Understanding Stretch Shortening Cycle Ability in Youth : Strength & Conditioning Journal

Journal Logo


Understanding Stretch Shortening Cycle Ability in Youth

Sahrom, Sofyan B. BSc(Sports Science), PGDip(Physical Conditioning)1; Cronin, John B. PhD; Harris, Nigel K. PhD2

Author Information
Strength and Conditioning Journal 35(3):p 77-88, June 2013. | DOI: 10.1519/SSC.0b013e318295560a
  • Free




In human locomotion, such as running, hopping, and jumping, muscle contraction is typified by a combination of eccentric lengthening followed immediately by a concentric-shortening contraction thus termed a stretch-shortening cycle (SSC). The stretching of a muscle is only considered an eccentric action if the muscle is active during the stretch (36,37). According to Komi and Gollhofer (39), an effective SSC requires 3 fundamental conditions: (a) a well-timed preactivation of the muscles before the eccentric phase, (b) an eccentric action phase that must be short and fast, and (c) an immediate transition or short delay between the eccentric and concentric phase. The improvements in performance by the use of SSC muscle actions are well documented in the literature.

One of the most used methods to demonstrate the SSC augmentation is by comparing 2 different types of vertical jumps (no arm swing). A vertical jump that is preceded by a countermovement (i.e., a countermovement jump [CMJ]) can be compared with a vertical jump without a countermovement (i.e., a squat jump [SJ]). In most studies using this approach, the CMJ has led to better vertical jump performance than the SJ, by between 18 and 30% in adults (11,38). Although the enhancements from the potentiating effects of the SSC are certain, the underlying mechanisms responsible for this potentiation have been a source of debate for many years.

These different viewpoints were summarized in an article with subsequent discussions by van Ingen Schenau et al. (84,85). Four possible explanations for the SSC enhancement were presented. First, it was proposed that SSC enhancement is because of the storage and utilization of elastic energy in the muscle, particularly the series elastic component (SEC). Second, the countermovement simply provided time for the muscles to build up to a maximum active state before the commencement of the concentric contraction. Third, it was theorized that alteration of the properties of the contractile machinery occurred during the prestretch of the active muscle, which subsequently enhanced the concentric contraction. The contributions of the spinal reflexes were proposed as the fourth possible explanation for SSC potentiation. Spinal reflexes that are triggered by the prestretch of a muscle during a countermovement help to increase muscle activation during the concentric phase (20). The reader is directed to the discussion and subsequent commentary by van Ingen Schenau et al. (84) for a full treatise of these explanations of SSC potentiation.

A good understanding of SSC in youth will help coaches develop better plyometric programs for children as part of a long-term development approach. To do so, an understanding of growth and maturation is first required before proceeding to the active and passive components of SSC and how the components possibly change with maturation and the subsequent effects on SSC ability.


Irrespective of the underlying mechanisms, SSC potentiation is undeniable and a great deal of research has investigated CMJ and SJ performance in adults. However, there has been less literature that has investigated these jumps in preadolescent and adolescent youths. The biological maturity of youths does not necessarily coincide with their chronological ages and can differ by several years (2,54,55). Youths undergoing puberty experience many physiological changes, which include changes to their musculotendinous and neuromuscular systems (53). The physiological changes during these periods of maturity are likely to contribute to age-associated variations in jumping performances among children of different age groups, maturity level, and gender (12,53,81).

Spurts in growth and performances are likely to occur during adolescence (53). Adolescence is generally viewed as occurring between the ages of 12 and 18 years where great physical and mental development occurs, such as puberty. There is a large amount of change occurring during these years and great variability in the rate of growth among individuals. Therefore, it is important to note the biological age of an individual rather than the chronological age. Biological age as opposed to chronological age is determined by the youth’s rate of development and maturational process. This maturational process can be further divided into 3 significant phases: prepubescence, pubescence, or postpubescence with each phase having unique characteristics.

Prepubescents are usually chronologically above 8 years of age but have not yet reached the pubescent stages. This maturation phase is the buildup phase before the puberty phase and is marked by accelerated growth and the appearance of secondary sex characteristics, but they are not fully capable of sexual reproduction (53,80).

Pubescents are defined as children who are at the onset of puberty, have developed secondary sex characteristics, and have reached maturity (21,53,80). Also known as adolescents, they are usually chronologically between 13 and 17 years of age for males and between 12 and 16 years of age for females. One of the most recognized events signifying children in this maturation stage would be the increase in stature or adolescent growth spurt. During this adolescent growth spurt, the standing height (increase in) velocity increases and peaks, commonly known as peak height velocity (PHV). PHV values range from 5.4 to 11.2 centimeters per year for females and from 5.8 to 13.1 centimeters per year for males (63). Practitioners can take note of this height increase and use regular height monitoring as a practical method for gauging biological age. There are of course other methods of height monitoring that are shown in Table 1.

Table 1:
Classical methods of measuring growth and biological maturation

Postpubescents are usually chronologically above 17–18 years of age for males and 16–17 years of age for females. The skeletal growth slows and the physiologic functions of the sexual organs are fully established (53,80). Ideally, children should be classified and trained according to their biological maturity or developmental stages. For this review, the term youth shall be referred to individuals below the age of 18 years. Other terms such as adolescents, pre, post, and pubescents refer to individuals as described above.


Because of the ease of measuring vertical jumps, different methodological approaches have been developed to measure SSC enhancement using the vertical jump by comparing CMJ with SJ (38). CMJ uses a countermovement, whereas SJ does not; in theory, the difference between the 2 types of vertical jumps can be attributed to augmentation associated with the countermovement, i.e., SSC augmentation. Table 2 provides in detail the 4 common field-based methods of quantifying SSC augmentation that are easy to use.

