Next Article in Journal
Trimodal Watch-Type Wearable Health Monitoring Device
Next Article in Special Issue
The Impact of Sport-Specific Practice on Health-Related Physical Fitness Components in Young Water Polo and Volleyball Athletes
Previous Article in Journal
Long-Term Storage Stability of Neutral Electrolyzed Water by Two-Stage Electrolysis: Optimal Storage Conditions for Intraoral Use
Previous Article in Special Issue
Respiratory Muscle Strength as a Predictor of VO2max and Aerobic Endurance in Competitive Athletes
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Applied Sciences
Volume 14
Issue 20
10.3390/app14209266
applsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Relationship between the Reliability of Tennis-Specific Change of Direction (77COD) Test and Squat Jump–Countermovement Jump in Adolescent Tennis Players

by
Selman Kaya
1,*,
Aysu Önal
2 and
Gökhan Deliceoğlu
3
1
Department of Coaching Education, Faculty of Sports Sciences, University of Yalova, Yalova 77000, Turkey
2
Department of Training and Movement Sciences, Institute of Health Sciences, University of Gazi, Ankara 06500, Turkey
3
Department of Coaching Education, Faculty of Sports Sciences, University of Gazi, Ankara 06500, Turkey
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14(20), 9266; https://doi.org/10.3390/app14209266
Submission received: 16 August 2024 / Revised: 18 September 2024 / Accepted: 9 October 2024 / Published: 11 October 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Sports, Exercise and Health)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The aim of this study was to investigate the reliability of the tennis-specific change of direction (77COD) test with vertical jump tests (Squat Jump and Countermovement Jump) in adolescent tennis players. A total of 58 athletes (31 girls, 27 boys) actively playing tennis, with an average age of 10.57 ± 2.54 years, participated in the study. Tests and retests were completed within 2 weeks. Bland–Altman (B&A) plots were established and Pearson’s correlation analysis was conducted on the 77COD, CMJ, and SJ tests. Simple linear regression analysis (enter method) was used to determine the significant predictors of the 77COD variable from the SJ-CMJ variables. The SJ and CMJ were found to be highly negatively correlated with the 77COD test (−0.72 ≤ r ≤ −0.74). The test–retest reliability of the 77COD test was found to be very high, with an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.95. Our findings showed that the 77COD test is suitable for determining COD ability in adolescent tennis players. In addition, vertical jump heights are an informative and practical performance indicator for 77COD. In conclusion, the 77COD test is a COD test that can be used in coaching practices without the need for complex testing materials.

1. Introduction

Tennis is an intermittent sport that involves short–intense and medium–low-intensity long-term physiological capacities, as well as sudden biomechanical activities like acceleration, deceleration, change of direction (COD), and striking [1]. A player runs a total of ~8–12 m per point [2]. In a competitive match, players perform more than 1.000 CODs [3]. Players perform ~4 CODs per rally, but in a long rally, more than 15 CODs are applied [4]. Most of the time, lateral direction changes are more common than forward movements in rallies [5]. Additionally, although data show that COD movements in tennis are within ~4 m [4], 80% of all tennis shots are played at a distance of less than 2.5 m [6]. Therefore, COD abilities should be monitored to improve players’ performance [7].
In tennis, since many physical components like speed, agility, COD, and jumping that are necessary for success are power-based [8,9,10], upper and lower body strength and power are important performance determinants [11]. Additionally, due to the importance of CODs in many sports, conditioners and coaches aim to use the most appropriate tests to accurately measure the physical quality of CODs [12,13]. When the literature is examined, many agility tests have been developed and used to assess COD ability [14,15,16]. The most common of these tests are the pro-agility shuttle [17,18,19,20,21], the three-cone drill or L-run test [17,19,22], the T-test agility [23,24,25], and the Illinois agility test [21,25,26,27]. Although most COD tests are largely correlated with athletes’ ability to accelerate and decelerate [28], several studies have shown a weak and inconsistent relationship between CODs and straight-line sprinting [16,29,30,31,32].
Previous studies have reported a significant relationship between COD and jump tests [21,32,33,34,35,36,37,38]. These results suggest that athletes’ jump performances could be one of the factors affecting athletic skills like COD. However, the relationship between vertical jumps and COD in tennis players remains uncertain.
Considering the specific demands of the sport is essential when selecting the most appropriate COD test to accurately represent an athlete’s strengths and weaknesses. The quest for the optimal COD test in tennis players to determine performance most accurately has long been investigated and remains an intriguing topic for sports scientists. Since leg neuromuscular qualities are important determinants of COD performance [39], there is a need for a reliable tennis-specific test to assess COD ability associated with vertical jump tests. Furthermore, we could not find a tennis-specific reliable COD test correlating with vertical jump tests for adolescent tennis players.
Based on this information, the objectives of this study were as follows: (1) to examine the reliability of the 77COD test in adolescent tennis players; (2) to determine the relationship between vertical jump (Squat Jump–Countermovement Jump) height and the 77COD test.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design

