## 2 Materials and Methods
### Procedures  
The participants' body height, age, and sex were recorded first, and then a code was given to represent their names to comply with data protection policies at the university. Test order for a total of nine jumps was randomized in session one to minimize any potential fatigue or learning effects impacting one specific jump test, and the same test order was retained for each subject in test session two ([PERSON] et al., 2018). Ninety seconds (s) of rest was set between each trial to ensure adequate recovery and minimize any potential fatigue impacting any of the jump tests ([PERSON] et al., 2018). Participants had ten minutes to perform low-intensity jogging and five minutes to perform dynamic stretching, which included forward lunge rotations,'spiderman' with thoracic rotation, and forward and lateral hip swings ([PERSON] et al., 2018). Before data collection, a static calibration trial was recorded first for each subject, with participants keeping their hands on their hips and standing upright. The arm swing was inhibited in this study to avoid any influences of upper-limb movements on the center of mass (COM) location estimation [21]. Depending on the jump types, the specific verbal cues such as \"jump as high and as fast as you can\" was given for the CMJ and CMRJ1, and \"jump as high as you can whilst spending the shortest time possible on the ground\" was given for the DJ and CMRJ2. These external verbal cues direct participants' attention to the movement outcomes only and ensure they utilize self-preferred jump strategies. Furthermore, no comments regarding the jump performance or segment movements were given to participants during testing [22].  
Participants completed all jumps on twin embeddable force plates ([FP], 9281 EA, Kistler Instruments Ltd., Hook, UK) at a sampling frequency of 1000 Hz in conjunction with 11 Qualisys three-dimensional motion capture cameras (Qualisys Oquis, Goteborg, Sweden) recording at a sampling frequency of 200 Hz. The FP recorded the ground reaction force (GRF) and was synchronized with the cameras. Forty-two reflective markers were bilaterally placed on specific anatomical land markers, as shown in Figure 1. These markers were modified from previous studies that investigated the lower limb joint kinetics and kinematics during jumping [10; 23]. The data acquisition involved use of Qualisys Track Manager software (QTM, Qualisys, version 2.16, Gothenburg, Sweden) to collect the GRF data from the FP and marker positions data from the cameras. The FP was zeroed each time before participants stepped on, and participants were required to maintain fully extension of their lower extremities during take-off and landing in all jump tests [21; 24]. During the CMJ and CMRJ, participants initiated movements by standing on the FP and ended by landing at the same FP as take-off [21]. The DJ was measured via twin embeddable FP using one FP method as proposed by [PERSON] et al. [24]. The box height of 0.30 m was chosen in accordance with previous investigations [24; 25], and the participants stepped off the drop box (0.30 m) and came in contact with the FP placed adjacent to the drop box and rebounded immediately. For an accurate calculation of body weight, participants were also required to keep the same static position identical to the calibration trial for at least one second before initiating the CMJ (and CMRJ) and after landing from the DJ [7; 24].  
Figure 1: Anatomical body land marker locations of the 26 single reflective markers and four sets of non-collinear cluster markers were adhered symmetrically on both sides of each participants’ body.