CC BY
115
DOI: 10.14529/hsm210218
IDENTIFYING DIFFERENCES BETWEEN BASKETBALL, HANDBALL AND VOLLEYBALL PLAYERS IN INCREASING EXPLOSIVE FORCE AND AGILITY
F. Miftari1, [email protected], ORCID: 0000-0003-0242-1151, M. Selimi1*, [email protected], ORCID: 0000-0002-4537-9531, D. Badau2*, [email protected], ORCID: 0000-0002-1881-3531, D. Kelmendi1, [email protected], ORCID: 0000-0003-3640-1132 University of Prishtina, Kosovska Mitrovica Prishtina, Kosovo,
2George Emil Palade University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science and Technology of Targu Mures, Targu Mures, Romania,
Correspondence authors: E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Selimi), [email protected] (D. Badau)
Introduction. This study investigated the impact of specific training on the explosive force and agility of players during the preparatory phase of basketball, handball and volleyball. Aim. The purpose of this study was to notice the differences between sports and improvements during the preparatory phase and in the future to serve the coaches in preparing better sport specific programs. Materials and Methods. The research sample was chosen among students of the University of Prishtina Faculty of PES. The sample was split in three groups. The first group was composed of 15 students who were active basketball players in different Super league teams. The second group was composed of 15 students who were active handball players while the third group was composed of 15 students who were active volleyball players. Seven different motor tests were used to determine the explosive force and agility: Leonardo Jumping Test, the Long Jump, the Seated Medicine Ball Throw, the 20-Meter Speed Test, the Agility T-Test, the Illinois Agility Test and the Hexagon Agility Test. LEJUTE were applied using Leonardo Mechano-graphy GRFP STD. Results. The variable analysis showed that the training programs for basketball, volleyball, and handball increased the explosive force and agility of the players. The process of increasing agility occurs when explosive force and speed are developed as a precondition for improving balance and coordination. Conclusions. We can conclude that due to the higher priority and importance given in the preparatory phase from basketball clubs to agility and explosive force training, the students engaged in professional basketball clubs have shown better results overall.
Keywords: explosive force, agility training, team sports, hexagon agility test; jumping, physical training.
Introduction
In individual sports and in team sports, physical preparation during the preparatory phase is important to achieve better results. Thus, a high importance is given to the choice of methodology, which in conjunction with realizing the technique, enables optimal specific movements. Unfortunately, in reality, physical preparation is treated separately from technical sports achievement. To have a better game, both in defense and attack it is absolutely necessary the permanent improvement of general and specific physical training hints. Physical training, the component of sports training, marks the entire training process, determines the performance of athletes, and the evolution trends of the game world-wide indicate even an increase in the importance of this factor [11, 29]. Team sports are very com-
plex activities, and activities during the game can only be achieved by realizing a number of motor skills and anthropometric characteristics. The results achieved by a basketball, handball, or volleyball player during a game depend on different factors that affect the player's efficiency [50].
According to a previous publication by the authors, all factors cannot have an equal effect on the result, and they cannot be analyzed individually without adequate reliance upon other factors. One factor does not have the same coefficient of correlation as other factors [27]. Since there are many sports, there is a big variety of anthropometric abilities and characteristics. It is important to have detailed knowledge of the movements required, training equipment, and methods and loads required and their effects on
the development of skills and abilities for different sports [16].
Agility is an important component of physical training in team sports games, conditioning the physical performance of athletes [32, 33, 39]. Agility targets changing the direction of body movement or the execution of movements in relation to an external style involving the athlete a good ability to anticipate and decision-making tasks [35, 37, 44, 49].
Explosive force is the human ability to develop and increase strength as quickly as possible during rapid voluntary muscular contractions [7, 14, 21], being dependent on the age of the subjects [3, 43, 51], and on the functional interdependence of the muscle groups [13, 48]. The explosive force conditions the jumps and the technical actions of finishing, of scoring, specific to the sports games.