This research examined the test–retest reliability of the 77COD test with vertical jump tests using a correlation design. Tests and retests were completed within 2 weeks. Participants visited the facility twice. After body composition measurements were taken, participants participated in the tests. A 10-day rest was given between the tests. All tests were conducted at the same training facility (indoor hard court) and at the same time of the day (10:00 a.m.–15:00 p.m.).

2.2. Subjects

Athletes aged between 9 and 15 years who had been actively playing tennis for at least 3 ± 4 years participated in the present study (girl n = 31, boy n = 27, age = 10.57 ± 2.54 years, body mass = 40.27 ± 13.83 kg, height = 146.60 ± 14.22 cm, body mass index = 18.36 ± 2.62 kg/m2). Tennis players who had undergone physical therapy (rehabilitation) in the past 12 months were excluded. A total of 58 athletes participated in this study, and all completed the study. Participants’ height (measured using a stadiometer with ±1 mm accuracy) and body weight (measured using a digital weighing scale with ±0.1 kg accuracy) were recorded. Athletes were instructed to avoid intense training for 24 h before each test day. They were also prohibited from consuming any stimulatory foods from 24 h prior to the test and were advised not to eat 2–3 h before each evaluation session. Before participating in the study, athletes and their families were informed about the research, and all signed an informed consent form. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee on Human Research of Gazi University (ID: 2023-1468). The research adhered to the Helsinki Declaration (October 2013, Brazil) throughout the study.

2.3. CMJ and SJ Test

Athletes ran two laps around the tennis court to warm up and performed tennis-specific warm-up exercises for 10 min (e.g., shoulder rotations, overhead triceps, standing trunk rotations, side lunge, butt kicks). All exercises were performed in 2 sets and 8 repetitions. CMJ and SJ were performed on a mat system with ±0.1 cm accuracy (Optojump, Microgate, Bolzano, Italy). A 30 s passive recovery period was applied between each jump for both the SJ and CMJ. Eight CMJs (3 trials maximal + 5 familiarization submaximal) followed by eight SJs (3 trials maximal + 5 familiarization submaximal) were performed with maximum effort. Participants stood still with their hands akimbo until verbally commanded to complete the CMJ. Participants were instructed to minimize the transition between descending and ascending stages and to jump as fast and high as possible. Participants were free to choose the depth of the movement. They were also instructed not to make any movements during the flight. After the CMJ, a 5 min passive rest was taken. Participants then stood on the force platform again for the SJ. While standing on the force plate, subjects were asked to bend their legs. After having maintained this crouch position for about 2 s, they were asked to apply force as fast as possible and to jump to maximum height. The jumps were performed without countermovement. The best score of each test was used for analysis.

