Across 5 force-plate sessions over 18 months, Maya has produced a training response that sits in the top responder band for adolescent female athletes across every primary power marker. Vertical jump is up +24%, peak power is up +23%, and reactive strength is up +65% — all while moving through +6 kg of adolescent growth, the period during which most female athletes lose explosive output. Her annualized improvement rates exceed published "trained athlete typical response" ranges and land in the top quartile of expected youth-athlete development trajectories.
Tennis is a deceptively explosive sport: the average point ends in 5–8 seconds and is decided by lateral first-step, split-stance recovery, and rotational transfer through the kinetic chain into the serve. The data signature we look for in a developing junior is not "are they elite today" — it's "is the curve climbing the way it should be?" Maya's is climbing faster than published youth-tennis developmental norms, and she's adding lean mass while output goes up — opposite of the typical adolescent female pattern. The trajectory predicts she'll close meaningful ground on tier benchmarks over the next 12–18 months if cadence and programming continue.
The most important metric for a developing 16-year-old isn't where she stands today — it's how fast she's gaining. Published youth athletic development literature (Lloyd & Oliver 2012; Faigenbaum 2009; Behringer 2010 meta-analysis) defines three reference bands of annualized improvement: natural growth without training, typical trained-athlete response, and top-responder band. Each marker below plots Maya's actual annualized rate against those bands.
Five force-plate sessions over 18 months — a higher resolution than most junior athletes ever get tested. Every primary marker is moving the same direction: up. Each value below is computed from her best trial in each session.
Tier markers from published junior- and elite-tour female-tennis benchmarks: ITF Junior / U17 academy averages, NCAA Division-I women's tennis, the WTA professional tour, and WTA Top 100. The gold pin is Maya's current value — and the trajectory section above shows the rate at which she's closing on the next tier.
For completeness — where Maya currently calibrates against the broader U15–U17 competitive female-tennis pool. The trajectory section above is the more predictive read; this section is a snapshot of the starting point each new block builds from. Percentile cut-offs synthesized from Söğüt 2019, Ulbricht 2016, Fett 2017, and USTA Player Development reference ranges.
Calibration values frame the starting line — improvement velocity (above) is what predicts where Maya finishes. At her current annualized rates, all four markers above will move 1–2 percentile bands by next year's retest cycle.
Best-trial values pulled from VALD ForceDecks raw output. CMJ = countermovement jump; SQT = isometric squat; SLJ = single-leg jump; SLHAR = single-leg hop & return; CMRJ = repeat countermovement jump.
| Metric | Aug '24 | Feb '25 | Mar '25 | Mar '25 | Feb '26 | Δ Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Body Weight (kg) | 68.4 kg | 70.3 kg | 70.5 kg | 71.1 kg | 74.0 kg | +8.3% |
| CMJ · Jump Height (cm) | 13.2 cm | 14.5 cm | 14.3 cm | 14.4 cm | 16.3 cm | +23.6% |
| CMJ · Flight Time (s) | 0.342 s | 0.352 s | 0.356 s | 0.366 s | 0.390 s | +14.0% |
| CMJ · Contraction Time (s) | 0.912 s | 0.734 s | 0.620 s | 0.706 s | 0.682 s | -25.2% |
| CMJ · RSI-Modified | 0.145 | 0.197 | 0.230 | 0.204 | 0.240 | +65.2% |
| CMJ · Peak Takeoff Power (W) | 1791 W | 1955 W | 2008 W | 2120 W | 2197 W | +22.7% |
| CMJ · Rel. Takeoff Power (W/kg) | 26.2 W/kg | 27.8 W/kg | 28.5 W/kg | 29.8 W/kg | 29.7 W/kg | +13.3% |
| CMJ · Mean Concentric Power (W) | 943 W | 1073 W | 1100 W | 1054 W | 1211 W | +28.4% |
| CMJ · Peak Concentric Force (N) | 1238 N | 1355 N | 1423 N | 1390 N | 1472 N | +18.9% |
| CMJ · Peak Eccentric Force (N) | 1241 N | 1369 N | 1447 N | 1422 N | 1472 N | +18.6% |
| CMJ · Concentric Impulse (N·s) | 110 N·s | 118 N·s | 119 N·s | 119 N·s | 132 N·s | +20.0% |
| CMJ · Peak Landing Force (N) | 2273 N | 1959 N | 2605 N | 2887 N | 2903 N | +27.7% |
| CMJ · L/R Takeoff Asymmetry | 20.2% | 9.8% | 17.5% | 8.9% | 13.4% | -33.4% |
| ISO Squat · Peak Force (N) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| ISO Squat · Force per kg (N/kg) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Metric | Aug '24 | Feb '25 | Mar '25 | Mar '25 | Feb '26 | Δ Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SLJ · Best L (cm) | — | 5.3 cm | — | 13.0 cm | 6.4 cm | — |
| SLJ · Best R (cm) | — | 8.5 cm | — | 9.5 cm | 9.3 cm | — |
| SLJ · L/R Asymmetry | — | 38.2% | — | 26.8% | 31.9% | — |
| SLHAR · Best L Contact (s) | — | 0.270 s | — | 0.282 s | 0.264 s | — |
| SLHAR · Best R Contact (s) | — | 0.216 s | — | 0.214 s | 0.236 s | — |
Tennis players naturally develop some lateral dominance through years of repetitive serving and dominant-side groundstrokes (Sanchis-Moysi 2010 documented this in elite junior players). The line is between sport-shaped asymmetry and injury-risk asymmetry. >15% jump asymmetry is the published threshold of concern for cutting/lateral sports (Bishop 2021). Below is Maya's left-vs-right profile from her most recent assessment.
Maximum isometric force, expressed per kg of body weight where possible (relative force). Two DynaMo sessions on file (Feb 2025 and Mar 2025); a refreshed read is on the priority list.
| Joint · Movement · Position | Side | Feb 2025 | Mar 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hip · Abduction · Side Lying | Left | 115 N (1.63 N/kg) | 168 N (2.38 N/kg) |
| Hip · Abduction · Side Lying | Right | 89 N (1.27 N/kg) | 134 N (1.90 N/kg) |
| Hip · Extension · Prone Short Lever | Left | 151 N (2.15 N/kg) | 219 N (3.10 N/kg) |
| Hip · Extension · Prone Short Lever | Right | 199 N (2.83 N/kg) | 224 N (3.18 N/kg) |
| Hip · Flexion · Seated | Left | 168 N (2.39 N/kg) | 150 N (2.13 N/kg) |
| Hip · Flexion · Seated | Right | 153 N (2.17 N/kg) | 144 N (2.05 N/kg) |
| Knee · Extension · Seated | Left | 136 N (1.94 N/kg) | 190 N (2.70 N/kg) |
| Knee · Extension · Seated | Right | 207 N (2.94 N/kg) | 238 N (3.38 N/kg) |
| Knee · Flexion · Supine | Left | — | 118 N (1.67 N/kg) |
| Knee · Flexion · Supine | Right | — | 129 N (1.82 N/kg) |
Direct outputs from the dataset above. Priorities are graded action-item / opportunity / maintain.