Speed, agility and quickness training (SAQ training) integrates basic and specific situational training as developed in the field. This method of training uses eccentric-concentric contractions, which are much more efficient and make the athlete stronger than only using concentric contractions motor abilities [5]. The development of motor skills, perfection of these abilities, and the specific skills practiced during the preparatory phase are important aspects that can have effect during a physical preparation program [18]. The technical-tactical demands of many sports disciplines, such as basketball, handball volleyball, often include practices that require changes in the frontal sagittal field of the brain, e. g., different types or unique jumps are required for each specific type of sport [34].
These different demands require adequate preparation and a high amount of physical preparation regarding the technical, tactical, basic, and specific motor because, e. g., many different jumping techniques exist depending on the type of sport [52]. Previous authors and studies have found a similar need for deliberate HR training in other sports, but this is demonstrated here for the first time in elite handball players. It is recommended that handball coaches implement in-season HR training to enhance the performance of their players. Potential neuromuscular explanations of the observed gains merit further investigation [15]. The maximal rate of rise in muscle force [rate of force development (RFD)] has important functional consequences as it determines the force that can be generated in the early phase of muscle contraction 0-200 ms [1]. Aerobic and
anerobic of young basketball players can be significantly improved during the off-season using only specialized basketball training performed exclusively on the court [4]. It is well known that traditional RT programs can produce desirable results such as improved muscular strength and local muscular endurance [24]. Maximal rate of oxygen uptake is one of the most commonly measured parameters in basic and physiological sciences and it is frequently used to indicate the cardio-respiratory fitness of an individual [17].
Explosive strength and agility are two components of major importance in optimizing the physical and technical potential of athletes playing team sports games. Basketball, handball and volleyball require players to perform technical procedures in conditions of efficiency and adversity in which strength, coordination and agility are essential components for increasing efficiency and sports performance. [9, 10, 19, 36].
In the study, we expected that physical training in elite players would not show significant differences in terms of explosive force and agility. If differences are found, we want to identify which team sports games has the greatest impact in terms of physical training, in the development of explicit strength and agility and implicitly on sports performance. We consider that the identification of these aspects of physical training will determine the optimization of the sports training process.
This study investigated the impact of specific training on the explosive force and agility of players during the preparatory phase of basketball, handball and volleyball. The purpose of this study was to notice the differences between sports and improvements during the preparatory phase and in the future to serve the coaches in preparing better sports specific programs.
Materials and Methods
Participants
The research sample was chosen from students of the University of Prishtina Faculty of Physical Education and Sports that were in undergraduate years I, II, III, and IV and in master's degree years I and II. The sample was split in three groups. The first group was composed of 15 students who were active basketball players in eight different Super league teams during the 2017/18 sports season. The second group was composed of 15 students who were all active handball players in eight different handball Super league teams during the 2017/18 season. The third group included 15 students who were active volleyball
players in eight volleyball Super league teams during the 2017/18 season. Inclusion criteria: active athletes, active students, completion of the training program, male, age 18-35. In total, 45 athletes participated, and all the athletes consented to participation in this study as voluntaries. The research was conducted in accordance with the ethics rules and the research standards of the Declaration of Helsinki (1964) and its amendments. All authors contributed equally to this article.
Research Design
The research was conducted after the end of the preparatory training phase for sports teams, which lasted 45 days. Specifically, the changes in the explosive force and agility were measured on the 24th, 25th, and 26th of February in the Sports Hall in the Physical Education and Sports Faculty of University of Prishtina.
Seven motor tests were used to determine the explosive force and agility: the Leonardo Jumping Test (LEJUTE) (Jump for maximum height), the Long Jump (LONJUM), the Seated Medicine Ball Throw (SMEBTH), the 20-Meter Speed Test (MSPT20), the Agility T-Test (AGTTES), the Illinois Agility Test (ILAGTE) and the Hexagon Agility Test (HEAGTE). LEJUTE was applied using Leonardo Mechanography GRFP STD. Leonardo Mechanography measures the dynamic ground reaction forces and calculates the center of mass related physical parameters, including acceleration, velocity, energy, power, jumping height and stiffness or flexibility. The LONJUM test was performed without shoes from a hard platform to a karate mattress, where the distance was measured in cm. The SMEBTH test was performed by throwing a 3-kg medicine ball from a seated position in a chair. The MSPT20, AGTTES and ILAGTE were measured using a photocells system (Brower Timing Systems). The HEAGTE was conducted using a chronometer.