2.4. 77COD Test

The 77COD test consists of three movement patterns commonly used by tennis players during matches: forward, backward, and lateral shuffle. The 77COD test spans a total length of 12 m and consists of seven stations. The first station involves a forward sprint, the second a backward sprint, the third a lateral shuffle, the fourth a forward sprint, the fifth a backward sprint, the sixth a lateral shuffle, and the seventh a forward sprint. Participants stood 50 cm behind the starting gate and began the test upon hearing the verbal command from the starting official. The athletes completed the test by performing a forward sprint to the first cone, a backward sprint to the second cone, a lateral shuffle to the third cone, a forward sprint to the fourth cone, a backward sprint to the fifth cone, a lateral shuffle to the sixth cone, and a forward sprint to the seventh cone. Participants completed a 2 m sprint between vertical and horizontal stations, and a 1 m sprint between the backward stations. They were instructed to touch the cones (cone height = 1 m) at each station. Photocell gates were placed at the start and finish points. A Fusion Smart Speed photocell system (Fusion Sport, Coopers Plains, QLD, Australia) was used to measure the time taken for direction changes. Each participant performed two submaximal trials before the test. After the familiarization phase, the test was conducted with two maximal-effort trials. The average time of the two trials was recorded. A 3 min passive recovery period was given to athletes between tests (Figure 1).

2.5. Data Analyses

Data were transferred to SPSS (IBM: Version 27, Armonk, NY, USA) for normality assessment and analysis. The normality distribution was evaluated using the Shapiro–Wilk test (p > 0.05). Pearson’s correlation analysis was conducted on the 77COD, CMJ, and SJ tests. Simple linear regression analysis (enter method) was used to determine the significant predictors of the 77COD variable from the SJ-CMJ variables. The adjusted R-squared value (R2; coefficient of determination) was used to indicate how much of the total variation in the 77COD variable could be explained by the SJ-CMJ variables.
A Bland–Altman (B&A) graph was created to evaluate the agreement between the test and retest performances [40]. A scattering graph was drawn representing the average values [(Test1 + Test2)/2] on the X axis and the score differences of the two tests (Test1–Test2) on the Y axis. The mean differences between two tests were considered as estimated deviation (Test1–Test2 mean). The 95% limits of agreement, which reflect random error, are expressed as mean ± 1.96 × SD. The upper limit of agreement is mean + 1.96 × SD, and the lower limit of agreement is mean—1.96 × SD. A sample T-test was used to compare the test–retest means of the 77COD, SJ, and CMJ tests. Cronbach’s alpha (α) reliability coefficients and 95% coefficients of variation (CV) were calculated for all tests. Minimum reliability was accepted as CV < 10% [41]. The mean differences were analyzed at a 95% confidence interval. ICC values less than 0.50 indicate poor reliability, values of 0.50–0.75 indicate moderate reliability, 0.75–0.90 indicate good reliability, and greater than 0.90 indicate excellent reliability [42]. An alpha value of <0.05 was used to assess statistical significance.

3. Results

The correlation values of the tests are presented in Table 1. There was a significant high positive correlation of 0.95 between the CMJ and SJ. A significant moderate negative correlation (r = −0.74) was found between the CMJ and 77COD test. A significant moderate negative correlation (r = −0.72) was observed between the SJ and 77COD test (p < 0.01).
The CMJ was positively related with the SJ (p < 0.01; R2 = 0.91). These two vertical jump tests (CMJ-SJ) were negatively related with the 77COD test (CMJ, p < 0.01; R2 = 0.55; SJ, p < 0.01; R2 = 0.52), indicating that as vertical jump height increased, the time taken to complete the 77COD test decreased (Figure 2).
The continuous line represents the mean difference of the test and retest scores. The dotted lines represent the 95% limit of agreement for the upper and lower ranges (Figure 3). Based on the T-test values, no significant differences were found between the test and retest scores across all tests (p > 0.05). The within-subject variation for all tests was observed to be between 6.1% and 7.0%. The Cronbach’s α reliability coefficients for the variables were excellent, ranging between 0.91 and 0.95 (Table 2).