Table 2:
Different methods of measuring SSC augmentation


Hill (32) in 1938, in his original experiment on the thermodynamics of muscle contraction, described a 2-component model of muscle that consisted of a contractile component (CC) and a purely elastic element that lies in series with the CC known as the SEC. Over the years, the model was extended into a 3-component model (22,25), where another elastic component known as the parallel elastic component (PEC) was added. The addition of the third component was introduced to help explain the passive force of an inactive fiber. The model attempts to describe characteristics rather than direct reference to any individual structures. Therefore, each component can comprise many different muscle structures that possess those characteristics. The CC of the model refers to the moving or contracting components or structures of muscles (i.e., the muscle fibers: actin and myosin filaments) that provide the active force during contraction of the muscle.

The SEC refers to the structures of the muscle, which lies in series or in line with the muscle fibers such as cross-bridges, structural proteins, and tendons. The PEC is noncontractile in nature and lies parallel to the muscle fibers. A relaxed passive muscle exerts the force that it contributes when it is stretched beyond its resting length. Muscle connective tissues such as the perimysium, epimysium, and endomysium are examples of the PEC.

During human locomotion, such as walking, running, or jumping, the 3 components interact to produce efficient motion. For example, in the initial eccentric phase of a CMJ, the CC is active, the SEC and PEC are being lengthened, and as a result, elastic energy is stored. In the ensuing concentric contraction, the stored elastic energy is used in conjunction with the contractile forces being produced in the CC. The magnitude of the energy returned is proportional to the applied force and induced deformation with reported energy returns of between 65 and 85% in human tendons (7,70). The contribution of the SEC and PEC is minimized if the squat position is held for approximately 4 seconds before the concentric phase (90). The assistance of elastic energy is likely to exist even for SJ; however, when starting from a static squat, most of the elastic energy is dissipated as heat energy, and therefore, the forces associated with the ensuing concentric contraction are primarily attributed to the CC. These factors that occur in most cases during SJ (extended duration) are thought to be one of the main reasons why SJ is inferior to CMJ performance, i.e., minimal contribution of SEC and PEC. The Figure highlights the difference in force profile between a CMJ and a SJ.

A typical force (ground reaction) profile taken from a force plate during both countermovement and SJ. The first figure (2a) represents a CMJ, whereas the second one (2b) represents a SJ. The circled point a) represents the countermovement (where the child squats and moves downward) before the jump. A valid SJ should not have any countermovement before the jump. This is especially important when comparing CMJ and SJ. CMJ = countermovement jump; SJ = squat jump.

Each of the components contributes to total force production during the SSC. However, it has also been observed that the mechanical properties of the SEC and the PEC were not related to each other (41). Among the 3 components, it is likely that the main contributors of the propulsive force during the SSC lie more with the SEC and the CC because of these components' response to deformation and ability to store potential energy. The magnitude of the PEC contribution is currently debatable (83). Nonetheless, the following sections discuss how the contributions of the active (CC) and passive (SEC and PEC) components change with maturation and the subsequent effects on SSC ability.


Other than changes in muscle mass and fiber-type proportions, the exact changes that occur in the contractile properties of muscle during puberty are relatively unknown as there have been few studies that have investigated these changes. Activation ability of a muscle refers to the individuals’ ability to successfully recruit and activate the motor unit during a movement. When more motor units are able to be activated for a movement, the muscle is able to generate a higher amount of force. It has been consistently shown that youths have a lower voluntary muscle contraction ability or maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) than adults (3,18,56). Furthermore, the magnitude of twitch tension (TT) and MVC are 2 of the main changes that have been found to increase with age and maturity in children (10,18,56–58). Comparisons of the extensor hallucis brevis muscle in male subjects aged between 3 and 22 years clearly demonstrated that maximal isometric TTs increased gradually as the individual matured (57). This improvement, although gradual at first, undergoes a significant marked increase during puberty.

Differences in the maturity and development of the muscle groups can be observed as early as 6 years of age. Belanger and McComas (5) conducted a study to determine the extent of the changes of contractile properties of the ankle muscles during childhood (6–13 years old, n = 10) and adolescence (15–18 years old, n = 8). A strong and positive relationship was observed in children between age and MVC torque values for both ankle dorsiflexion (r = 0.78) and plantar flexion (r = 0.76). The same relationship was also observed for twitch torque and age for both children (r = 0.81) and adolescents (r = 0.81). The mean values were approximately double the values for the adolescent (148.9 N·m) compared with the younger children (78.3 N·m). However, no significant correlations were found between age and contraction time. The authors concluded that these differences were likely because of the fiber-type proportions between the dorsiflexion and plantar flexor muscles (6) and possibly other variables such as active state and myosin light chain phosphorylation (62).

The results of the study by Belanger and McComas (5) further support the concept of age-related differences for the CCs, which is also observed for motor unit activation although it was partial. The younger the child, the less voluntary activation the individual has (10,18). Davies et al. (18) observed that there was a relationship in voluntary muscle ability and age (r = 0.93). The study also reported that younger children (preadolescent) take a longer time to reach peak tension as opposed to older children (adolescent) and adults when electrically stimulated. Blimkie et al. (10) compared the degree of motor unit activation during voluntary contraction in a group of males between the ages of 10 and 16 years. No significant difference in elbow flexor percentage of motor unit activation among the age groups (89.4 versus 89.9%) was found. However, there was a significant difference for the knee extensors (77.7 versus 95.3%). Although these findings are conflicting (lower body only) compared with other studies, it seems that age-associated variance exists.