Statistical Analysis
The results from the measurements were processed via basic statistical analysis using the following parameters: minimal result (Min), maximal result (Max), arithmetic average (X), standard deviation (SD), the Skewness measure of symmetry, and Kurtosis. Measure if data is heavy-tailed or light-tailed compared to a normal distribution is measured with Kurtosis. To determine the difference between the means of the three independent groups, ANOVA analysis, and Post-Hoc, Least Significant Difference LSD test were used. The statistically significant choice for the study was p < 0.05.
3. Results
Table 1 shows the basic statistical parameters for 15 basketball players. For the LEJUTE, the results have a symmetric spread, and the mean leans towards the lower results (hypokurtic). Additionally, most of the results are higher, and the kurtosis curve is platykurtic. For the LONJUM test, the results have a symmetric spread, and the mean leans towards the lower results (hypo-kurtic); additionally, most of the results are higher, and the kurtosis curve is platykurtic. For the SMEBTH test, the results have a symmetric spread and the mean leans towards the high results (leptokurtic); additionally, most of the results are lower, and the Kurtosis curve is platykurtic. For the MSPT20, the results have a symmetric spread, and the mean leans towards the lower results (hypokurtic); additionally, most of the results are higher and the kurtosis curve is mesokurtic. For the AGTTES, the results have a symmetric spread, and the mean leans towards the low results (hypokurtic); additionally, most of the results are higher and the Kurtosis curve is mesokurtic.
Table 2 shows the basic statistic parameters for 15 handball players. The results of the LEJUTE had a symmetric spread, and the mean leans
Table 1
Basic statistical parameters for the basketball players
Test type N Min Max X SD Skewness Kurtosis
LEJUTE 15 56.00 75.00 67.00 5.57 -0.44 -0.30
LONJUM 15 242.00 266.00 254.60 8.13 -0.22 -1.11
SMEBTH 15 6.80 8.16 7.46 0.48 0.28 -1.29
MSPT20 15 2.76 3.17 2.98 0.09 -0.67 1.97
AGTTES 15 9.00 10.26 9.69 0.31 -0.58 1.15
ILAGTE 15 14.99 16.65 15.69 0.49 0.56 -0.10
HEAGTE 15 6.65 8.57 7.68 0.73 -0.29 -1.80
Note. Here and in Tables 2, 3 N - number of subjects, Min - minimum, Max - maximum, X - average, SD -standard deviation.
Table 2
Basic statistical parameters for the handball players
Test type N Min Max X SD Skewness Kurtosis
LEJUTE 15 43.00 72.00 59.47 9.32 -0.36 -1.06
LONJUM 15 210.00 275.00 245.20 23.12 -0.30 -1.52
SMEBTH 15 5.00 7.80 6.45 0.89 -0.38 -0.92
MSPT20 15 2.88 3.20 2.99 0.09 0.97 0.82
AGTTES 15 9.24 10.26 9.66 0.28 0.54 0.23
ILAGTE 15 14.67 16.55 15.49 0.53 0.18 -0.47
HEAGTE 15 6.44 9.06 8.31 0.74 -1.81 2.95
Table 3
Basic statistical parameters for the volleyball players
Test types N Min Max X SD Skewness Kurtosis
LEJUTE 15 52.00 81.00 66.00 8.27 0.18 -0.46
LONJUM 15 225.00 278.00 248.27 18.01 0.45 -1.00
SMEBTH 15 5.30 7.15 6.33 0.64 -0.12 -1.56
MSPT20 15 2.59 3.30 2.99 0.15 -0.74 4.32
AGTTES 15 9.55 11.78 10.55 0.58 1.00 1.39
ILAGTE 15 15.06 20.13 17.35 1.32 0.63 0.31
HEAGTE 15 7.70 12.52 10.31 1.56 -0.04 -1.04
towards the lower results (hypokurtic); additionally, most of the results are higher, and the kurtosis curve is platykurtic. For the ILAGTE, the results have a symmetric spread, and the mean leans towards the lower results (hypokurtic); additionally, most of the results are higher, and the kurtosis curve is platykurtic. In the HEAGTE, the results have a symmetric spread, and that the mean leans towards the lower results (hypokurtic); additionally, most of the results are higher, and the kurtosis curve is platykurtic.