4. Discussion

The goal of this study was to establish the test–retest reliability of a newly developed tennis-specific 77COD test incorporating vertical jump tests (SJ-CMJ) among adolescent tennis athletes. All jump tests and the 77COD tests had high within-subject reliability variance.
CMJ and SJ are among the most commonly applied test methods for assessing the mechanical capacities of the lower body [43,44]. Since CMJ height can reflect lower extremity muscle power, a significant positive correlation exists between the CMJ and SJ [45]. The within-subject variances (CV) in the present study are acceptable. These results demonstrated stable repeatability across all protocols (CV < 10%) [41]. Artega et al. and Markovic et al. reported CV values for the SJ and CMJ of 5.4–3.3% and 6.3–2.8%, respectively [43,46]. The CV values in the current study are higher than those reported in other studies. However, studies on reliability in jump height among young athletes and children (CMJ, ICC = 0.90, CV% = 7.1) [47] (SJ, ICC = 0.97, CV% = 4.9) [48] are similar to our findings. Excellent reliability (ICC > 0.91) was achieved across all protocols performed in this study. The SJ, CMJ, and 77COD tests had similar within-subject reliability, as indicated by the values of ICC and Cronbach’s α. Both CMJ and SJ tests are considered reliable and valid [43] in children [49].
Most of the scores were close to the average of the differences between the two tests in the Bland–Altman graphs, and the test–retest results were consistent. The relationship of COD to performance parameters in adolescent athletes depends on age, body composition, maturity status, and years of training experience [33]. These results suggest that repeated attempts should be made until the researcher’s judgment is satisfied or the subject’s true performance is revealed for a consistent COD performance (mean ± 3–4 repetitions).
SJ and CMJ vertical jumps are commonly used to measure explosive muscle power and jump height [50]. Similar to our study, CMJ height is generally superior to SJ performance [38]. Minor differences in performance between SJ and CMJ are thought to result from the effective use of the stretch-shortening cycle [50,51]. In a study conducted by Popowczak et al. on male athletes, 30 m CODS1-2 tests were found to have a weak correlation with CMJ (r = −0.00, r = −0.16) heights [52]. Similarly, McFarland et al. demonstrated that, in soccer players, COD tests (pro-agility shuttle and T-tests) were weakly correlated with SJ (r = −0.32, r = −0.23) and CMJ (r = −0.30, r = −0.16) heights, with the relationships being weaker in male athletes compared to female athletes. It has been suggested that the more consistent relationship between COD performance and vertical jump in female athletes, compared to males [53,54], is determined by factors such as explosive strength, the stretch-shortening cycle (SSC), and the use of elastic energy [38]. The findings of our study indicate that sport-specific COD tests, such as the 77COD test, are more strongly correlated with vertical jumps. Additionally, the strength of the relationship between the 77COD and vertical jump tests appears to depend on factors such as sport specificity, total distance, and the number of lateral, forward, backward, and/or straight sprints.
This study has some limitations. The reliability of the 77COD test could be influenced by variables such as gender and age. In our study, the differences between boys and girls were unclear. Further research is needed to determine whether the newly created 77COD test would indicate similar reliability among participants with different subject characteristics (i.e., performance level, gender, and age). Additionally, we did not measure the physical and mental fatigue that may occur during the test.
This study confirmed that the newly created 77COD test has good metric properties in association with vertical jump heights. Our findings showed that the 77COD test is suitable for determining COD ability in adolescent tennis players. Moreover, it is a repeatable test usable in coaching practices without the need for complex test equipment.

