Abstract
The purpose of this study was to use rating of perceived exertion (RPE) scale to evaluate popular bilateral plyometric exercise intensities. Fourteen physically active men (age 20.64 ± 1.4 years; height 176.93 ± 6.83 cm; weight 75.28 ± 11.1 kg) volunteered to participate in this study and performed a set of ten repetitions plyometric exercises to depth jump from 35 cm box, 35 cm box jump, depth jump from 60 cm box, 60 cm box jump, pike jump, tuck jump, and squat jump in a session with 5-min rest in between exercises. RPE was measured following the completion of each exercise using 0–10 Borg RPE scale. Data were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA and the level of significant was set at p <0.05. The results indicated that squat jump was harder than other types of bilateral plyometric exercises such as 35 cm box jump, depth jump from 35 cm box, and tuck jump (p < 0.05). Moreover, the 35 cm box jump was easier than other plyometric exercises (p < 0.05). With regard to the results of this investigation, it can be recommended that athletes and strength and conditioning professionals use these findings to design plyometric training in their training schedule and keep in their mind that plyometric exercises have different intensities, however, the total volume was matched.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Asadi A (2013) Effects of in-season short-term plyometric training on jumping and agility performance of basketball players. Sport Sci Health 9:133–137
Mirzaei B, Norasteh AA, Asadi A (2013) Neuromuscular adaptation to plyometric training: depth jump versus countermovement jump on sand. Sport Sci Health 9:145–149
Potach DH, Chu DA (2008) Plyometric training. In: Baechle TR, Erale RW (eds) Essentials of strength training and conditioning. Human Kinetics, Champaign
Ebben WP, Simenz C, Jensen RL (2008) Evaluation of plyometric intensity using electromyography. J Strength Cond Res 22:861–868
Wallace BJ, Kernozek TW, White JM, Wright GA, Huang C (2010) Quantification of vertical ground reaction forces of popular bilateral plyometric exercises. J Strength Cond Res 24:207–212
Asadi A (2014) Monitoring plyometric exercise intensity using rating of perceived exertion scale. Phys Act Rev 1:10–15
Noble BJ, Robertson R (1996) Perceived exertion, 1st edn. Human Kinetics, Champaign
Singh F, Foster C, Tod D, McGuigan MR (2007) Monitoring different types of resistance training using session rating of perceived exertion. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2:34–45
Gearhart RF, Goss FL, Lagally KM, Jakici JM, Gallagher J, Robertson RJ (2001) Standardized scaling procedures for rating of perceived exertion during resistance exercise. J Strength Cond Res 15:320–325
Arazi H, Asadi A, Nasehi M, Delpasand A (2012) Cardiovascular and blood lactate responses to an acute plyometric exercise in female volleyball and handball players. Sport Sci Health 8:23–29
Eston RG, Lamb KL, Parfitt CG, King N (2005) The validity of predicting maximal oxygen uptake from a perceptually regulated graded exercise test. Eur J Appl Physiol 94:221–227
Chu DA (1998) Jumping into plyometrics. Human Kinetics, Champaign
Day ML, McGuigan MR, Brice G, Foster C (2004) Monitoring exercise intensity during resistance training using the session RPE scale. J Strength Cond Res 2:353–358
Wilmore JH, Costill DL (1994) Physiology of sport and exercise. Human Kinetics, Champaign
Cafarelli E, Bigland-Ritchie B (1979) Sensation of static force in muscles of different length. Exp Neurol 65:511–525
Acknowledgments
The author gratefully acknowledges the volunteers involved in this study. No sources of funding were sought or awarded for this study and the author reports no conflicts of interest regarding this study.
Conflict of interest
The author declares no conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Asadi, A. Use of rating of perceived exertion for determining plyometric exercises intensity in physically active men. Sport Sci Health 10, 75–78 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11332-014-0176-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11332-014-0176-y