For the LONJUM, the results have a symmetric spread, and the mean leans towards the lower results (hypokurtic); additionally, most of the results are higher, and the kurtosis curve is platykurtic. For the SMEBTH test, the results have a symmetric spread and the mean leans towards the higher results (leptokurtic); additionally, most of the results are lower, and the kurtosis curve is platykurtic. For the MSPT20, the results have a symmetric spread, and the mean leans towards the lower results (hypokurtic); additionally, most of the results are higher, and the kurtosis curve is mesokurtic. For the AGTTES, the results have a symmetric spread, and the mean leans towards the lower results (hypokurtic); additionally, most of the results are higher, and the kurtosis curve is mesokurtic.
For the HEAGTE, the results have a symmetric spread, and the mean leans towards the lower results (hypokurtic); additionally, most of the results are higher, and the kurtosis curve is
platykurtic. For the ILAGTE, the results have a symmetric spread, and the mean leans towards the lower results (hypokurtic); additionally, most of the results are higher, and the kurtosis curve is platykurtic.
Table 3 shows the basic statistic parameters for the 15 volleyball players. For the LEJUTE, the results have a symmetric spread, and the mean leans towards the lower results (hypokurtic); additionally, most of the results are higher, and the kurtosis curve is platykurtic. In the LONJUM test, the results have a symmetric spread, and the mean leans towards the lower results (hypokurtic); additionally, most of the results are higher, and the kurtosis curve is platykurtic. In the same line, for the SMEBTH test, the results have a symmetric spread, and the mean leans towards the higher results (leptokurtic); additionally, most of the results are lower, and the kurtosis curve is platykurtic. Also, for the MSPT20, the results have a symmetric spread, and the mean leans towards the lower results (hypokurtic); additionally, most of the results are higher, and the kurtosis curve is leptokurtic. For the AGTTES, the results have a symmetric spread, and the mean leans towards the lower results (hypokurtic); additionally, most of the results are higher, and the kurtosis curve is mesokurtic. For the ILAGTE, that results have a symmetric spread, and the mean leans towards the lower results (hypokurtic); additionally, most of the results are higher, and the kurtosis curve is platykurtic. For the HEAGTE, the results
have a symmetric spread, and the mean leans towards the lower results (hypokurtic); additionally, most of the results are higher, and the kurtosis curve is platykurtic.
Upon the ANOVA variance analysis (Table 4), an important statistical difference between the means for the basketball, handball and volleyball groups was found for the five motor tests, whereas for two of the tests, no significant differences were found. Significant differences were found for LEJUTE, SMEBTH, AGTTES, ILAGTE, and HEAGTE. No significant statistical differences were found for the LONJUM test or for the MSPT20.
Table 5 shows the results of the multiple comparison analysis between the means for the basketball, handball and volleyball teams. The results show that for the LEJUTE, there was a difference between basketballers and handballers because the mean difference was +7.53. Additionally, the mean difference was 5.53 cm between the volleyballers and handballers. For the LONJUM
Analysis of variance between basl
test, no significant statistical differences were found between the different groups of athletes. For the SMEBTH test, a difference was observed between basketball and handball because the mean difference was 101 cm. Additionally, the mean difference was 113 cm between basketballers and volleyballers. For the MSPT20, no significant differences were found between the different groups when their means were compared. For the AGTTES, the difference between basketballers and volleyballers was -0.86 s and between handballers and volleyballers, the mean difference was -0.89 s. For the ILAGTE, a difference was found between basketballers and volleyballers because the mean difference was -1.65 s and between handballers and volleyballers because their mean difference was -1.85 s. For the HEAGTE, a difference was found between basketballers and volleyballers because the mean difference was -2.62 s, whereas there was also a difference between handballers and volleyballers because the mean difference was -2.0 s.