5. Conclusions

The application of vertical jump tests is simple. These tests are frequently used by coaches, athletic performance coaches, and sports scientists during the training, testing, and monitoring of elite, professional, amateur, and adolescent athletes. Our findings indicate that the 77COD test is reliable and feasible for identifying pre-planned COD in adolescent tennis players. Additionally, vertical jump heights serve as informative and practical performance indicators for the 77COD test. In conclusion, the 77COD test, which is cost-effective and practical in its applicability, can be utilized by coaches to assess COD ability.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.K. and A.Ö.; methodology, S.K.; software, G.D.; validation, S.K., A.Ö. and G.D.; formal analysis, G.D.; investigation, S.K.; resources, S.K. and A.Ö.; data curation, A.Ö.; writing—original draft preparation, S.K.; writing—review and editing, S.K., A.Ö. and G.D.; visualization, A.Ö.; supervision, S.K.; project administration, G.D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Ethics Committee on Human Research of Gazi University (ID: 2023-1468) (19 December 2023).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The raw (deidentified/anonymized) data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors on request.

Acknowledgments

We thank all participants who participated in the research.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Cooke, K.; Davey, P.R. Tennis ball diameter: The effect on performance and the concurrent physiological responses. J. Sports Sci. 2005, 23, 31–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Parsons, L.S.; Jones, M.T. Development of speed, agility, and quickness for tennis athletes. Strength Cond. J. 1998, 20, 14–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Fernandez-Fernandez, J.; Granacher, U.; Sanz-Rivas, D.; Marín, J.M.S.; Hernandez-Davo, J.L.; Moya, M. Sequencing effects of neuromuscular training on physical fitness in youth elite tennis players. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2018, 32, 849–856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Giles, B.; Peeling, P.; Reid, M. Quantifying change of direction movement demands in professional tennis matchplay: An analysis from the Australian Open Grand Slam. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2024, 38, 517–525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Pereira, T.J.C.; Nakamura, F.Y.; de Jesus, M.T.; Vieira, C.L.R.; Misuta, M.S.; de Barros, R.M.L.; Moura, F.A. Analysis of the distances covered and technical actions performed by professional tennis players during official matches. J. Sports Sci. 2017, 35, 361–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ferrauti, A.; Weber, K.; Wright, P. Endurance: Basic, semi-specific and specific. In Strength and Conditioning for Tennis; ITF: London, UK, 2003; pp. 93–111. [Google Scholar]
  7. Dos’Santos, T.; Thomas, C.; Jones, P.A.; Comfort, P. Assessing asymmetries in change of direction speed performance: Application of change of direction deficit. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2019, 33, 2953–2961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Fernandez-Fernandez, J.; Sanz-Rivas, D.; Sanchez-Muñoz, C.; Pluim, B.M.; Tiemessen, I.; Mendez-Villanueva, A. A comparison of the activity profile and physiological demands between advanced and recreational veteran tennis players. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2009, 23, 604–610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Fernandez-Fernandez, J.; Ulbricht, A.; Ferrauti, A. Fitness testing of tennis players: How valuable is it? Br. J. Sports Med. 2014, 48 (Suppl. 1), i22–i31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Deng, N.; Soh, K.G.; Huang, D.; Abdullah, B.; Luo, S.; Rattanakoses, W. Effects of plyometric training on skill and physical performance in healthy tennis players: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front. Physiol. 