Sports Technology — all lessons

Force plates (e.g. VALD ForceDecks)

Using force plates — countermovement jump phases and metrics, isometric mid-thigh pull, balance tests, asymmetry and neuromuscular fatigue monitoring.

Advanced Evidence: Strong evidence 3 min read Reviewed 2026-10-31 Status: draft

Learning objectives

  • Explain how force plates measure ground reaction force
  • Interpret CMJ phases and key metrics
  • Run IMTP and other standard tests
  • Use force-plate data to monitor fatigue and readiness

Before this lesson

Why this matters

Force plates reveal how athletes produce force — not just how high they jump.

Countermovement jump force–time curve and its phases Vertical ground reaction force over about 1.4 seconds of a countermovement jump. The athlete stands still at body weight (about 800 newtons). Force drops below body weight during unweighting as the athlete dips, rises above body weight during braking as the downward movement is stopped, stays high during propulsion, falls to zero at take-off, stays at zero during flight, then spikes on landing. Flight time of 0.34 seconds corresponds to a jump height of about 14 centimetres using height equals g times flight time squared divided by eight. Unweighting Braking Propulsion Flight Landing body weight flight time 0.34 s → ≈14 cm impulse above body weight = take-off velocity 0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.4 0100020003000 Time (s) · jump height from flight time: h = g·t² ÷ 8 Vertical force (N) Schematic single trial; phase definitions follow McMahon et al. (2018).
Figure 1. Countermovement jump force–time curve and its phases. — Original diagram, FSHP Academy (schematic, not to scale).

CMJ phases and metrics [mcmahon2018]

PhaseMetrics
UnweightingMinimum force, time
BrakingBraking impulse, peak braking force, RFD
PropulsionPropulsive impulse, peak force, power
FlightJump height, flight time
OverallContraction time, RSI-modified (height ÷ contraction time), FT:CT

CMJ variables are useful for monitoring neuromuscular status [claudino2017].

IMTP

Standardised bar height, hip and knee angles, pulling instructions [comfort2019].

Protocol tips

Zero the plates, consistent warm-up, arms akimbo (or consistent arm swing), 3 trials, same time of day. Know the test’s typical error [hopkins2000].

Common mistakes and misconceptions

Case study

A rugby team tests CMJ weekly. A winger’s jump height is unchanged but contraction time rises 15% after a heavy week. Training is adjusted; values return to baseline in 5 days.

Further learning: video lessons

Video links are only marked “verified” after a human has watched them. Unverified entries open a YouTube search for that channel and topic rather than a guessed link.

Knowledge check

Knowledge check · 0/5

1. The CMJ phase where force falls below body weight is…

Answer B. Dip initiation.

2. Jump height from flight time uses…

Answer A. Kinematics.

3. Claudino et al. (2017) found CMJ…

Answer B. Meta-analysis.

4. The IMTP primarily measures…

Answer B. Comfort et al. (2019).

5. Inter-limb asymmetry from dual force plates should be interpreted…

Answer B. Context.

Short-answer & application questions

  1. Run a CMJ protocol and label the phases.
  2. Standardise an IMTP set-up.
  3. Plan weekly CMJ fatigue monitoring.

Key takeaways

  • Force plates measure ground reaction forces; software derives impulse, velocity and power.
  • CMJ phases: unweighting, braking, propulsion, flight and landing.
  • CMJ metrics (e.g., flight time:contraction time, RSI-modified) can detect neuromuscular fatigue.
  • The IMTP measures peak isometric force and rate of force development.

Connected topics

References

  1. McMahon JJ, Suchomel TJ, Lake JP, Comfort P (2018). Understanding the key phases of the countermovement jump force-time curve. Strength and Conditioning Journal, 40(4):96–106. Narrative review check pending
  2. Claudino JG, Cronin J, Mezêncio B, et al. (2017). The countermovement jump to monitor neuromuscular status: a meta-analysis. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 20(4):397–402. Meta-analysis check pending
  3. Comfort P, Dos’Santos T, Beckham GK, et al. (2019). Standardization and methodological considerations for the isometric midthigh pull. Strength and Conditioning Journal, 41(2):57–79. Narrative review check pending
  4. Hopkins WG (2000). Measures of reliability in sports medicine and science. Sports Medicine, 30(1):1–15. Narrative review check pending

Educational content only — not medical advice. Consult a qualified clinician for diagnosis or treatment.