Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the typical variation of variables from a countermovement jump (CMJ) test and a submaximal run test (SRT), along with comparing the sensitivity of each test for the detection of practically important changes within high-performance Australian rules football (ARF) players. Methods: 23 professional and semi-professional ARF players, performed six CMJs and three, eight-second 50-meter runs every 30 s (SRT), seven days apart. Absolute and trial-to-trial reliability was represented as a coefficient of variation (CV) +/- 90% confidence intervals (CI). Test-retest reliability was examined using the magnitude of the difference (effect size (ES) ± 90% CI) from week 1 to week 2. The smallest worthwhile change (SWC) was calculated as 0.25 x SD. Results: Good reliability (CVs = 6.6 – 9.3%) was determined for all variables except eccentric displacement (CV = 12.8%), with no clear changes observed in any variables between week 1 and week 2. All variables from the SRT possessed a CV < SWC, indicating an ability to detect practically important changes in performance. Only peak velocity from the CMJ test possessed a CV < SWC, exhibiting a limitation of this test in detecting practically meaningful changes within this environment. Conclusions: The results suggest that while all variables possess acceptable reliability, a SRT might offer to be a more sensitive monitoring tool than a CMJ test within high-performance ARF, due to its greater ability for detecting practically important changes in performance.
Garrett, JoelGraham, Stuart R.Eston, Roger G.Burgess, Darren J.Garrett, Lachlan J.Jakeman, JohnNorton, Kevn
Department of Sport, Health Sciences and Social Work
Year of publication: 2019Date of RADAR deposit: 2019-07-11