2022, 13, 1024418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ellenbecker, T.; Roetert, E. Age specific isokinetic glenohumeral internal and external rotation strength in elite junior tennis players. J. Sci. Med. Sport 2003, 6, 63–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Hammami, R.; Gene-Morales, J.; Nebigh, A.; Rebai, H.; Colado, J.C. Speed improves with eccentric hamstring training in athletes of different maturity status. Pediatr. Exerc. Sci. 2021, 34, 99–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Ayed, K.B.; Hammami, R.; Gene-Morales, J.; Ajailia, A.; Werfelli, H.; Rebai, H.; Jiménez-Martínez, P.; Flandez, J.; Colado, J.C. High-intensity forward-backward plyometrics after the warm-up entail better sprint and change-of-direction performance than low-intensity side-to-side plyometrics. Mot. Control 2023, 28, 63–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Brughelli, M.; Cronin, J.; Levin, G.; Chaouachi, A. Understanding change of direction ability in sport: A review of resistance training studies. Sports Med. 2008, 38, 1045–1063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Sheppard, J.M.; Jay Dawes, J.; Jeffreys, I.; Spiteri, T.; Nimphius, S. Broadening the View of Agility: A Scientific Review of the Literature. Australian Strength & Conditioning Association. J. Aust. Strength Cond. 2014, 22, 6. [Google Scholar]
  16. Sheppard, J.M.; Young, W.B. Agility literature review: Classifications, training and testing. J. Sports Sci. 2006, 24, 919–932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Robbins, D.W. The National Football League (NFL) combine: Does normalized data better predict performance in the NFL draft? J. Strength Cond. Res. 2010, 24, 2888–2899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Nimphius, S.; Geib, G.; Spiteri, T.; Carlisle, D. Change of direction” deficit measurement in Division I American football players. J. Aust. Strength Cond. 2013, 21, 115–117. [Google Scholar]
  19. Sierer, S.P.; Battaglini, C.L.; Mihalik, J.P.; Shields, E.W.; Tomasini, N.T. The National Football League Combine: Performance differences between drafted and nondrafted players entering the 2004 and 2005 drafts. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2008, 22, 6–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Vescovi, J.; Brown, T.; Murray, T. Positional characteristics of physical performance in Division I college female soccer players. J. Sports Med. Phys. Fit. 2006, 46, 221. [Google Scholar]
  21. Vescovi, J.D.; Mcguigan, M.R. Relationships between sprinting, agility, and jump ability in female athletes. J. Sports Sci. 2008, 26, 97–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Gabbett, T.J.; Kelly, J.N.; Sheppard, J.M. Speed, change of direction speed, and reactive agility of rugby league players. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2008, 22, 174–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Sassi, R.H.; Dardouri, W.; Yahmed, M.H.; Gmada, N.; Mahfoudhi, M.E.; Gharbi, Z. Relative and absolute reliability of a modified agility T-test and its relationship with vertical jump and straight sprint. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2009, 23, 1644–1651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Pauole, K.; Madole, K.; Garhammer, J.; Lacourse, M.; Rozenek, R. Reliability and validity of the T-test as a measure of agility, leg power, and leg speed in college-aged men and women. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2000, 14, 443–450. [Google Scholar]
  25. Jarvis, S.; Sullivan, L.O.; Davies, B.; Wiltshire, H.; Baker, J.S. Interrelationships between measured running intensities and agility performance in subelite rugby union players. Res. Sports Med. 2009, 17, 217–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Lockie, R.G.; Schultz, A.B.; Callaghan, S.J.; Jeffriess, M.D.; Berry, S.P. Reliability and validity of a new test of change-of-direction speed for field-based sports: The change-of-direction and acceleration test (CODAT). J. Sports Sci. Med. 2013, 12, 88. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  27. Wilkinson, M.; Leedale-Brown, D.; Winter, E.M. Validity of a squash-specific test of change-of-direction speed. Int. J. Sports Physiol. Perform. 2009, 4, 176–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Buchheit, M.; Haydar, B.; Ahmaidi, S. Repeated sprints with directional changes: Do angles matter? J. Sports Sci. 2012, 30, 555–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Young, W.; James, R.; Montgomery, I. Is muscle power related to running speed with changes of direction? J. Sports Med. Phys. Fit. 2002, 42, 282–288. [Google Scholar]