Table 4
ll, handball, and volleyball players
ANOVA
Test types I df MS F p
LEJUTE 502.l78 2 25l.0S9 4.044 .025
LONJUM б89.378 2 344.689 l.llS .337
SMEBTH ll.555 2 5.777 l2.079 .000
MSPT20 .00l 2 .000 .024 .977
AGTTES 7.7б5 2 3.SS3 23.lS9 .000
ILAGTE 3l.l24 2 20.703 .000
HEAGTE 5б.553 2 2S.277 24.052 .000
Note. X - sum of squares, df - degrees of freedom, MS - Mean Square, F - F test value, p - probability level.
Table 5
Multiple comparison analysis - Least Significant Difference LSD
Test types Team sports MD SD p CI
LB UB
LEJUTE Basketball Handball 7.533* 2.S77 .0l2 1.726 l3.339
Volleyball l.000 2.S77 .730 -4.806 6.806
Handball Basketball -7.533* 2.S77 .0l2 -l3.339 -l.726
Volleyball -б.533* 2.S77 .028 -l2.339 -.726
Volleyball Basketball -l.000 2.S77 .730 -6.806 4.806
Handball б.533* 2.S77 .028 .726 l2.339
LONJUM Basketball Handball 9.400 б^^ .l50 -3.540 22.340
Volleyball б.333 б^^ .329 -6.606 l9.273
Handball Basketball -9.400 б^^ .l50 -22.340 3.540
Volleyball -3.0бб б^^ .б35 -l6.006 9.873
Volleyball Basketball -б.333 б^^ .329 -l9.273 6.606
Handball 3.0бб .б35 -9.873 l6.006
Table 5 (end)
Test types Team sports MD SD p CI
LB UB
SMEBTH Basketball Handball 1.010* .252 .000 .501 1.520
Volleyball 1.129* .252 .000 .619 1.639
Handball Basketball -1.010* .252 .000 -1.520 -.501
Volleyball .118 .252 .641 -.391 .628
Volleyball Basketball -1.129* .252 .000 -1.639 -.619
Handball -.118 .252 .641 -.628 .391
MSPT20 Basketball Handball -.006 .041 .874 -.090 .077
Volleyball -.008 .041 .836 -.092 .075
Handball Basketball .006 .041 .874 -.077 .090
Volleyball -.002 .041 .962 -.086 .082
Volleyball Basketball .008 .041 .836 -.075 .092
Handball .002 .041 .962 -.082 .086
AGTTES Basketball Handball .036 .149 .811 -.265 .337
Volleyball -.862* .149 .000 -1.164 -.561
Handball Basketball -.036 .149 .811 -.337 .265
Volleyball -.898* .149 .000 -1.200 -.597
Volleyball Basketball .862* .149 .000 .561 1.164
Handball .898* .149 .000 .597 1.200
ILAGTE Basketball Handball .204 .316 .523 -.434 .842
Volleyball -1.653* .316 .000 -2.292 -1.014
Handball Basketball -.204 .316 .523 -.842 .434
Volleyball -1.857* .316 .000 -2.496 -1.218
Volleyball Basketball 1.653* .316 .000 1.014 2.292
Handball 1.857* .316 .000 1.218 2.496
HEAGTE Basketball Handball -.626 .395 .121 -1.425 .172
Volleyball -2.628* .395 .000 -3.427 -1.829
Handball Basketball .626 .395 .121 -.172 1.425
Volleyball -2.002* .395 .000 -2.801 -1.203
Volleyball Basketball 2.628* .395 .000 1.829 3.427
Handball 2.002* .395 .000 1.203 2.801
Note. * The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level; MD - mean difference, SD - standard deviation, p - probability level, CI - 95% confidence level, LB - lower bound, UB - upper bound.
Discussion
It is known that sports results that are achieved by elite athletes depend primarily on motor skills. For this reason, quantitative changes that are achieved in sports are due to training programs that are specific to the sport. Based on the results of this study we conclude that due to the higher priority and importance given in the preparatory phase from basketball clubs to agility and explosive force training, the students engaged in professional basketball clubs have shown better results overall.
In team sports such as handball [12, 36], the fitness of components such as speed and explosive force is of particular importance. A well-planned program combining athletic training with fitness as well as adding agility training leads to improved physical and functional parameters in athletes with regard to basketball players [46].