When compared with adults, motor unit activation or neurological adaptations are likely to be one of the primary adaptations to strength training adaptations in prepubescents (10,40,66,73). Ozmun et al. (66) used electromyography (EMG) to measure strength training–induced changes in prepubescent boys and girls after 8 weeks of strength training. The authors observed significant increases in both maximal isokinetic strength (27.8%) and a corresponding increase in integrated EMG amplitude of 16.8% with no corresponding significant increase in muscle size, suggesting that the youths in the study experience a neurological adaptation as opposed to hypertrophy. Ramsay et al. (73) and Blimkie et al. (10) investigated the contribution of changes in motor unit activation to training-induced strength increases in prepubescent boys. In both studies, there was a corresponding increase in motor unit activation with strength change, although in terms of percentage increase, motor unit activation was not proportionate and much less than the increase in strength. Although many factors (e.g., hypertrophy) can contribute to strength training adaptations, in prepubescents, motor unit activation is likely to be the primary factor for strength training adaptations.

Although some contractile properties gradually increase with age, it has also been suggested that other contractile properties of muscle may have already matured by early childhood (57,73). McComas et al. (57) observed that the twitch contraction times of younger children (2–16 years of age, n = 19) were already within adult range. The same observation was also made for the ratio of muscle strength to muscle cross-sectional area, which is used to indicate maturity of the contractile properties. For some muscle groups such as the knee flexors, the ratio remains relatively consistent throughout the different maturational groups. For other muscle groups (e.g., the elbow flexors), the ratio increases as the individual ages through his/her adolescent years (57). Although the study population was small (n = 19), the authors did observe a noticeable increase, which, although inconclusive, does add support to the suggestion of early maturation of the contractile properties. This increase suggests that the growth of contractile force increases at a much greater rate than the increase in muscle mass or the ability to develop voluntary maximum force during adolescent growth.

Stretch reflex potentiation has been observed to be related to age or maturity level (24,28,49). Grosset et al. (28) attempted to observe the development of reflex excitability in prepubescent children. They believed that although the central mechanism that controls stretch reflex in children is mature by the time they reach prepubescence, the mechanically induced reflex only increases with the age of the child. Lin et al. (49) in their study observed that reflex twitch time also improved as an individual matures before it slowly deteriorates again as one grows older. It has been suggested that this increase is because of the maturation of the sensorimotor pathways (49). Other possible contributors to the development of the stretch reflex could possibly be improved spindle sensitivity and/or increased gamma drive (γ) of the muscle spindles (28). Grosset et al. (28), who observed changes in stretch reflex and muscle stiffness in children, also suggested that elastic properties of muscle (and in relation to muscle stiffness), which decreased as the individual matured, was likely one of the major contributors to the development of the stretch reflex because of the correlation between the changes in reflex amplitude and active muscle stiffness. Changes in passive muscle stiffness with maturation are explored in detail in the next section.


Because of the importance of the SEE and muscle stiffness in the SSC, it is important to investigate this phenomenon in youth. Previous studies on both deceased donors and animal cadavers have shown that there are changes in the elastic properties across ages (17,23,41,42,64,78). Differences in mechanical stiffness between maturational groups can differ from 84% to as much as 334% (23,64). Elliot (23) in 1965 observed that the tensile strength of the male human tendon for infants was 30 and 100 MPa in adults, a difference of about 334%. This difference in tendon stiffness (patella) reduces as the child matures and by the age of 8–9 years has reduced to 94% between men and boys and 84% between women and girls (64). The same pattern was also observed for the Young’s modulus with a difference of 99% between men and boys and 66% between women and girls. Young’s modulus describes the ratio of stress to strain and refers to the soft tissue ability to withstand changes in length during lengthwise tension. The investigators concluded that an increase in mechanical stiffness between human children and adults is because of the change in stiffness of the tendon microstructures.

Kubo et al. (42) investigated tendon compliance of 3 different age groups. Significant differences in muscle compliance were found among younger boys, older boys, and adult men (Table 2). The tendon structures of the younger children were reported to have the highest compliance, whereas adults were reported to have the highest stiffness. Significantly higher tendon stretch was also noted for the younger boys with muscle forces above 0.35 MPa of Fm per muscle cross-sectional area than the other 2 groups. There was no significant difference when comparing the tendon stretch between the older boys and the adults. Stiffness was defined by Kubo et al. (42) in his study as the relationship between the estimated muscle force and tendon elongation during the ascending phase of a leg extension. This observation regarding muscle/tendon compliance in youth is supported by other studies, some of which has been highlighted in Table 3 (28,42,49,51,52,87).

Table 3:
Stiffness across different age groups

Two main reasons have been suggested to explain the increase in tendon stiffness. The first is because of the increase in tendon mass and therefore the anatomical cross-sectional area and tendon length. One of the contributors to increase in tendon size and cross-sectional area is probably the increase in the collagen fibril diameter itself as the individual matures (19,67). This combined with other normal growth changes such as increases in muscle size and mass leads to an increase in the loading on the tendon itself. This combination of growth and loading in turn leads to an increase in tendon stiffness during maturation (17,64). Other than pure increase in overall mass, other changes have also been noted such as microstructural changes in the tendon (4,19,65,67,68,74), increases in the fibril density or packing, and increases in the cross-linking within the collagen (4,74).

