Plyometric Jump Training Micro-and High-Dose Effects on Amateur Basketball Players Athletic Performance: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Bitai Wu¹Baiming Zhang¹Mingyue Yin²Kai Xu²Rodrigo Ramirez-Campillo^3,4Sen Huang⁵Limingfei Zhou⁶Leijiao Yue⁷Jianxiong Li⁸Zhifeng Liu⁹Zhiquan Song¹⁰Boyi Zhang¹¹Hengxian Liu²Long Li¹Ken Zhang^1*

• ¹Changsha University of Science and Technology, Changsha, China
• ²Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai, China
• ³Universidad Andres Bello Facultad de Ciencias de la Rehabilitacion, Santiago, Chile
• ⁴Universidad de Los Lagos, Osorno, Chile
• ⁵Hunan Institute of Sport Science, Changsha 410005, China, Changsha,Hunan,China, China
• ⁶Beijing Sport University, Beijing, China
• ⁷Capital University of Physical Education and Sports, Beijing, China
• ⁸School of Physical Education and Sports Training, Hunan sports vocational college, Changsha, Hunan, China, Changsha,Hunan,China, China
• ⁹Hengyang Normal University, Hengyang, China
• ¹⁰Beijing Information Science and Technology University, Beijing, China
• ¹¹Deutsche Sporthochschule Koln, Cologne, Germany

Purpose: To compare the effects of a 4-week plyometric training program involving microdosing (MPT; 4 sessions per week, 400 total jumps) and highdosing (HPT; 2 sessions per week, 800 total jumps) on athletic performance in male amateur basketball players. Methods: Participants were randomly assigned to the MPT (n=24), HPT (n=23), or control (CTR; n=22). The intervention training protocol involved 4 weeks, while the control group received no additional training. Twelve performance metrics were assessed pre- and post-intervention, including countermovement jump (CMJ), countermovement jump with arms (CMJA), 40 cm-drop jump (DJ), reactive strength index (RSI) and modified reactive strength index (RSImod), maximal isometric squat strength, isometric mid-thigh pull (IMTP) rate of force development (RFD), 10 m and 20 m sprint, T-test agility, 5-0-5 test agility, and endurance capacity (yo-yo intermittent recovery test-level 2 - YYIR2). Paired and independent sample t-tests were used to assess within- and between-group (with Bonferroni correction) differences. Effect sizes were calculated using Hedges’ g (g) to quantify the magnitude of training effects. Results: Compared to the control group, MPT improved CMJ (g=0.66), RSI (g=0.96), RSImod (g=0.71), IMTP (g=0.64), and 20 m sprint (g=0.58), and HPT improved RSI (g=1.08), RSImod (g=0.88), IMTP (g=0.64), 20 m sprint (g=0.79). No differences were observed between MPT and HPT. Conclusion: Both MPT and HPT similarly enhance basketball players' athletic performance. However, microdosing required reduced training volume to attain a similar magnitude of improvement, representing a time-efficient training alternative. Keywords: Plyometric Exercise; Human Physical Conditioning; Muscle Strength; Team Sports; Resistance Training; Athletic Performance.