Effect of Vertical, Horizontal, and Combined Plyometric Training on Explosive, Balance, and Endurance Performance of Young Soccer Players
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare the effects of 6 weeks of vertical, horizontal, or combined vertical and horizontal plyometric training on muscle explosive, endurance, and balance performance. Forty young soccer players aged between 10 and 14 years were randomly divided into control (CG; n = 10), vertical plyometric group (VG; n = 10), horizontal plyometric group (HG; n = 10), and combined vertical and horizontal plyometric group (VHG; n = 10). Players performance in the vertical and horizontal countermovement jump with arms, 5 multiple bounds test (MB5), 20-cm drop jump reactive strength index (RSI20), maximal kicking velocity (MKV), sprint, change of direction speed (CODS), Yo-Yo intermittent recovery level 1 test (Yo-Yo IR1), and balance was measured. No significant or meaningful changes in the CG, apart from small change in the Yo-Yo IR1, were observed while all training programs resulted in meaningful changes in explosive, endurance, and balance performance. However, only VHG showed a statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05) increase in all performance test and most meaningful training effect difference with the CG across tests. Although no significant differences in performance changes were observed between experimental groups, the VHG program was more effective compared with VG (i.e., jumps, MKV, sprint, CODS, and balance performance) and HG (i.e., sprint, CODS, and balance performance) to small effect. The study demonstrated that vertical, horizontal, and combined vertical and horizontal jumps induced meaningful improvement in explosive actions, balance, and intermittent endurance capacity. However, combining vertical and horizontal drills seems more advantageous to induce greater performance improvements.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it