These well-planned programs, including physical parameters such as strength and power, reduce the risk of trauma to athletes.
A study at University of Alicante also came to an interesting conclusion that there were very slight differences in the level of agility among the players in the four different sport games [45].There is no consensus in the scientific literature on the use of a single battery of tests to assess fitness in team sports, our proposal seems valid finding significant differences between three different disciplines [38]. The variable analysis showed that the training programs for basketball, volleyball, and handball increased the explosive force and agility of the players. This increase was more noticeable for basketball players.
The process of increasing agility occurs when explosive force and speed are developed as a precondition for improving balance and coordi-
nation. Agility is primarily determined by good knowledge of motor movements or a high level of motor skill. Agility is a crucial factor of a players in taking a fast, precise and accurate decision [2]. In the chain of movement, a wrong motor movement anywhere along the movement chain often disables proper execution of the move overall or upcoming moves. For these reasons, agility must be practiced daily and during the whole season to provoke instinctive reaction. Scheduling agility, explosive force and speed training includes "splitting" these into smaller components and processing the components in zones that are isolated from the game itself. Training for these different abilities occurs via communication with the brain in a similar manner, the same energy sources, and common factors that depend on the individual ability levels [26]. Developing these skills enables fast work and explosive movement, and it is believed that renowned athletes that have the skill of explosive reaction have easier control of their bodies under extreme conditions during competitions.
Although the players showed improvements in physical parameters we are very aware that this data should be looked at in a different perspective including a control and intervention group. It can also be noted as a weak point of this study the low number of participants in this study. This study also includes many direct tests that give this study an advantage.
In their study [47] studied the effects of exercise training on agility performance in athletes. The results of this study showed that in order to improve muscular strength and athletic performance, good exercise planning is needed through complex agility exercises. The authors also suggest that this exercise be combined with plyome-tric and strength training.
We suggest in the future a study of a mix training method aiming training physical components including strength, speed, cardiorespiratory fitness and power. Also the data obtained from this study will be viewed and applied only to men and not for women (seeing that only male gender is included in the study).
The development of speed and agility is directly linked to nervous system factors and mechanisms of transmission of nerve impulses for neuronal cells and functional structures, the terms in the system and processes neuromuscular stimulation should note to make plans and training programs for the development of these capabilities [30].
Influential biomotor capacity an exercise to
the components you want to upgrade cannot be separated from the implementation plan and exercise program is good, true, and using a scientific approach. High Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) workout is prepared using a scientific approach and implemented very seriously. High Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) effects on the increasing Explosive Power, Speed, and Agility [8, 28, 42].
The results of our study are closer to those of previous research which have highlighted the importance of explosive force and agility in optimizing physical training and implicitly in obtaining sports performance, but which have been mainly focused on different others team sports [20, 31, 40], and track and field [6, 22, 23, 25, 41]. But, the results of our study show comparatively how the explosive force and agility show significant differences between three team sports games in the context of a relatively unitary physical training.
Strengths and limits. A major strength point is the complexity of the information in the comparative study analyzed on the impact of explosive force and agility in three team sports. The results of the study allowed us to identify the highest level of explosive force and agility of basketball players against volleyball and handball. Highlighting the weight that explosive force and agility have in the physical training process with an impact on the efficiency of technical training and sports performance. Among the limits of the study we can highlight: the relatively small number of participants for each team sports game; analysis only of certain parameters of physical training, namely explosive force and agility; limited duration focused on the period of physical training; non-analysis of the impact of the analyzed physical parameters on the technical performances within the sports competitions.
Conclusions
As in every sport, the training plans for basketball, handball and volleyball during the preparatory phase are basic documents that describe the process of sports preparation, their realization and the results of the preparation. The training process and preparation of athletes is optimized so that during practice and games athletes do not suffer from chaotic injuries.
The preparation can be successfully managed and regulated if there are a clear set of objectives, duties, cycles and time restrictions; however, even if these are clearly set, the loads, working methods, locations and training equipment used may be different.
