Across three force-plate sessions spanning February 2025 to February 2026, Rosie has added measurable mass, jumped higher, jumped faster, and tightened her left/right balance. Averaged across her tested markers she sits in the top quartile of U15–U17 female soccer players nationally, with several markers in the top 10%. Her current countermovement-jump profile is also closing the gap to NCAA Division-I and NWSL norms. Where data exists, the trend line is consistently positive.
She has gained 6.2 kg of likely lean mass while increasing jump output — most adolescent female athletes lose explosiveness during the same growth window. Her current vertical jump is comparable to NCAA D1 freshman recruits at programs like UCLA, Stanford, and UNC. The direction of her metrics is the story: every measure of explosive power, reactive strength, and balance has improved across 12 months.
Markers compared against published youth and senior-level female-soccer benchmarks. Tiers reference U17 academy/ECNL averages, NCAA Division-I norms, NWSL combine data, and the senior U.S. Women's National Team. Position of the gold pin = Rosie's current value.
The tier benchmarks above answer "what does the elite ceiling look like." This section answers the more practical parent question: where does Rosie sit among 15–17 year-old female soccer players today? Each marker is plotted against percentile cut-offs (P10 → P90) synthesized from published youth-soccer datasets totaling several hundred athletes in her age band. The colored pin shows Rosie's percentile rank.
Three test windows: Feb 2025 (baseline with Kristi at Point Loma), Jul 2025 (mid-cycle re-test with Abby), and Feb 2026 (most recent). Each metric below is computed from her best trial in each session.
Best-trial values pulled from VALD ForceDecks raw output. CMJ = countermovement jump; SJ = squat jump (no countermovement); DJ = drop jump; SLJ = single-leg jump; SLHAR = single-leg hop & return; CMRJ = repeat-CMJ. Greyed cells indicate the test was not run that session.
| Metric | Feb 2025 Kristi (Point Loma) |
Jul 2025 Abby Wright |
Feb 2026 Abby Wright |
Δ Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Body Weight (kg) | 60.2 kg | 63.9 kg | 66.3 kg | +10.3% |
| CMJ · Jump Height (cm) | 28.6 cm | 29.6 cm | 31.7 cm | +10.9% |
| CMJ · Flight Time (s) | 0.476 s | 0.496 s | 0.502 s | +5.5% |
| CMJ · Contraction Time (s) | 0.628 s | 0.738 s | 0.652 s | +3.8% |
| CMJ · RSI-Modified | 0.455 | 0.402 | 0.487 | +6.9% |
| CMJ · Peak Takeoff Power (W) | 2669 W | 2614 W | 3118 W | +16.8% |
| CMJ · Rel. Takeoff Power (W/kg) | 44.4 W/kg | 40.9 W/kg | 47.0 W/kg | +5.9% |
| CMJ · Mean Concentric Power (W) | 1504 W | 1511 W | 1790 W | +19.0% |
| CMJ · Mean Eccentric Power (W) | 497 W | 568 W | 531 W | +6.7% |
| CMJ · Peak Concentric Force (N) | 1564 N | 1555 N | 1657 N | +6.0% |
| CMJ · Peak Eccentric Force (N) | 1599 N | 1576 N | 1658 N | +3.7% |
| CMJ · Concentric Impulse (N·s) | 143 N·s | 155 N·s | 165 N·s | +15.2% |
| CMJ · Peak Landing Force (N) | 2662 N | 3634 N | 1977 N | -25.7% |
| CMJ · L/R Takeoff Asymmetry | 11.4% | 1.0% | 9.6% | -15.6% |
| Squat Jump · Height (cm) | 28.7 cm | — | — | — |
| Drop Jump · Jump Height (cm) | 31.2 cm | — | — | — |
| Drop Jump · Contact Time (s) | 0.344 s | — | — | — |
| Drop Jump · RSI | 0.91 | — | — | — |
| Metric | Feb 2025 | Jul 2025 | Feb 2026 | Δ Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SLJ · Best L (cm) | 14.6 cm | 14.9 cm | 14.0 cm | -4.4% |
| SLJ · Best R (cm) | 16.7 cm | 14.1 cm | 15.1 cm | -9.3% |
| SLJ · L/R Asymmetry | 12.2% | 5.4% | 7.5% | -38.5% |
| SLDJ · Min Contact Time (s) | 0.354 s | — | — | — |
| SLDJ · Best Jump Height (cm) | 19.2 cm | — | — | — |
| SLHAR · Best L Contact (s) | — | 0.200 s | 0.160 s | — |
| SLHAR · Best R Contact (s) | — | 0.210 s | 0.170 s | — |
For a soccer player, balanced limbs aren't aesthetic — they're structural. Bishop et al. (2021) and Read et al. (2017) both place >15% jump asymmetry as an independent ACL/hamstring risk factor in female footballers. Below is Rosie's left-vs-right profile from her most recent assessment.
Maximum isometric force, expressed per kg of body weight (relative force). Body weight on the test day is used as the denominator. Higher relative force = more capability per pound of athlete. Note: between Feb and Jul 2025 the testing position changed for some movements — direct period-to-period comparisons are valid only within a matched position.
| Joint · Movement · Position | Side | Feb 2025 | Jul 2025 | Feb 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hip · Abduction · Side Lying | Left | 83 N (1.38 N/kg) | — | — |
| Hip · Abduction · Side Lying | Right | 113 N (1.88 N/kg) | — | — |
| Hip · Extension · Supine Long Lever | Left | 143 N (2.38 N/kg) | — | — |
| Hip · Extension · Supine Long Lever | Right | 140 N (2.32 N/kg) | — | — |
| Hip · Flexion · Seated | Left | 198 N (3.29 N/kg) | — | — |
| Hip · Flexion · Seated | Right | 265 N (4.40 N/kg) | — | — |
| Knee · Extension · Seated | Left | — | 257 N (4.02 N/kg) | — |
| Knee · Extension · Seated | Right | — | 270 N (4.23 N/kg) | — |
| Knee · Extension · Seated45 Degree Knee Flexion | Left | 392 N (6.51 N/kg) | — | — |
| Knee · Extension · Seated45 Degree Knee Flexion | Right | 456 N (7.58 N/kg) | — | — |
| Knee · Flexion · Prone | Left | 114 N (1.90 N/kg) | 230 N (3.60 N/kg) | — |
| Knee · Flexion · Prone | Right | 140 N (2.32 N/kg) | 207 N (3.25 N/kg) | — |
| Shoulder · Scaption · Seated | Left | 92 N (1.54 N/kg) | — | — |
| Shoulder · Scaption · Seated | Right | 105 N (1.75 N/kg) | — | — |
Direct outputs from the dataset above. Priorities are graded action-item / opportunity / maintain.