  30. Little, T.; Williams, A.G. Specificity of acceleration, maximum speed, and agility in professional soccer players. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2005, 19, 76–78. [Google Scholar]
  31. Peterson, M.D.; Alvar, B.A.; Rhea, M.R. The contribution of maximal force production to explosive movement among young collegiate athletes. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2006, 20, 867–873. [Google Scholar]
  32. Meylan, C.; McMaster, T.; Cronin, J.; Mohammad, N.I.; Rogers, C.; Deklerk, M. Single-leg lateral, horizontal, and vertical jump assessment: Reliability, interrelationships, and ability to predict sprint and change-of-direction performance. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2009, 23, 1140–1147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Hammami, R.; Sekulic, D.; Selmi, M.A.; Fadhloun, M.; Spasic, M.; Uljevic, O.; Chaouachi, A. Maturity status as a determinant of the relationships between conditioning qualities and preplanned agility in young handball athletes. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2018, 32, 2302–2313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Hori, N.; Newton, R.U.; Andrews, W.A.; Kawamori, N.; McGuigan, M.R.; Nosaka, K. Does performance of hang power clean differentiate performance of jumping, sprinting, and changing of direction? J. Strength Cond. Res. 2008, 22, 412–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Buchheit, M.; Mendez-Villanueva, A.; Delhomel, G.; Brughelli, M.; Ahmaidi, S. Improving repeated sprint ability in young elite soccer players: Repeated shuttle sprints vs. explosive strength training. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2010, 24, 2715–2722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Jones, P.; Bampouras, T.M.; Marrin, K. An investigation into the physical determinants of change of direction speed. J. Sports Med. Phys. Fit. 2009, 49, 97–104. [Google Scholar]
  37. Suarez-Arrones, L.; Gonzalo-Skok, O.; Carrasquilla, I.; Asián-Clemente, J.; Santalla, A.; Lara-Lopez, P.; Núñez, F.J. Relationships between Change of Direction, Sprint, Jump, and Squat Power Performance. Sports 2020, 8, 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Horníková, H.; Zemková, E. Relationship between physical factors and change of direction speed in team sports. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Castillo-Rodríguez, A.; Fernández-García, J.C.; Chinchilla-Minguet, J.L.; Carnero, E. Relationship between muscular strength and sprints with changes of direction. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2012, 26, 725–732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Bland, J.M.; Altman, D. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986, 327, 307–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Atkinson, G.; Nevill, A.M. Statistical methods for assessing measurement error (reliability) in variables relevant to sports medicine. Sports Med. 1998, 26, 217–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Koo, T.K.; Li, M.Y. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J. Chiropr. Med. 2016, 15, 155–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Markovic, G.; Dizdar, D.; Jukic, I.; Cardinale, M. Reliability and factorial validity of squat and countermovement jump tests. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2004, 18, 551–555. [Google Scholar]
  44. Anicic, Z.; Janicijevic, D.; Knezevic, O.M.; Garcia-Ramos, A.; Petrovic, M.R.; Cabarkapa, D.; Mirkov, D.M. Assessment of countermovement jump: What should we report? Life 2023, 13, 190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Sarvestan, J.; Svoboda, Z.; de Oliveira Claudino, J.G. Force-time curve variables of countermovement jump as predictors of volleyball spike jump height. Ger. J. Exerc. Sport Res. 2020, 50, 470–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Arteaga, R.; Dorado, C.; Calbet, J.C.J. Reliability of jumping performance in active men and women under different stretch loading conditions. J. Sports Med. Phys. Fit. 2000, 40, 26. [Google Scholar]