The second reason for increasing stiffness has been attributed to the reduction of collagen crimping, which is another microstructural change of the tendon that contributes to increased stiffness. Collagen fibers are packed in parallel; however, they are not straight but wavy (19,75). The crimp is a structural characteristic that refers to the “waviness” of the fibril, which contributes to the nonlinear stress-strain relationships. A nonlinear stress-strain means that the stiffness of the soft tissues changes with deformation increasing the effect, as opposed to a linear relationship where the stiffness remains constant. As the collagen fibrils become “uncrimped,” tendon stiffness increases, contributing to the overall stiffness of the tendon. Studies on both humans and animals have shown that there is a reduction in collagen crimping with increased age from youth to adult (35,69).

Aponeuroses are broad flat membranes that are histologically similar to tendons but lack the same level of blood supply and nerves. Whereas tendons connect muscle to bone, aponeuroses connect muscles to the part that moves, be it bone or other muscles. Aponeuroses undergo a similar progressive development from childhood to adulthood (13,42) and are likely to have an effect on the storage of elastic energy. The aponeuroses for those younger than 16 years were found to be slender, shorter, and lower volume (13,43). The length of the aponeuroses appeared to increase with age (42). Adults above the age of 40 years were consistently found to have much thicker aponeuroses (13). However, the aponeuroses for an elderly group (60 years and older) were still particularly well developed and strong. This observation supports the concept of function over age for the aponeuroses similar to muscles.

In summary, children have more compliant tissues, which stiffen as the individual matures. This is likely to play a role in the SSC ability of youths, the extent of its effect however is unknown. The extent of its trainability is also difficult to assess and differentiate be it because of maturation or training. It should be noted that even research into adult stiffness/compliance and the effect on force production is conflicting. For example, a compliant tissue will store more energy and perform more work if contraction time allows this to occur, whereas when contraction durations are brief as in the case of foot strike when sprinting, a stiffer musculotendinous unit that is capable of higher rates of force development is desirable (45,47,48). It is likely that there is an optimal range of stiffness/compliance that is best for specific tasks; however, more research is needed in this area for both adults and youth. Practitioners might want to take this into consideration when attempting to target and train stiffness in youths.


The magnitude of potentiation that results from the prestretch augmentation cited in the previous literature was from research using mainly adults. Youths, specifically adolescents and preadolescents, who have yet to reach full maturity in terms of the development of muscle, tendon, and/or reflexes may not have the same level of potentiation. This section explores this theme in more detail.

A number of studies have attempted to compare the jumping performance of children with adults (29,87,88). Wang et al. (88) compared CMJ performance of prepubescent children (6 ± 0.41 years) with adults (18 ± 0.50 years). The authors found significant differences in the range of motion for the jump, particularly the depth of the crouch during the countermovement, and a more backward projection (in reference to the line of center of gravity) during takeoff for the prepubescent children. These differences were because of limited range of movement (ROM) during the crouch and what the authors termed as immature joint functions at the knee before takeoff (88).

Limited ROM in the ankle and knee of the children during the takeoff has been observed (57) and is likely indicative of low ability to perform the jump, possibly because of a lack of experience in performing the jump or possibly a physical limitation (less likely). Immature joint function refers to different firing patterns in the children compared with the adults. To descend into the crouch, children used mainly concentric contractions of the joint flexors compared with adults who used both concentric contractions in the joint flexors and eccentric contractions in the joint extensors. Such differences were attributed to probable lack of form in jumping strategy because of experience and immature joint function. It is also possible that the lack of coordination could reflect a motor system that is unable to exploit the SSC at the current stage of maturation. Therefore, any future studies with children should include a strict familiarization jump session before the study or prior jump experience to help tackle the lack of form in jumping strategy.

Harrison and Gaffney (29) conducted a study to observe the effects of age and gender on SSC performance. The vertical jump performance of prepubescent children (n = 20) consisting of 12 girls (6 ± 0.4 years) and 8 boys (6 ± 0.2 years) was compared with adults (n = 22) consisting of 12 women (21 ± 1 years) and 10 men (23 ± 3 years). The SSC potentiation was calculated by comparing the differences between CMJ and SJ collected from a force plate. The variable used to compare the difference was the ratio of velocity at takeoff ([INCREMENT]VTO) derived from the resultant ground reaction force on the force plate. The children had a percentage difference in [INCREMENT]vTO of 10.5 ± 19.7%, which was higher than the adult group that had [INCREMENT]vTO of 6.3 ± 5.6%. However, it should be noted that there was great variability in the [INCREMENT]vTO of children and that there was a noticeable difference in scores between boys (14.5 ± 24.9%) and girls (7.8 ± 15.1%). It was believed that one of the primary reasons for this difference was because of the poor execution and performance of the SJ, rather than SSC-augmented improvement in the CMJ (29).

The researchers proposed 3 reasons in support of their conclusion. First, a lower or reduction in variability is an indication of motor development, learning, and maturity; therefore, a greater variation as observed in the children suggested a less-developed or mature motor pattern. This variability was again observed in the high ΔvTO scores of the SJ for the children. The variability suggested nonoptimal performance of SJ, which was consistent with what was observed by Bobbert et al. (11). The second observation reported was that when comparing CMJ with SJ, the children generated a significantly greater relative peak power and force for CMJ (Table 4). Children also generated significantly lower peak power (28 ± 3 W/kg) in SJ when compared to adults (48 ± 7 W/kg) with similar results for peak force (Table 4). These results suggest lower motor development or mastery of SJ compared with CMJ. The third reason was that significant variations were observed in relative peak force in SJ for children compared with adults, which again suggests reduced motor control or mastery of SJ compared with CMJ, and that it is possibly age dependent. In both situations, poor execution of SJ would increase the ratio of ΔvTO between CMJ and SJ.

