I agree! It is possible to do massive amounts of drop jumps, and I have witnessed it myself too. I don’t think we can talk about “tolerance” in the way that that it becomes impossible to continue increasing loads (volume) over the minimal or average. However, I guess it’s a question about tolerance in the way of how overall training can tolerate an increase in drop jumps without messing up progression or even be detrimental for the other parts – the other parts tend to be much more important anyhow (even for jumpers).
Jumpers tend to do lots of this type of training, yet when we move up on the performance level, the amount existing in their training seems to drop drastically (if they have been in the program in the first place). This is kind of natural since event-specific technique training progressively take their place, hence their minimal volume. The extreme being perhaps Edwards, that eliminated almost every other form of jumping, bounding or plyometrics except from doing just the triple jump (counting up to about 10 jumps a week, depending on approach speed).
It appears that benefits from drop jumps or extreme plyometrics tend to diminish greatly when the performance level (jumps) goes up – they can even become detrimental. A further progression is usually found in speed and technical elements. If further benefits are searched by drop jumps, it would probably be either: 1) insanely high intensity with minimal volume; 2) just as a “wake up” steering the body into the technical jump sessions (light intensity and minimal volume).
Just a quick reply to the original first post by Supersprinter.
Why so many warm-up sets??? I only do about 2-3 and I’m fine.
Why the same weight for the warm-up sets? I usually start at a weight and progressively get heavier for each warm-up set till I’m relatively close to my working set weight.
(1st set=135 pounds, 2nd set 185, 3rd set 225
Working sets= 255) <<<<<just an example
Lastly, why such volume??? A couple sets of some heavy doubles or triples (~90% of 1RM) will do MUCH more for your strength than a “pyramid”.
Loads are specific to an athlete and generally, large volumes of true plyometrics DROP JUMPS AND DEPTH JUMPS ARE LOW AND NOT TOLERATED WELL BY ADVANCED OR BEGINNER. Jump training on the other hand is different Bounding, skips hops can be done at a relatively high volume. But from personal experience and coaching, lower volumes ARE JUST AS EFFECTIVE.
Bounding, skips hops=Jump training
Drop jumps, Depth jumps,hurdle hops= Intense plyometrics.
Doing large volumes do not guarantee that all contact times are short. Inhibition is likely to set in. Don’t take my word for it. If you can test on a contact mat or force plate I am sure you would understand my experience and reservations.
I have the same impression as well. Although I know it’s possible to build a high tolerance for plyometrics (high intensity), it seems not to produce the desired results in terms of higher performance - former Estern-block approach (“grinders”). Moreover, speed seems to suffer. I guess that’s why they tend to be minimal when standards go up; speed on the board becomes far more important and the necessary plyometric stimulus comes from event-specific work.
What comes to jump training (bounding etc.) is somewhat open. Some like to do high volumes of at low intensities, especially during GPP – a kind of high/low approach like in CFTS for sprinters – whereas some like to also minimize those and focus more on take-offs and drills. Some prefer only event-specific jumping.
Incidentally, in the triple jump, the best guy eliminated most types of plyometrics and boundings and only did triple jump with variable speeds. The guy who’s ruling now, seems to find enough stimulus from quite a variety of easy drills and triple jumping. Massive bounding or plyometrics seems to have disappeared among the top, especially among the ones that stays on the top year after year. The “grinders” have a hard time staying healthy or maintain good capacity year after year.
Supersprinter, I have attached an excel file with a routine for improving the squat max of an athlete to 210kg. The 200 in the cell O2 to the right is the athlete’s current squat max. Use that to work out the percentages in order to analyse the program, you will find that the percentages are manageable and do improve strength. The idea of this routine is to increase leg strength. The premis being that high reps lean too much towards endurance and take a long time to recover from. The routine builds confidence and you will make progress. Analyse and adapt as you see fit.
it would had they not had the proper traits in place and even then it woud eventually. im under the assumption that you believe that they would do this everyday it is only a stimulus that can be used to elicit a response.
repetition ceased if form broke down this includes sharp stops, measured with video analysis.
i believe inhibtion was decreased simply because the basic theroy is that a massive number of motor units must turn on for a fraction of a second to absorb the large force generated from falling from various heights. we have to start thinking of training as neurological condtioning so they are like drills inwhich every landing reinforces what we want from our bodies (high frequency rate coding, gross motor unit recruitment)
this all depends on what other factors go into training. without going into the organization scheme to much the idea is the longer you can keep the athletes in a state of overtraining of 4-7% the greater the supercompensation upon recovery from the defeciet. drop below these levels and the out come will be a maladaptive stress not an eustress.
for the most part to but the equipment was available along with a v-scope im not sure what other research they did into volume control.
if they were aptly prepared for it, no soreness, no pain, no malapative stress .
Sorry Supersprinter, I’ll rephrase the question. Why not keep the same weight for the working sets? It says there that you do doubles with 490. Why not just doing continous sets of doubles at 490 until you cannot complete 2 reps? What I mean is this:
set of 2- 490 pounds
REST 3-4 minutes
set of 2- 490 pounds
REST 3-4 minutes
set of 2- 490 pounds
REST 3-4 minutes
set of 1 (cannot do 2 reps)- 490 pounds
STOP AND END WORKOUT
See, once you get under a certain power threshold, you end the workout. There would be no sense in training under your max power would there?
That right there would increase your strength tremendously.
No its not tough at all, I squat heavy mon, wed and friday and because I do heavy weights with low reps there is almost no lactic acid buildup.
I feel I could squat everyday if I wanted to but I’m obviously not gonna try
Well, it is just a suggestion. It has worked tremendously well with me and other athletes I haved trained for max strength. Maybe you should give it a try (maybe go for doubles with 480 till you can do 2 reps anymore, with the 3-4 minute rest periods still?). Hope I have helped some.