The obtained results show that during the preparatory phase in training sessions basketball coaches focus heavily on explosive force and agility development. In basketball, handball and volleyball, only selected drills in the practice session, a good intensity, and extensive practice schedules that result in tiredness during the sessions will lead to optimal preparation and development of important anthropometric skills that will result in top achievements.
References
1. Aagaard P., Simonsen E.B., Andersen J.L. et al. Increased Rate of Force Development and Neural Drive of Human Skeletal Muscle Following Resistance Training. J Appl Physiol, 2002, vol. 93, no. 4, pp. 1318-1326. DOI: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00283.2002
2. Akilan N., Shah M. Comparison of Speed and Agility between Handball and Volleyball Players. International Journal of Physical Education, Fitness and Sports, 2014, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 31-34. DOI: 10.26524/1415
3. Badau A. Study of Somatic, Motor and Functional Effects of Practicing Initiation Programs in Water Gymnastics and Swimming by Students of Physical Education and Sports. Physical Education of Students, 2017, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 158-164. DOI: 10.15561/20755279. 2017.0402
4. Bogdanis G.C., Ziagos V., Anastasia-dis M., Maridaki M. Effects of Two Different Short-Term Training Programs on the Physical and Technical Abilities of Adolescent Basketball Players. J Sci Med Sport, 2007, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 79-88. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsams.2006.05.007
5. Brown L.E., Ferrigno V. Training for Speed, Agility, and Quickness. Champaign, IL.: Human Kinetics, 2005.
6. Cross M.R., Brughelli M., Samozino P., Morin J.B. Methods of Power-Force-Velocity Profiling During Sprint Running: A Narrative Review. Sports Med., 2017, vol. 47, no. 7, pp. 1255-1269. DOI: 10.1007/s40279-016-0653-3
7. Dideriksen J.L., Del Vecchio A., Farina D. Neural and Muscular Determinants of Maximal Rate of Force Development. J Neurophysiol., 2020, vol. 123, no. 1, pp. 149-157. DOI: 10.1152/jn.00330.2019
8. Fajrin F., Kusnanik N.W., Wijono N. Effects of High Intensity Interval Training on Increasing Explosive Power, Speed, and Agility. J. Phys.: Conf. Ser., 2018, vol. 947, no. 012045. DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/947/1/012045
9. Freitas T.T., Pereira L.A., Alcaraz P.E.
et al. Influence of Strength and Power Capacity on Change of Direction Speed and Deficit in Elite Team-Sport Athletes. J Hum Kinet., 2019, vol. 21, no. 68, pp. 167-176. DOI: 10.2478/hukin-2019-0069
10. Freitas T.T., Pereira L.A., Alcaraz P.E. et al. Change-of-Direction Ability, Linear Sprint Speed, and Sprint Momentum in Elite Female Athletes: Differences Between Three Different Team Sports. J Strength Cond Res., 2020, Epub ahead of print. DOI: 10.1519/JSC. 0000000000003857
11. Gamble P. Periodization of Training for Team Sports Athletes. Strength and Conditioning Journal, 2006, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 56-66. DOI: 10.1519/00126548-200610000-00009
12. Granados C., Izquierdo M., Ibanez J. et al. Difference in Physical Fitness and Throwing Velocity Among Elite and Amateur Female Handball Players. Int J Sports Med., 2007, vol. 28, pp. 860-867. DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-964989
13. Hannah R., Folland J.P., Smith S.L., Minshull C. Explosive Hamstrings-to-Quadriceps Force Ratio of Males Versus Females. Eur J Appl Physiol., 2015, vol. 115, no. 4, pp. 837-847. DOI: 10.1007/s00421-014-3063-y
14. Harper D.J., Cohen D.D., Carling C., Kiely J. Can Countermovement Jump Neuromuscular Performance Qualities Differentiate Maximal Horizontal Deceleration Ability in Team Sport Athletes? Sports (Basel), 2020, vol. 8, no. 6, pp. 1-16. DOI: 10.3390/sports8060076
15. Hermassi S., Chelly M.S., Tabka Z. et al. Effects of 8-week in-season Upper and Lower Limb Heavy Resistance Training on the Peak Power, Throwing Velocity, and Sprint Performance of Elite Male Andball Players. J Strength Cond Res., 2011, vol. 25, no. 9, pp. 2424-2433. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182030edb
16. Hoppe W.M., Brochhagen B.J., Baumgartner C. et al. Differences in Anthropometric Characteristics and Physical Capacities Between Junior and Adult Top-Level Handball Players. Asian Journal of Sports Medicine, 2017, vol. 8, no.4,e60663.