Table 4:
CMJ and SJ variables between children and adults

The variability in jumping performances observed by Harrison and Gaffney, which is suggestive of motor control issues related to maturity, has been observed in many other studies on jumping in youth (26,30,33,50,61,88). The variability could also possibly suggest an inability to exploit SSC. However, from a coaching standpoint, it is likely that motor control or a lack of skill is one of the main causes of variability. Practitioners might want to focus on coaching good jumping and landing technique first (1,15). This would at least eliminate or minimize the variability because of motor control issues and minimize injury risk associated with jumping and landing (60,71,72,89). Future research measuring SSC enhancement (SJ versus CMJ) in youth populations needs to take into account these issues and ensure that the youth subjects are proficient in both methods of jumping.

Most literature comparing CMJ with SJ in children has shown CMJ to be superior, which is to be expected. Observations from recent research (51) have suggested that this might not always be the case, at least for jump height. The jumping performances and SSC ability (CMJ versus SJ) of children across chronological ages of 7–17 years were measured. Periods of accelerated adaptation in SSC across the ages of 14–16 years were observed. However, in the same study, it was also observed that children aged 12–14 years had a better mean SJ jump height (centimeters) compared with CMJ. Children, 15 years of age, had the same jump height performance between CMJ and SJ. These children could possibly be post-PHV. Although the investigators did not directly address the superiority of SJ performance compared with CMJ, it was suggested that because these ages were post-PHV, it could be due to a combination of an increase in maximal isometric strength and concentric strength capability of the subjects as opposed to their SSC ability. Post-PHV is a period where it has been observed that there is an increase in strength and muscle mass (9). Because maximal isometric strength regardless of age is believed to be proportional to muscle size (82), it is possible that the greater maximal isometric strength combined with increased concentric ability might explain why the mean SJ height performance was better than CMJ during ages of 12–14 years. It is likely that after the age of 16 years, when the children are more mature, they exhibit the expected adult-like CMJ versus SJ jump performance.


Certain neuromuscular and musculotendinous changes do occur with maturation, but the influence of these changes on SSC ability of youth is not yet clear. This is because the biological maturity of youth does not necessarily coincide with chronological age, and therefore, the variability in SSC ability across different populations is likely to exist. No studies have directly investigated SSC augmentation for jumping potentiation across maturation, i.e., pre, at, and post pubescence. The more compliant tissues evident in children, which stiffen as they mature, are likely to play a role in the SSC ability of youths. Thus, measuring SSC potentiation in children and determining if SSC potentiation differs across maturational stages would provide an insight into the optimal windows for trainability of the SSC. Better understanding windows of trainability should enable development of programs for children to optimize their SSC ability as part of long-term development of youth athletes.

Practitioners, looking to assess SSC ability in youth practitioners, might want to consider 2 main factors: the first would be the biological maturity of the youth and the second would be the method. Practitioners can use any of the methods highlighted for assessing biological age (Table 1) and SSC ability (Table 2). One of the methods highlighted is the eccentric utilization ratio (EUR), which is essentially the ratio of CMJ in relation to SJ calculated by taking the displacement of CMJ and dividing it by the displacement of SJ, resulting in a ratio, the EUR. It is expected that adult athletes will have an EUR of at least 1.0 (27), which suggests a poor SSC augmentation ability. A higher EUR would suggest that the athlete possesses a high SSC augmentation ability. The EUR can also be measured using other outputs. If there is access to a force plate or position transducer, outputs such as peak and mean power can be used. The additional advantage of monitoring peak power (EUR) on top of monitoring the SSC augmentation ability will also allow the coach to monitor increases in actual power production with training and as the adolescent matures. This is especially important for monitoring adolescents who are still growing and are likely to experience changes in mass. Unlike adults, jumping performance in youths is not as stable with great variability and lack of familiarization with the jump itself. For youths, learning effects and the subsequent increased jump efficiency might lead to sudden increase in jump displacement in a very short period with or without the necessary increase in power production capability. These reasons combined could serve as a better monitoring tool of performance to those coaching youths and provide another additional advantage of using EUR peak power.

It is important to note that the EUR for children might differ depending on the familiarity with the SJ. One of the consistent observations found in jump studies using youth subjects is the variability in jumping performance, particularly in SJ owing to motor control issues related to maturity. Without any intervention or specific familiarization, it is likely that children will not exhibit SJ performances typically observed in adults until they are much more mature, leading to a misleading and usually an inflated value. Therefore, it is recommended that when comparing CMJ and SJ performance in children, a familiarization jump session should be included and research should ideally use children with some prior jump experience.

It is suggested that practitioners working with youths looking to develop SSC-related ability such as jumping and other plyometric type of training might want to focus on 2 aspects, which combined would likely allow for a better jump performance. The first would be the development of good sound jumping and landing techniques as many of the studies reviewed have highlighted the variability of jumping performance of youth. The development of good technique will minimize the variability and improve the coordination of the jumping pattern (1,15). This might possibly lead to an improvement in the motor pattern to better exploit SSC. A sound muscle strengthening program concurrent or before a serious plyometric program might also lead to an improvement. The improvement in the jumping technique and improvements in muscular strength not only allow for a better jump performance but also minimize the risk of injury to the youth.


