Effects of cluster vs. traditional plyometric training sets on maximal-intensity exercise performance

Abstract

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the effects of 6-week cluster versus traditional plyometric training sets on jumping ability, sprint and agility performance. Materials and methodsThirteen college students were assigned to a cluster sets group (N=6) or traditional sets group (N=7). Both training groups completed the same training program. The traditional group completed five sets of 20 repetitions with 2min of rest between sets each session, while the cluster group completed five sets of 20 [2×10] repetitions with 30/90-s rest each session. Subjects were evaluated for countermovement jump (CMJ), standing long jump (SLJ), t test, 20-m and 40-m sprint test performance before and after the intervention. ResultsBoth groups had similar improvements (P<0.05) in CMJ, SLJ, t test, 20-m, and 40-m sprint. However, the magnitude of improvement in CMJ, SLJ and t test was greater for the cluster group (effect size [ES]=1.24, 0.81 and 1.38, respectively) compared to the traditional group (ES=0.84, 0.60 and 0.55). Conversely, the magnitude of improvement in 20-m and 40-m sprint test was greater for the traditional group (ES=1.59 and 0.96, respectively) compared to the cluster group (ES=0.94 and 0.75, respectively). ConclusionsAlthough both plyometric training methods improved lower body maximal-intensity exercise performance, the traditional sets methods resulted in greater adaptations in sprint performance, while the cluster sets method resulted in greater jump and agility adaptations.