Background: The methodological approach to plyometric training can influence the magnitude of adaptations by accumulating acute responses that result in long-term adaptations. However, there is a lack of studies comparing cluster methods and traditional models of plyometric training organization regarding the magnitude of medium-term adaptations. Objective: This study aimed to compare cluster and traditional repetition methods on the resulting adaptations in jump performance, speed, and change of direction in young soccer players through plyometric training. Methods: A randomized controlled study was conducted over 6 weeks. In total, thirty male youth soccer players participated in the study, with nine allocated to the traditional training method group (TRD) (age = 14.83 ± 0.52 years) where they performed 3 × 10:225 s, ten players assigned to the cluster training group (CS) (age = 14.50 ± 0.52 years) where they performed 3 × 5 × 2:30s:45 s, and 11 athletes allocated to the control group (CON) (age = 14.73 ± 0.46 years). Players were evaluated pre-and post the 6 weeks of training in the 30-meter sprint (T30), change of direction (COD 505), countermovement jump (CMJ), and standing long jump (SLJ) tests. Results: Significant improvements were observed in the T30 (p < 0.001), COD 505 (p = 0.039), and CMJ (p < 0.01) for the time factor (pre vs. post) but not for SLJ (p = 0.49). Between-subject effects showed significant differences in T30 (p < 0.01) and COD 505 (p < 0.01), favoring the CON group over both training groups. The interaction between time and training method revealed significant differences for COD 505 (p < 0.01) and CMJ (p = 0.01), with the CON group showing better performance in COD 505 compared to both CS (p < 0.01) and TRD (p = 0.01) groups. No significant improvements were noted in SLJ across groups (p = 0.06). Conclusion: Plyometric training through both traditional and cluster set methods did not outperform the control condition in most measures, with the control group even showing a greater COD 505 performance compared to CS and TRD groups. Given that, regular soccer training might be sufficient for improving the assessed physical tests in young athletes, or the plyometric interventions might need adjustments in volume or intensity to yield more significant improvements.
WisløffU, et al.Strong correlation of maximal squat strength with sprint performance and vertical jump height in elite soccer players. Br J Sports Med2004; 38: 285–288.
2.
TurnerANStewartPF. Strength and conditioning for soccer players. Strength Cond J2014; 36: 1–13.
3.
Otero-EsquinaC, et al.Is strength-training frequency a key factor in developing performance adaptations in young elite soccer players?Eur J Sport Sci2017; 17: 1241–1251.
4.
SuchomelTJ, et al.The importance of muscular strength: training considerations. Sports Med2018; 48: 765–785.
5.
SuchomelTJNimphiusSStoneMH. The importance of muscular strength in athletic performance. Sports Med2016; 46: 1419–1449.
6.
FerleyDDScholtenSVukovichMD. Combined sprint interval, plyometric, and strength training in adolescent soccer players: effects on measures of speed, strength, power, change of direction, and anaerobic capacity. J Strength Cond Res2020; 34: 957–968.
7.
Ramirez-CampilloR, et al.Programming plyometric-jump training in soccer: a review. Sports2022; 10: 94.
8.
AsadiA, et al.The effects of plyometric training on change-of-direction ability: a meta-analysis. Int J Sports Physiol Perform2016; 11: 563–573.
9.
NorgeotFFouréA. Effects of vertical and horizontal plyometric training on jump performances and sprint force–velocity profile in young elite soccer players. Eur J Appl Physiol2024; 124: 2591–2601.
10.
BesierTF, et al.Anticipatory effects on knee joint loading during running and cutting maneuvers. Med Sci Sports Exerc2001; 33: 1176–1181.
11.
NobariH, et al.Effects of horizontal compared to vertical-based plyometric jump training on semi-professional soccer player’s performance. Sci Rep2023; 13: 10039.
12.
BianchiM, et al.Comparative effects of single vs. Double weekly plyometric training sessions on jump, sprint and change of directions abilities of elite youth football players. J Sports Med Phys Fitness2019; 59: 910–915.
13.
StoneMH, et al.Training specificity for athletes: Emphasis on strength-power training: A narrative review. J Funct Morphol Kinesiol2022; 7: 1–19.
14.
JukicI, et al.Acute effects of cluster and rest redistribution set structures on mechanical, metabolic, and perceptual fatigue during and after resistance training: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med2020; 50: 2209–2236.
15.
StaniszewskiM, et al.Effect of rest duration between sets on fatigue and recovery after short intense plyometric exercise. Sci Rep2024; 14: 15080.
16.
OliverJ, et al.Acute effect of cluster and traditional set configurations on Myokines associated with hypertrophy. Int J Sports Med2016; 37: 1019–1024.
17.
JukicI, et al.The effects of set structure manipulation on chronic adaptations to resistance training: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med2021; 51: 1061–1086.
