Beyond Imbalance: An Elasticity Framework for the Distance-averaged Force-Velocity Relationship in Vertical Jump

Authors

Li, Z., Li, M., Zhang, X., Chen, Z., Yang, L., Li, Q.

Abstract

This study aimed to (1) establish the distance-averaged F-V relationship framework and (2) develop elasticity metrics that quantify how F-V relationship variables govern jump height and inform training prescription. Theoretical derivation and experimental validation across 108 F-V relationship models derived from 1578 jumps (countermovement jump and squat jump at three knee angles; 20 well-trained subjects) yielded a standard error of 2.1% and a nearly perfect correlation (r = 0.96, p < 0.001) between measured and predicted jump height. Four elasticity metrics were formulated: force elasticity (F_{e}), the elasticity of jump height to maximal force (F_{0}); velocity elasticity (v_{e}), the elasticity of jump height to maximal velocity (v_{0}); the force-velocity elasticity norm {(mathrm{F}-mathrm{V}}_{mathrm{EN}}=sqrt{F_{e}^{2}+v_{e}^{2}}), reflecting the overall sensitivity of jump height to changes in F-V relationship variables; and the force-velocity elasticity ratio {(mathrm{F}-mathrm{V}}_{mathrm{ER}}=F_{e}{div v}_{e}), indicating which variable dominates the jump height response. Simulations and experiments revealed that F_{e} bore an inverse relationship to F_{0}, and v_{e} was inversely related to v_{0}, reflecting diminishing marginal returns. At a fixed jump height, simulations showed {mathrm{F}-mathrm{V}}_{mathrm{EN}} and {mathrm{F}-mathrm{V}}_{mathrm{ER}} displayed a U-shaped relationship; a balanced profile ({mathrm{F}-mathrm{V}}_{mathrm{ER}}=1) did not always correspond to the lowest {mathrm{F}-mathrm{V}}_{mathrm{EN}}. The distance-averaged F-V elasticity framework offers a physically grounded and quantitative tool for linking F-V relationship variables directly to jump performance, providing a basis for informing individualized training decisions.

Preprint server: bioRxiv
The authors list and abstract were imported from bioRxiv on 04 Sep 2026.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this preprint? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.