1. Aerts I, Cumps E, Verhagen E, Meeusen R. Efficacy of a 3 month training program on the jump-landing technique in jump-landing sports. Design of a cluster randomized controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 11: 281, 2010.
2. Armstrong N, Welsman J. Young People and Physical Activity. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2002. pp. 88–91.
3. Asmussen E, Heebøll-Nielsen KR. A dimensional analysis of physical performance and growth in boys. J Appl Physiol 7: 593–603, 1955.
4. Bailey AJ, Paul RG, Knott L. Mechanisms of maturation and ageing of collagen. Mech Ageing Dev 106: 1–56, 1998.
5. Belanger AY, McComas AJ. Contractile properties of human skeletal muscle in childhood and adolescence. Eur J Appl Physiol 58: 563–567, 1989.
6. Belanger AY, McComas AJ, Elder GBC. Physiological properties of two antagonistic human muscle groups. Eur J Appl Physiol 51: 381–393, 1983.
7. Bennett MB, Ker RF, Imery NJ, Alexander RM. Mechanical properties of various mammalian tendons. J Zoolog 209: 537–548, 1986.
8. Berkey CS, Rockett HR, Field AE, Gillman MW, Camargo CA Jr, Colditz GA. Activity, dietary intake, and weight changes in a longitudinal study of preadolescent and adolescent boys and girls. Pediatrics 105: E56, 2000.
9. Beunen GP. Muscular strength development in children and adolescents. In: Children and Exercise XVIII. Froberg K, Lammert O, Hansen HS, Blimkie CJR, eds. Odense, Denmark: Odense University Press, 1997. pp. 193–207.
10. Blimkie CJR, Ramsay J, Sale D, MacDougall D, Smith K, Garner S. Effects of 10 weeks of resistance training on strength development in prepubertal boys. In: Children & Exercise XIII. S, Carlsen KH, eds. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics Publishers, 1989. pp. 183–197.
11. Bobbert MF, Gerritsen KGM, Litjens MCA, Van Soest AJ. Why is countermovement jump height greater than squat jump height? Med Sci Sports Exerc 28: 1402, 1996.
12. Bosco C, Komi PV. Influence of aging on the mechanical behaviour of the leg extensor muscles. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 45: 209–221, 1980.
13. Brunel G, El-Haddioui A, Bravetti P, Zouaoui A, Gaudy J- F. General organization of the human intra-masseteric aponeuroses: Changes with ageing. Surg Radiol Anat 25: 270–283, 2003.
14. Castriota-Scanderbeg A, Sacco MC, Emberti-Gialloreti L, Fraracci L. Skeletal age assessment in children and young adults: Comparison between a newly developed sonographic method and conventional methods. Skeletal Radiol 27: 271–277, 1998.
15. Chockley C. Ground reaction force comparison between jumps landing on the full foot and jumps landing en pointe in ballet dancers. J Dance Med Sci 12: 5–8, 2008.
16. Cox LA. The biology of bone maturation and ageing. Acta Paediatr 423: 107–108, 1997.
17. Danielsen CC, Andreassen TT. Mechanical properties of rat tail tendon in relation to proximal-distal sampling position and age. J Biomech 21: 207–212, 1988.
18. Davies CTM, White MJ, Young K. Muscle function in children. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 52: 111–114, 1983.
19. Diamant J, Keller A, Baer E, Litt M, Arridge RG. Collagen; ultrastructure and its relation to mechanical properties as a function of ageing. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 180: 293–315, 1972.
20. Dietz V, Schmidtbleicher D, Noth J. Neuronal mechanisms of human locomotion. J Neurophysiol 42: 1212–1222, 1979.
21. Dorn LD, Dahl RE, Woodward HR, Biro F. Defining the boundaries of early adolescence: A user’s guide to assessing pubertal status and pubertal timing in research with adolescence. Appl Dev Sci 10: 30–56, 2006.
22. Edman KAP, Elzinga G, Noble MI. Residual force enhancement after stretch of contracting frog single muscle fibers. J Gen Physiol 80: 769–784, 1982.
23. Elliot DH. Structure and function of mammalian tendon. Biol Rev 40: 392–421, 1965.
24. Finan DS, Smith A. Jaw stretch reflexes in children. Exp Brain Res 164: 58–66, 2005.
25. Forcinito M, Epstein M, Herzog W. Theoretical considerations on myofibril stiffness. Biophys J 72: 1278–1286, 1997.
26. Gerodimos V, Zafeiridis A, Perkos S, Dipla K, Manou V, Kellis S. The contribution of stretch-shortening cycle and arm-swing to vertical jumping performance in children, adolescents, and adult basketball players. Pediatr Exerc Sci 20: 379–389, 2008.
27. Gilli G. The assessment of skeletal maturation. Horm Res 45(Suppl 2): 49–52, 1996.
28. Grosset J-F, Mora I, Lambertz D, Perot C, Pérot C. Changes in stretch reflexes and muscle stiffness with age in prepubescent children. J Appl Physiol 102: 2352–2360, 2007.
29. Harrison AJ, Gaffney S. Motor development and gender effects on stretch-shortening cycle performance. J Sci Med Sport 4: 406–415, 2001.
30. Harrison AJ, Moroney A. Arm augmentation of vertical jump performance in young girls and adult females. In: 25th International Symposium on Biomechanics in Sports. Menzel H-J, Chagas MH, eds. Ouro Preto, Brazil: International Society of Biomechanics in Sports, 2007. pp. 160–163.
31. Hassel B, Farman AG. Skeletal maturation evaluation using cervical vertebrae. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 107: 58–66, 1995.
32. Hill AV. The heat of shortening and the dynamic constants of muscle. Proc R Soc Lond B Sci 126: 136, 1938.
