Why use the broad jump instead of the vertical jump?

Mostly practicality and reliability. It needs only a tape measure, it is quick, and there is no equipment-method problem to manage — a distance is a distance, whereas vertical jump results differ by measurement method. It also has research support as a broader index of muscular fitness rather than leg power alone.

Should we measure to the heels or the nearest contact point?

The nearest point of contact, which includes a hand placed behind on landing. Whichever rule a club adopts, it must be the same rule at every test — and athletes should be told it in advance, because it changes how they jump.

Is the broad jump useful for younger children?

Yes, with the caveat that landing confidence contaminates results more at U10 than at U16. A hesitant child under-jumps. Familiarisation and a forgiving landing surface improve data quality more than any amount of encouragement on the day.

Benchmark · Lower-body power

The standing broad jump as a general index of youth fitness

Why the standing long jump earns its place in youth testing — no equipment, high reliability, and research support as a general index of muscular fitness. Protocol, reference source per age band, and the limits.

What this page will not tell you

It will not print percentile numbers. Every reference band behind Vimasu is currently marked sourced, pending audit — cross-checked against the original publication is a step we have not finished, and a number a parent might act on is the wrong place to be approximately right. What follows is the protocol, the named source behind each age band, and what the result does and does not mean. The full methodology and source bibliography sits one level up.

What the test actually measures

The standing broad jump measures horizontal lower-body power — a two-footed jump for distance from a standing start, measured from the take-off line to the nearest point of contact on landing.

It is worth knowing that the research interest in this test goes beyond leg power: it has been examined specifically as a general index of muscular fitness in youth, on the basis that it aggregates lower-body strength, coordination and technique into one repeatable number. That is unusual — most field tests measure one thing narrowly — and it is the reason a test this crude survives in serious batteries.

The protocol, and why it decides whether the number means anything

Define the landing rule before anyone jumps. Measurement is to the nearest point of contact, which means a hand touching down behind the feet is the measurement. Athletes who do not know this jump differently once they find out.

Allow arm swing, and allow it every time. As with the vertical jump, the arms contribute meaningfully and inconsistency between tests destroys comparability.

Same surface. A gym floor, a rubber track and a grass field give up different amounts of energy on take-off and offer different landing confidence.

Three attempts, best recorded. And watch for athletes who shorten their jump to guarantee a clean landing — that is a technique artefact, not a power reading, and it is common in the U10 to U12 range.

Where the reference comes from

U10, U12, U14, U16, U18 resolve against NSCA Youth Position Statement (Faigenbaum 2016). Source populations run from 12,000 to 15,000 across those bands. Bands are held separately for male and female athletes. Full citation: Faigenbaum AD, Lloyd RS, Oliver JM. NSCA Position Statement on Long-Term Athletic Development. J Strength Cond Res 2016;30(6):1491-1509.

Every band above is currently flagged sourced, pending audit — the source is named and the values are in place, but our cross-check against the original publication is not finished. That is why this page names sources and populations rather than printing percentile numbers. The live coverage matrix, which is fetched from the platform rather than written by hand, is on the methodology page.

What the number does not tell you

Landing confidence is a large confounder in young athletes. A child who is unsure about landing will not commit to the jump, and the number describes their confidence rather than their power. This is the single biggest reason U10 broad jump data is noisier than it looks.

Technique is trainable in a way that flatters the test. A few sessions of coaching on arm swing and take-off angle can produce a large improvement with no change in underlying strength. That is fine if you know it; it is misleading if the number is being read as a fitness gain.

Like every power test in the growth years, it tracks maturation. Compare an athlete to themselves, and interpret year-on-year change with the calendar in mind.

Frequently asked

Questions parents and coaches ask

Why use the broad jump instead of the vertical jump?: Mostly practicality and reliability. It needs only a tape measure, it is quick, and there is no equipment-method problem to manage — a distance is a distance, whereas vertical jump results differ by measurement method. It also has research support as a broader index of muscular fitness rather than leg power alone.
Should we measure to the heels or the nearest contact point?: The nearest point of contact, which includes a hand placed behind on landing. Whichever rule a club adopts, it must be the same rule at every test — and athletes should be told it in advance, because it changes how they jump.
Is the broad jump useful for younger children?: Yes, with the caveat that landing confidence contaminates results more at U10 than at U16. A hesitant child under-jumps. Familiarisation and a forgiving landing surface improve data quality more than any amount of encouragement on the day.

From the Standard to your sideline

Testing is only worth it if the numbers go somewhere.

Vimasu records test results against age-referenced norms and keeps them on the player's permanent record — so a retest in six months is a comparison, not another isolated number. Start free.

Start Vimasu freeNo credit card · your players’ record from day one

Continue