CMJ Jump Height
45.0 cm (17.7″)
▼ −2.7 cm vs 30 Apr peak (−5.7%)
Above Avg Still +4.3 cm above 8 Apr baseline
This was a CMJ-only mid-block checkpoint (single test type, two trials) — not a full retest. Compared against the 30 Apr peak session, the result is a partial regression with two clear signals:
The bilateral propulsive symmetry win from 30 Apr did not hold. Concentric Impulse asymmetry went 3.8% L → 0.7% L → 4.9% L — Kaden's underlying left-leg dominance has reasserted itself. Landing patterns continue to be volatile session-over-session (Peak Landing Force asymmetry flipped sides and grew to 14.6% R).
The 30 Apr session is now visible as a peak, not a new baseline. The +17% jump-height gain in 22 days was real, but it was achieved at a lower bodyweight. The current trajectory — adding mass faster than the nervous system can convert it to expressed power — is exactly the pattern that produces a "stronger but slower" athlete, which is the opposite of what a college-bound goalkeeper needs.
Bottom line for the coaching staff: Pause the mass-accrual emphasis and shift focus to relative power expression for the next 4–6 weeks. Run the full battery (CMJ + CMRJ + SLJ + SLHAR) at next session to confirm whether the rebound and single-leg outputs have held up or also regressed.
Δ values on the middle and right cards are vs the immediately prior session, not vs 8 Apr baseline.
One line per metric, three sessions on the x-axis. Net % is from baseline to current. Trend coloring: green = moving in the right direction, red = moving against. The 30 Apr peak is now visible across most metrics as a turning point.
Power and force production. Higher is better.
Stretch-shortening cycle efficiency. RSI and takeoff velocity have regressed below 8 Apr baseline; the contraction is slower.
Bodyweight has climbed steadily. Absolute strength is intact — but the body is heavier, so /BM ratios are down.
Each chart shows side-bias over time. The shaded green band is the <10% safe zone. Above the zero line = right-dominant; below = left-dominant. Trend coloring on the line reflects whether the imbalance is getting better (green) or worse (red).
Negative axis = left-dominant; positive = right-dominant. Lower magnitude is always better.
Read: The bilateral propulsive symmetry that tightened to <1% on 30 Apr has reverted to the 8 Apr pattern (~5% left-dominant). The 30 Apr win was likely a session-specific neuromuscular state, not a durable coordination gain — or the added bodyweight has overridden it. Landing kinetics continue to flip sides session-to-session, which itself is informative: there is no stable landing pattern yet. Concentric Mean Force asymmetry mirrors Concentric Impulse almost exactly (same chart shape) so is not duplicated here.
| Session | kg | lb | Δ (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8 Apr 2026 | 79.1 | 174.4 | baseline |
| 30 Apr 2026 | 81.4 | 179.4 | +2.3 |
| 19 May 2026 | 84.0 | 185.2 | +2.6 |
| Cumulative (41 days) | +4.9 kg / +6.2% |
+4.9 kg in 41 days is roughly 1.2 kg/week. For an 18-year-old in an off-season strength block this is at the upper end of what could be lean mass; on the higher end of plausibility it is part fluid/glycogen/cycle-of-training noise.
Action: Get a body-composition data point (BIA, calipers, or DEXA if available) before the next force-plate session. If lean mass accounts for >70% of the gain, the strength block is working as designed — accept short-term /BM regression and continue. If not, the calorie surplus needs trimming.
| Priority | Adjustment | Why | Target / Re-Test KPI |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Cap further mass gain at ≤ 0.5 kg/week until reactive metrics recover. Maintain caloric intake or trim 200–300 kcal/day. | +1.2 kg/week is outpacing nervous system adaptation; relative power is the goalkeeper-relevant variable | Bodyweight at 28 May session ≤ 84.5 kg |
| 2 | Add velocity-emphasis CMJ sets: 3×3 max-intent CMJ with full rest, immediately following warm-up before any heavy lifting. 2× per week. | Reverse the slowing of contraction time and takeoff velocity; preserve high-velocity end of the force-velocity curve | Takeoff velocity ≥ 3.0 m/s at next retest |
| 3 | Keep the unilateral block from prior report (rear-foot elevated split squat R-heavy, single-leg RDL, step-ups) — even though SLJ wasn't tested, the underlying L/R imbalance is still present and is reasserting itself. | Bilateral asymmetry reverted to ~5% L; baseline issue has not been resolved | Re-test SLJ at next session, target asym < 12% |
| 4 | Get a body-comp data point — BIA scale or calipers minimum. DEXA preferred if accessible. | Need to know if the +4.9 kg is mostly lean mass (acceptable) or includes meaningful fat/fluid gain (course-correct) | Body fat % < 12 at college report-in |
| 5 | Run the full force-plate battery at the next session (CMJ, CMRJ, SLJ, SLHAR) — not a CMJ-only check. | Cannot determine whether reactive strength and single-leg asymmetries have moved without those tests | Full battery, not partial |
| Window | Battery | Decision Threshold |
|---|---|---|
| 2 weeks (≈ 2 Jun 2026) | Full battery (CMJ, CMRJ, SLJ, SLHAR) — replaces the original 4-week check | Takeoff velocity ≥ 3.0 m/s; RSI ≥ 1.60 (CMRJ); SLJ height asym ≤ 12% |
| 6 weeks (≈ 30 Jun 2026) | Full battery + SQT (re-baseline isometric force) | CMJ height ≥ 47 cm; Peak Power /BM ≥ 60 W/kg; SLJ asym ≤ 10% |
| Pre-season (early Aug 2026) | Full battery + capacity work; status report to college S&C staff | Bodyweight stable; relative power restored or improved on baseline |
All numbers in this report were pulled directly from the VALD ForceDecks API on 22 May 2026. 19 May session captured two CMJ trials (best-trial values shown unless noted as mean). 8 Apr and 30 Apr values are carried from the prior published report (CAT-KF-2026-04-30). Asymmetry sign convention is unchanged: L = left-dominant, R = right-dominant. Reference ranges remain those cited in the prior report (Loturco et al. 2018; Cormack et al. 2008; Bishop et al. 2018; Fort-Vanmeerhaeghe et al. 2020). The 19 May session intentionally did not include CMRJ, SLJ, SLHAR, or SQT — those metrics are unchanged from 30 Apr in this report and are flagged as requiring re-confirmation.
Δ% calculated as (latest − prior) / prior × 100 unless noted as "vs base" (vs 8 Apr 2026). Asymmetry deltas in absolute percentage points (pts). Direction of improvement: heights, power, force, RSI, takeoff velocity = higher better; contact time, time-to-takeoff, asymmetry, peak landing force = lower better. CM depth is a coaching variable, not directional.