33. Johnson BA, Salzberg CL, Stevennson DA. A systematic review: Plyometric training programs for young children. J Strength Cond Res 25: 2623–2633, 2011.
34. Kamal M, Goyal S. Comparative evaluation of hand wrist radiographs with cervical vertebrae for skeletal maturation in 10-12 years old children. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 24: 127–135, 2006.
35. Kastelic J, Palley I, Baer E. A structural mechanical model for tendon crimping. J Biomech 13: 887–893, 1980.
36. Komi PV. Biomechanical features of running with special emphasis on load characteristics and mechanical efficiency. In: Biomechanical Aspects of Sport Shoes and Playing Surfaces. Nigg B, Kerr B, eds. Calgary, Canada: University of Calgary, 1983. pp. 123–134.
37. Komi PV. Stretch-shortening cycle: A powerful model to study normal and fatigued muscle. J Biomech 33: 1197–1206, 2000.
38. Komi PV, Bosco C. Utilization of stored elastic energy in leg extensor muscles by men and women. Med Sci Sports Exerc 10: 261–265, 1978.
39. Komi PV, Gollhofer A. Stretch reflexes can have an important role in force enhancement during SSC exercise. J Appl Biomech 13: 451–460, 1997.
40. Komi PV, Viitasalo JT, Rauramaa R, Vihko V. Effect of isometric strength training of mechanical, electrical, and metabolic aspects of muscle function. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 40: 45–55, 1978.
41. Kubo K, Kanehisa H, Fukunaga T. Is passive stiffness in human muscles related to the elasticity of tendon structures? Eur J Appl Physiol 85: 226–232, 2001.
42. Kubo K, Kanehisa H, Kawakami Y, Fukunaga T, Fukanaga T. Growth changes in the elastic properties of human tendon structures. Int J Sports Med 22: 3–8, 2001.
43. Kubo K, Kanehisa H, Takeshita D, Kawakami Y, Fukashiro S, Fukunaga T. In vivo dynamics of human medial gastrocnemius muscle-tendon complex during stretch-shortening cycle exercise. Acta Physiol Scand 170: 127–135, 2000.
44. Kucukkeles N, Acar A, Biren S, Arun T. Comparisons between cervical vertebrae and hand-wrist maturation for the assessment of skeletal maturity. J Clin Pediatr Dent 24: 47–52, 1999.
45. Lemos RR, Epstein M, Herzog W. Modeling of skeletal muscle: The influence of tendon and aponeuroses compliance on the force-length relationship. Med Biol Eng Comput 46: 23–32, 2008.
46. Leone M, Comtois AS. Validity and reliability of self-assessment of sexual maturity in elite adolescent athletes. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 47: 361–365, 2007.
47. Lichtwark G, Barclay CJ. The influence of tendon compliance on muscle power output and efficiency during cyclic contractions. J Exp Biol 213: 707–714, 2010.
48. Lichtwark GA, Wilson AM. Is Achilles tendon compliance optimised for maximum muscle efficiency during locomotion? J Biomech 40: 1768–1775, 2007.
49. Lin JP, Brown JK, Walsh EG. Soleus muscle length, stretch reflex excitability, and the contractile properties of muscle in children and adults: A study of the functional joint angle. Dev Med Child Neurol 39: 469–480, 1997.
50. Lloyd RS, Oliver JL, Hughes MG, Williams CA. Reliability and validity of field-based measures of leg stiffness and reactive strength index in youths. J Sports Sci 27: 1565–1573, 2009.
51. Lloyd RS, Oliver JL, Hughes MG, Williams CA. The influence of chronological age on periods of accelerated adaptation of stretch-shortening cycle performance in pre and postpubescent boys. J Strength Cond Res 25: 1889–1897, 2011.
52. Lloyd RS, Oliver JL, Hughes MG, Williams CA, Hughes MG. Age related differences in neural regulation of SSC activities in male youths. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 22: 37–43, 2012.
53. Malina RM. Physical activity and fitness: Pathways from childhood to adulthood. Am J Hum Biol 13: 162–172, 2001.
54. Malina RM, Bouchard C, Bar-Or O. Growth, maturation, and physical activity. In: Growth, Maturation and Physical Performance (2nd ed). Malina RM, Bouchard C, Bar-Or O, eds. Champiagn, IL: Human Kinetics, 2004. pp. 1–17.
55. Malina RM, Eisenmann J, Cumming S, Ribeiro B, Aroso J. Maturity-associated variation in the growth and functional capacities of youth football (soccer) players 13–15 years. Eur J Appl Physiol 91: 555–562, 2004.
56. Maughan RJ, Watson JS, Weir J. Muscle strength and cross-sectional area in man: A comparison of strength-trained and untrained subjects. Br J Sports Med 18: 149–157, 1984.
57. McComas AJ, Sica RE, Currie S. An electrophysiological study of Duchenne dystrophy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 34: 461–468, 1971.
58. McComas AJ, Sica REP, Petito F. Muscle strength in boys of different ages. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 36: 171–173, 1973.
59. McGuigan MR, Doyle TL, Newton M, Edwards DJ, Nimphius S, Newton RU. Eccentric utilization ratio: Effect of sport and phase of training. J Strength Cond Res 20: 992–995, 2006.
60. McKay H, Tsang G, Heinonen A, MacKelvie K, Sanderson D, Khan KM. Ground reaction forces associated with an effective elementary school based jumping intervention. Br J Sports Med 39: 10–14, 2005.
61. Meylan CMP, Cronin JB, Oliver JL, Hughes MG, McMaster TD. The reliability of jump kinematics and kinetics in children of different maturity status. J Strength Cond Res 26: 1015–1026, 2012.
