## 2 Materials and Methods
### Methodology  
Players were evaluated during the competitive season, as the F-V profile variables can be affected both during the preseason and at the end of the competitive period [19]. Before the assessment, all players completed a standardized specific warm-up protocol, which included multiple attempts of unloaded countermovement jumps, dynamic stretches targeting the lower limbs and a low-intensity run [19]. To determine the vertical F-V profile of each player, two countermovement jumps were performed and jump height was estimated based on the flight time recorded by the Ergo Jump (Globus Ergotester(r), Codogne, Italy). Players were instructed to remain stationary at the center of the platform, with their hands placed on their hips for unloaded conditions or on the bar for loaded jumps, maintaining this position throughout the movement [6]. From this position, they initiated a downward motion until reaching a squat with a knee angle of approximately 90\({}^{\circ}\), followed by a jump for maximal height [20]. Although knee angulation was individualized, strict verbal instructions were provided to ensure participants maintained precise control over the squat depth. The assessment began with a load of 0% (body mass only), followed by loads corresponding to approximately 30, 50 and 70% of body mass [19]. Each load condition required two valid attempts, with a 2-min rest interval between attempts and a 4-5-min rest between different load conditions [8]. Each jump was supervised by a trained researcher to ensure proper execution and the protocol was deemed successfully completed when participants reached a jump height of at least 20 cm with the final load [3].  
Force, velocity and power were calculated using three equations, considering only simple input variables: body mass, jump height and impulse distance [6; 7]. The latter represents the distance traveled by the center of mass during the impulse, defined as the range of lower limb extension from the initial position to take-off [6; 7]. Impulse distance was measured a priori for each player as the difference between the length of the extended lower limb (from the iliac crest to the toes, with the ankle in plantar flexion) and the height in the standardized initial position (vertical distance from the iliac crest to the ground) [6; 7]. The individual F-V profile (F\({}_{0}\), V\({}_{0}\), F-V slope and P\({}_{\max}\)) was obtained as described in the literature [7; 19]. Variables of the F-V relationship were calculated using a linear regression model: F(V) = F\({}_{0}-\)aV, where F\({}_{0}\) represents the maximal force, V\({}_{0}\) is the maximal velocity and a is the relationship slope of the linear force-velocity relationship. In addition, the velocity intercept (V\({}_{0}\) = F\({}_{0}\)/a) and maximal power (P\({}_{\max}\) = F\({}_{0}\cdot\) V\({}_{0}\)/4) were determined [7]. To assess the percentage of imbalance in the F-V profile, players were classified into five categories according to optimal threshold ranges: high force deficit (<60%), low force deficit (60-90%), optimal balance (90-110%), low velocity deficit (>110-140%) and high velocity deficit (>140%) [8]. Figure 1 presents an example of the F-V profile assessment under different conditions (strength deficit, balanced profile and velocity deficit) based on actual participant data.