Baseline Performance and the 72-Hour Performance Window Following Plyometric Withdrawal in Collegiate Sprinters.
5 affiliations
- 1School of Humanities and Physical Education, Hebei Oriental College, Langfang, Hebei, China.
- 2School of Arts and Physical Education, Huanghe Science and Technology College, Zhengzhou, Henan, China.
- 3School of Physical Education, Langfang Normal University, Langfang, Hebei, China.
- 4Physical Education Department, Qinghai University, Xining, Qinghai, China.
- 5Emilio Aguinaldo College, Manila, Philippines.
Abstract
Plyometric studies emphasise pre-post change, but coaches need to know what remains after the block ends. This single-cohort study followed 26 collegiate sprinters through 12 weeks of Monday plyometric training and 4 weeks of withdrawal, without a parallel control group. During intervention, 30 m sprint time and arm-assisted countermovement jump (CMJ) height were measured at 0, 24, 48, 72, and 96 h; 0 and 72 h were retained during withdrawal. Mixed models showed large week effects for sprint, F(1, 1534) = 2272.01, partial η² = 0.597, 95% CI [0.570, 0.622], and CMJ, F(1, 1534) = 2537.82, partial η² = 0.623, 95% CI [0.598, 0.647]. Time-point effects were evident, but week × time-point interactions were not. Relative to 0 h, sprint was 0.0098 s slower at 24 h and 0.0057 s faster at 72 h; CMJ was 0.311 cm lower at 24 h and 0.245 cm higher at 72 h (all Tukey-adjusted p < 0.001). Linear, quadratic, and autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) models were compared by rolling one-step error. ARIMA had the lowest rolling errors and provided exploratory, model-based references for weeks 13-16. During withdrawal, 1/4 sprint and 0/4 CMJ 0 h observations fell within the 95% prediction interval; mean absolute deviations were 0.0233 s and 0.794 cm. Three of four 72 - 0 h observations were within the interval for both outcomes. The 72 - 0 h series more often fell within their model-based intervals than the 0 h series, indicating different short-term patterns.
Related
- Effects of Elastic-Band Resistance and Plyometric Training on Serum MMP-2, MMP-9, TIMPs and Coenzyme Q10 in Collegiate Tennis Players: An Exploratory, Non-Randomised Three-Arm Controlled Study
- The impact of postactivation performance enhancement on 20 m sprint and CMJ performance in male sprinters.
- Sampling matters: the interplay of physiological parameters and performance over 1, 2 and 3 km in well-trained male endurance runners and sprinters
- Effects of a Four-Week Progressive Plyometric Programme on Flying Shoot Performance in Female University Handball Athletes: A Quasi-Experimental Controlled Pretest–Posttest Study
- Opioid Withdrawal Following Intrathecal Morphine Pump Explantation Managed with a Structured Oral Opioid Taper: A Case Study
BibTeX
@article{du2026baseline,
title = {{Baseline Performance and the 72-Hour Performance Window Following Plyometric Withdrawal in Collegiate Sprinters.}},
author = {Hao Du and Jingkun Zhou and Yuxiang Liu and Lei Yang and Yonggang Luo and Shuai Yang},
journal = {European journal of sport science},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1002/ejsc.70277},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42902451},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Baseline Performance and the 72-Hour Performance Window Following Plyometric Withdrawal in Collegiate Sprinters.
AU - Hao Du
AU - Jingkun Zhou
AU - Yuxiang Liu
AU - Lei Yang
AU - Yonggang Luo
AU - Shuai Yang
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/30
JO - European journal of sport science
DO - 10.1002/ejsc.70277
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42902451
AB - Plyometric studies emphasise pre-post change, but coaches need to know what remains after the block ends. This single-cohort study followed 26 collegiate sprinters through 12 weeks of Monday plyometric training and 4 weeks of withdrawal, without a parallel control group. During intervention, 30 m sprint time and arm-assisted countermovement jump (CMJ) height were measured at 0, 24, 48, 72, and 96 h; 0 and 72 h were retained during withdrawal. Mixed models showed large week effects for sprint, F(1, 1534) = 2272.01, partial η² = 0.597, 95% CI [0.570, 0.622], and CMJ, F(1, 1534) = 2537.82, partial η² = 0.623, 95% CI [0.598, 0.647]. Time-point effects were evident, but week × time-point interactions were not. Relative to 0 h, sprint was 0.0098 s slower at 24 h and 0.0057 s faster at 72 h; CMJ was 0.311 cm lower at 24 h and 0.245 cm higher at 72 h (all Tukey-adjusted p < 0.001). Linear, quadratic, and autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) models were compared by rolling one-step error. ARIMA had the lowest rolling errors and provided exploratory, model-based references for weeks 13-16. During withdrawal, 1/4 sprint and 0/4 CMJ 0 h observations fell within the 95% prediction interval; mean absolute deviations were 0.0233 s and 0.794 cm. Three of four 72 - 0 h observations were within the interval for both outcomes. The 72 - 0 h series more often fell within their model-based intervals than the 0 h series, indicating different short-term patterns.
SN - 1746-1391
SN - 1536-7290
ER -