62. Moore RL, Stull JJ. Myosin light chain phosphorylation in fast and slow skeletal muscles in situ. Am J Physiol 247(Pt 1): C462–C471, 1984.
63. Neinstein LS, Kaufman FR. Normal physical growth and development. In: Adolescent Health Care: A Practical Guide (4th ed). Neinstein LS, ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2002.
64. O’Brien TD, Reeves ND, Baltzopoulos V, Jones D, Maganaris CN. Mechanical properties of the patellar tendon in adults and children. J Biomech 43: 1190–1195, 2010.
65. O’Brien TD, Reeves ND, Baltzopoulos V, Jones DA, Maganaris CN. Muscle-tendon structure and dimensions in adults and children. J Anat 216: 631–642, 2010.
66. Ozmun JC, Mikesky AE, Surburg PR. Neuromuscular adaptations following prepubescent strength training. Med Sci Sports Exerc 26: 510–514, 1994.
67. Parry DA, Barnes GR, Craig AS. A comparison of the size distribution of collagen fibrils in connective tissues as a function of age and a possible relation between fibril size distribution and mechanical properties. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 203: 305–321, 1978.
68. Parry DA, Craig AS, Barnes GR. Tendon and ligament from the horse: An ultrastructural study of collagen fibrils and elastic fibres as a function of age. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 203: 293–303, 1978.
69. Patterson-Kane JC, Firth EC, Goodship AE, Parry DA. Age-related differences in collagen crimp patterns in the superficial digital flexor tendon core region of untrained horses. Aust Vet J 75: 39–44, 1997.
70. Pollock CM, Shadwick RE. Relationship between body mass and biomechanical properties of limb tendons in adult mammals. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 266: R1016–R1021, 1994.
71. Prapavessis H, McNair PJ, Anderson K, Hohepa M. Decreasing landing forces in children: The effect of instructions. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 33: 204–207, 2003.
72. Quatman CE, Ford KR, Myer GD, Hewett TE. Maturation leads to gender differences in landing force and vertical jump performance: A longitudinal study. Am J Sports Med 34: 806–813, 2006.
73. Ramsay J, Blimkie CJR, Smith K, Garner S, MacDougall J, Sale D. Strength training effects in prepubescent boys. Med Sci Sports 22: 605–614, 1990.
74. Reed CC, Iozzo RV. The role of decorin in collagen fibrillogenesis and skin homeostasis. Glycoconj J 19: 249–255, 2003.
75. Rigby BJ. Effects of cyclic extension on the physical properties of tendon collagen and its possible relation to biological aging of collagen. Nature 13: 1072–1074, 1964.
76. San Román P, Palma JC, Oteo MD, Nevado E. Skeletal maturation determined by cervical vertebrae development. Eur J Orthod 24: 303–311, 2002.
77. Schlossberger NM, Turner RA, Irwin CE. Validity of self-report of pubertal maturation in early adolescents. J Adolesc Health 13: 109–113, 1992.
78. Shadwick RE. Elastic energy storage in tendons: Mechanical differences related to function and age. J Appl Physiol 68: 1033–1040, 1990.
79. Smith RJ. Misuse of hand-wrist radiographs. Am J Orthod 77: 75–78, 1980.
80. Tanner JM. Growth at Adolescence (2nd ed). Oxford, United Kingdom: Blackwell, 1962. pp. 121–134.
81. Temfemo A, Hugues J, Chardon K, Mandengue S-H, Ahmaidi S. Relationship between vertical jumping performance and anthropometric characteristics during growth in boys and girls. Eur J Pediatr 168: 457–464, 2009.
82. Tonson A, Ratel S, Le Fur Y, Cozzone P, Bedahan D. Effect of maturation on the relationship between muscle size and force production. Med Sci Sports Exerc 40: 918–925, 2008.
83. Turner AN, Jeffreys I. The stretch-shortening cycle: Proposed mechanisms and methods for enhancement. Strength Cond J 32: 87, 2010.
84. Van Ingen Schenau GJ, Bobbert MF, De Haan A. Author’s response: Mechanics and energetics of the stretch-shortening cycle: A stimulating discussion. J Appl Biomech 13: 484–496, 1997.
85. Van Ingen Schenau GJ, Bobbert MF, De Haan A. Target article: Does elastic energy enhance work and efficiency in the stretch-shortening cycle. J Appl Biomech 13: 389–496, 1997.
86. Walshe AD, Wilson GJ. The influence of musculotendinous stiffness on drop jump performance. Can J Appl Physiol 22: 117–132, 1997.
87. Wang L, Lin D, Huang C. Age effect on jumping techniques and lower limb stiffness during vertical jump. Res Sports Med 12: 209–219, 2004.
88. Wang L-I, Lin D-C, Huang C, Chung-Hsien. Biomechanical analysis during countermovement jump in children and adults. In: 20th International Symposium on Biomechanics in Sports. Gianikellis KE, ed. Cáceres, Spain: International Society of Biomechanics in Sports, 2002. pp. 374–377.
89. White PE, Ullah S, Donaldson A, Otago L, Saunders N, Romiti M, Finch CF. Encouraging junior community netball players to learn correct safe landing technique. J Sci Med Sport 15: 19–24, 2012.
90. Wilson JM, Flanagan EP. The role of elastic energy in activities with high force and power requirements: A brief review. J Strength Cond Res 22: 1705, 2008.
91. Young W. Laboratory strength assessment of athletes evaluation—En laboratoire de la force des athletes. New Stud Athlet 10: 89–96, 1995.

    stretch-shortening cycle; youth; maturation; SSC potentiation; countermovement jump; squat jump

    © 2013 by the National Strength & Conditioning Association