The purpose of this study was to identify the effects of warm-up strategies on countermovement jumpperformance. Twenty-nine male college football players (age: 19.4 ± 1.1 years; body height: 179.0 ± 5.1 cm; body mass:73.1 ± 8.0 kg; % body fat: 11.1 ± 2.7) from the Tuzla University underwent a control (no warm-up) and differentwarm-up conditions: 1. general warm-up; 2. general warm-up with dynamic stretching; 3. general warm-up, dynamicstretching and passive stretching; 4. passive static stretching; 5. passive static stretching and general warm-up; and, 6.passive static stretching, general warm-up and dynamic stretching. Countermovement jump performance wasmeasured after each intervention or control. Results from one way repeated measures ANOVA revealed a significantdifference on warm-up strategies at F (4.07, 113.86) = 69.56, p < 0.001, eta squared = 0.72. Bonferonni post hocrevealed that a general warm-up and a general warm-up with dynamic stretching posted the greatest gains among allinterventions. On the other hand, no warm-up and passive static stretching displayed the least results incountermovement jump performance. In conclusion, countermovement jump performance preceded by a general warmupor a general warm-up with dynamic stretching posted superior gains in countermovement jump performance.
Financed by the National Centre for Research and Development under grant No. SP/I/1/77065/10 by the strategic scientific research and experimental development program:
SYNAT - “Interdisciplinary System for Interactive Scientific and Scientific-Technical Information”.