18.
ApiG, et al.Influence of cluster sets on mechanical and perceptual variables in adolescent athletes. Int J Environ Res Public Health2023; 20: 2810.
19.
TufanoJJ, et al.Cluster sets vs. Traditional sets: levelling out the playing field using a power-based threshold. PLoS One2018; 13: 8035–e 020.
20.
RongBXiuC. Effects of cluster vs. Traditional sets Complex training on physical performance adaptations of trained male volleyball players. J Sports Sci Med2024; 23: 822–833.
21.
YilmazN, et al.The effect of a six-week plyometric training performed with different set configurations on explosive performance: cluster vs. traditional set configurations. J Sports Med Phys Fitness2021; 61: 892–898.
22.
NickersonBS, et al.Effect of cluster set warm-up configurations on sprint performance in collegiate male soccer players. Appl Phys Nut Met2018; 43: 625–630.
23.
HansenKTCroninJBNewtonMJ. The effect of cluster loading on force, velocity, and power during ballistic jump squat training. Int J Sports Physiol Perform2011; 6: 455–468.
24.
OliverJM, et al.Acute response to cluster sets in trained and untrained men. Eur J Appl Physiol2015; 115: 2383–2393.
25.
MorenoSD, et al.Effect of cluster sets on plyometric jump power. J Strength Cond Res2014; 28: 2424–2428.
26.
FieldA. Discovering statistic using IBM SPSS statistics. 5th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc, 2017,p.1104.
27.
AsadiARamírez-CampilloR. Effects of cluster vs. Traditional plyometric training sets on maximal-intensity exercise performance. Medicina (B Aires)2016; 52: 41–45.
28.
LoturcoI, et al.Mixed training methods: effects of combining resisted sprints or plyometrics with Optimum power loads on sprint and agility performance in professional soccer players. Front Physiol2017; 8: 1034.
29.
McKinlayBJ, et al.Effects of plyometric and resistance training on muscle strength, explosiveness, and neuromuscular function in young adolescent soccer players. J Strength Cond Res2018; 32: 3039–3050.
30.
MirzaeiB, et al.Effects os six weeks of depth jump vs countermovement jump training on Sando n muscle soreness and performance. Kinesiology2014; 46: 97–108.
31.
ThomasKFrenchDHayesPR. The effect of two plyometric training techniques on muscular power and agility in youth soccer players. J Strength Cond Res2009; 23: 332–335.
32.
BeatoM, et al.Effects of plyometric and directional training on speed and jump performance in elite youth soccer players. J Strength Cond Res2018; 32: 289–296.
33.
BeattieK, et al.The relationship between maximal strength and reactive strength. Int J Sports Physiol Perform2017; 12: 548–553.
34.
LatellaC, et al.The acute neuromuscular responses to cluster set resistance training: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med2019; 49: 1861–1877.
35.
FaulF, et al.G*power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods2007; 39: 175–191.
36.
MirwaldRL, et al.An assessment of maturity from anthropometric measurements. Med Sci Sports Exerc2002; 34: 689–694.
37.
RibeiroJ, et al.Effects of plyometric versus Optimum power load training on components of physical fitness in young male soccer players. Int J Sports Physiol Perform2020; 15: 222–230.
38.
HealyRKennyICHarrisonAJ. Reactive strength Index: a poor indicator of reactive strength?Int J Sports Physiol Perform2018; 13: 802–809.
39.
FlanaganEPComynsTM. The use of contact time and the reactive strength Index to optimize fast stretch-shortening cycle training. Strength Cond J2008; 30: 32–38.
40.
PueoBPenichet-TomasAJimenez-OlmedoJ. Reliability and validity of the chronojump open-source jump mat system. Biol Sport2020; 37: 255–259.
41.
HedgesLOlkinI. Estimation of a single effect size: parametric and nonparametric methods. In: Statistical methods for meta-analysis. 1st. ed. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press, 1985, pp.76–104.
42.
KossowA, et al.Kinetic analysis of horizontal plyometric exercise intensity. J Strength Cond Res2018; 32: 1222–1229.
43.
CormiePMcguiganMRNewtonR. Adaptations in athletic performance after ballistic power versus strength training. Med Sci Sports Exerc2010; 42: 1582–1598.
44.
AlgrøyEA, et al.Quantifying training intensity distribution in a group of Norwegian professional soccer players. Int J Sports Physiol Perform2011; 6: 70–81.
45.
MoghadamBT, et al.Effects of different cluster-set rest intervals during plyometric-jump training on measures of physical fitness: a randomized trial. Plus One2023; 18: 1–14.
46.
BehmDGKonradANakamuraM, et al.A narrative review of velocity-based training best practice: the importance of contraction intent versus movement speed. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab2025; 50: 1–9.
