Vertical Jump Calculator — calculate vertical jump for training and performance. Evidence-based formula and benchmarks.
A vertical jump test measures explosive lower-body performance from a standing reach and a jump-touch mark. This page calculates the difference between those marks and uses body mass in the Sayers field equation to estimate peak mechanical power. It is a repeatable training indicator, not a force-platform measurement.
For adjacent context, compare Running Pace Calculator, Heart Rate Zone Calculator, and One Rep Max Calculator. Keep the test protocol and units visible when moving between pages.
Benchmark source: the Sayers and Harman cross-validation study. External norms are guides, not medical assessments or universal selection standards.
Jump height = jump-touch height − standing reach height. Sayers estimated peak power (W) = 60.7 × jump height (cm) + 45.3 × body mass (kg) − 2,055.
The Sayers equation is a field prediction from jump height and mass. Jump technique, arm swing, countermovement depth, surface, and measurement error can change the result, so use it for comparable repeated tests rather than as a laboratory value.
Topend Sports presents vertical-jump norms as general guides and notes that test protocol matters. Compare athletes only when jump style, reach method, age group, and reporting units are aligned.
Use a baseline, repeat the same test under similar conditions, and look for a trend across several sessions. A single result can change with warm-up, fatigue, surface, footwear, timing error, motivation, and technique.
When a result changes, first check the measurement boundary before attributing the change to fitness. A different reach posture, line distance, start command, timing device, jump style, or response instruction can create a larger apparent change than a normal training effect. Keep the original raw measurement beside the converted score.
For training decisions, pair this result with movement quality, recovery, pain, and the demands of the sport. A faster shuttle, longer jump, or lower latency is not automatically better if technique becomes unsafe or the task no longer matches competition.
Testing is most useful when it answers a defined question. A coach may want a repeatable readiness marker, an athlete may want to monitor a training block, and a researcher may need a validated protocol. Those goals require different levels of standardisation. Decide the question before choosing the benchmark, because an informal home test can be useful for a personal trend while remaining unsuitable for comparing teams or making a selection decision.
For reliable follow-up, write down the date, rest period, number of attempts, warm-up, surface, equipment, and any unusual condition. If the first attempt is familiarisation and the second is maximal, record that rule rather than silently selecting whichever number looks best. Consistency makes a modest measurement more useful than a highly precise-looking result with unknown conditions.
Finally, preserve the input units. Rounding a jump height, converting a distance twice, or copying a hand-timed result as though it came from timing gates can create false confidence. Show the raw value, the converted value, and the test label together when sharing the result.
This is a general educational athletic-performance estimate, not medical advice, a diagnosis, a laboratory measurement, or a guarantee of competition performance. Stop testing if pain, dizziness, chest symptoms, or unusual breathlessness occurs and seek appropriate professional advice.