  47. Meylan, C.M.; Cronin, J.B.; Oliver, J.L.; Hughes, M.G.; McMaster, D. The reliability of jump kinematics and kinetics in children of different maturity status. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2012, 26, 1015–1026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Dos’santos, T.; Thomas, C.; Comfort, P.; McMahon, J.J.; Jones, P.A. Relationships between isometric force-time characteristics and dynamic performance. Sports 2017, 5, 68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Fernandez-Santos, J.R.; Ruiz, J.; Cohen, D.D.; Gonzalez-Montesinos, J.L.; Castro-Piñero, J. Reliability and validity of tests to assess lower-body muscular power in children. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2015, 29, 2277–2285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. McGuigan, M.R.; Doyle, T.L.; Newton, M.; Edwards, D.J.; Nimphius, S.; Newton, R.U. Eccentric utilization ratio: Effect of sport and phase of training. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2006, 20, 992–995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Bobbert, M.F.; Casius, L.J.R. Is the effect of a countermovement on jump height due to active state development? Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2005, 208, 440–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Popowczak, M.; Rokita, A.; Świerzko, K.; Szczepan, S.; Michalski, R.; Maćkała, K. Are linear speed and jumping ability determinants of change of direction movements in young male soccer players? J. Sports Sci. Med. 2019, 18, 109. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  53. Shalfawi, S.A.; Enoksen, E.; Tonnessen, E. The relationship between measures of sprinting, aerobic fitness, and lower body strength and power in well-trained female soccer players. Int. J. Appl. Sports Sci. 2014, 26, 18–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. McFarland, I.T.; Dawes, J.J.; Elder, C.L.; Lockie, R.G. Relationship of two vertical jumping tests to sprint and change of direction speed among male and female collegiate soccer players. Sports 2016, 4, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Applsci 14 09266 g001
Figure 1. 77COD test.
Figure 1. 77COD test.
Applsci 14 09266 g001
Applsci 14 09266 g002
Figure 2. Scatter plots with simple linear regression adjusted R2 for (A) SJ vs. 77COD and (B) 77COD vs. CMJ.
Figure 2. Scatter plots with simple linear regression adjusted R2 for (A) SJ vs. 77COD and (B) 77COD vs. CMJ.
Applsci 14 09266 g002
Applsci 14 09266 g003
Figure 3. Bland–Altman plots of test–retest scores.
Figure 3. Bland–Altman plots of test–retest scores.
Applsci 14 09266 g003
Table 1. Intercorrelation matrix of all tests.
Table 1. Intercorrelation matrix of all tests.
VariablesCMJ SJ 77COD
CMJ (cm)1
SJ (cm)0.954 *1
77COD (s)−0.743 *−0.726 *1
* Significant at the level p < 0.01.
Table 2. Descriptive and reliability statistics for all the tests.
Table 2. Descriptive and reliability statistics for all the tests.
VariablesTest ± SDRetest ± SD p 95% CI
(Lower ± Upper) 		ICC 95% CV α
CMJ (cm) 23.23 ± 3.51 23.41 ± 3.07 0.396−0.59 ± 0.240.9387.0%0.93
SJ (cm) 22.77 ± 2.83 23.04 ± 2.46 0.176−0.66 ± 0.120.9146.8%0.91
77COD (s) 9.76 ± 1.38 9.74 ± 1.40 0.460−0.09 ± 0.190.9596.1%0.95
SD = standard deviation; CI = confidence interval; ICC = intraclass correlation coefficient; CV = coefficients of variation; α = Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficients.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kaya, S.; Önal, A.; Deliceoğlu, G. Relationship between the Reliability of Tennis-Specific Change of Direction (77COD) Test and Squat Jump–Countermovement Jump in Adolescent Tennis Players. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 9266. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14209266

AMA Style

Kaya S, Önal A, Deliceoğlu G. Relationship between the Reliability of Tennis-Specific Change of Direction (77COD) Test and Squat Jump–Countermovement Jump in Adolescent Tennis Players. Applied Sciences. 2024; 14(20):9266. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14209266

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kaya, Selman, Aysu Önal, and Gökhan Deliceoğlu. 2024. "Relationship between the Reliability of Tennis-Specific Change of Direction (77COD) Test and Squat Jump–Countermovement Jump in Adolescent Tennis Players" Applied Sciences 14, no. 20: 9266. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14209266

APA Style

Kaya, S., Önal, A., & Deliceoğlu, G. (2024). Relationship between the Reliability of Tennis-Specific Change of Direction (77COD) Test and Squat Jump–Countermovement Jump in Adolescent Tennis Players. Applied Sciences, 14(20), 9266. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14209266

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop