verkhoshansky reccomends a maximium of 390-400 depth jumps when using the shock method, what would be an approx the minimium number in a 4 week period(only performing the depth jumps twice a week not three) for an athlete using depth jumps and still looking for optimal results?
If an athlete was only looking for gains in reactivity, would it be best to use the height in which he/she jumps the highest from or the height where theres the least ground contact time or what?
Is there a difference between reactive capacity and reactive strength?
I would say it all depends on what you are trying to achieve with that tool - see steve mac. Since so much is relative to the individual if I really wanted to train “scientifically” i’d use a force platform and create my own protocols from that.
As for reaching up and touching something i guess it totally depends on if that changes the GCT and if it does if the change is what you want.
Some people might not even need any plyometrics as they get enough from their other training so it’s about working out what is best for each individual given their specific circumstances.
All good points, any other input on my depth jump questions by anyone else?
I would go for a box that allows height more so than quickest ground contact time. As long as your contacts aren’t longer than .2x you should be good. I remember somewhere Verkoshansky said that the landing should be full and not super quick like someone slapping their hand on a desk. Then you will have Ian King who will use depth jumps with a focus on minimal contact getting minimal height. There is rarely a simple answer.
Why not use a hurdle hop series? Wouldn’t this automatically designate the optimal jump height?
I was thinking exactly the same thing. I just don’t see the benefits of depth jumps over hurdle hops if the sole aim is reactive strength. Perhaps if the aim is explosive or maximum strength (see James’ classification) it allows a higher load because of a higher box height but I’m skeptical about the risk-benefit ratio of this exercise vs. alternative ways of improving these two qualities.