17. Ibikunle O.B., Ubaezuonu V.S. Cardi-orespiratory Responses of Professional Male Volleyball and Basketball Players to Harvard Step Test. Journal of Sports and Physical Education, 2016, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 61-64. DOI: 10.9790/6737-03035461
18. Issurin V. New Horizons for the Methodology and Physiology of Training Periodization. Sports Med., 2010, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 189-206. DOI: 10.2165/11319770-000000000-00000
19. Loturco I., Suchomel T., James L.P. et al. Selective Influences of Maximum Dynamic Strength and Bar-Power Output on Team Sports Performance: A Comprehensive Study of Four Different Disciplines. Front Physiol., 2018, vol. 17, no. 9, p. 1820. DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2018. 01820
20. Lum D., Haff G.G., Barbosa T.M. The Relationship between Isometric Force-Time Characteristics and Dynamic Performance: A Systematic Review. Sports (Basel), 2020, vol. 15, no. 8 (5), pp. 63-72. DOI: 10.3390/sports8050063
21. Maffiuletti N.A., Aagaard P., Blaze-vich A.J. et al. Rate of Force Development. Physiological and Methodological Considerations. Eur J Appl Physiol, 2016, vol. 116, no. 6, pp. 1091-1116. DOI: 10.1007/s00421-016-3346-6
22. Manolache G. The Art of Dominating in Soccer Play. Annals of the University Dunarea de Jos of Galati: Fascicle XV: Physical Education & Sport Management, 2019, vol. 1, pp. 33-37. DOI: 10.35219/efms.2019.1.07
23. Manolache G., Savu C. The Relationship between Coaching and Management During the Pre-Competition Period and its Influence on the Performance Results for 16-18 Year-Old Soccer Players. The Annals of "Dunarea de Jos" University of Galati. Fascicle XV, Physical Education and Sport Management, 2014, vol. 1, pp. 92-96.
24. Marques M.C. In-Season Strength and Power Training for Professional Male Team Handball Players. Strength and Conditioning Journal, 2010, vol. 32, pp. 74-81. DOI: 10.1519/ SSC.0b013e3181fbec32
25. Methenitis S., Terzis G., Zaras N. et al. Intramuscular Fiber Conduction Velocity, Isometric Force and Explosive Performance. J Hum Kinet, 2016, vol. 2, no. 51, pp. 93-101. DOI: 10.1515/hukin-2015-0174
26. Miendlarzewska E.A., Trost W.J. How Musical Training Affects Cognitive Development: Rhythm, Reward and Other Modulating Variables. Front Neurosci., 2014, vol. 7, pp. 279-299. DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2013.00279
27. Miftari F., Jarani J., Stratoberdha D., Sa-lihu H. A Comparison of the Anthropometric Parameters between Basketball Players, Handball Players and Volleyball Players. European Journal of Physical Education and Sport Science, 2017, vol. 3 (11), pp. 155-163.
28. Miftari F., Salihu H., Selimi M. Presentation of Valid Correlations in some Morphological Variables and Basic and Specific Motor Skills in Young People Aged 13-14 Years Engaged in Basketball. Journal of Education, Health and Sport, 2018, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 95-101.
29. Mojoiu M.C. The Importance of Physical Training in Team Sports. Ovidius University Annals, Series Physical Education and Sport/ Science, Movement and Health, 2017, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 397-401.
30. Moreno A.B. Speed and Agility Development and Theory. Revista de Entrenamiento Deportivo, 2014, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 1-8.
31. Morin J.B., Samozino, P., Murata M. et al. A Simple Method for Computing Sprint Acceleration Kinetics from Running Velocity Data: Replication Study with Improved Design. J Biomech, 2019, vol. 20, no. 94, pp. 82-87. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2019.07.020
32. Morral-Yepes M., Moras G., Bishop C., Gonzalo-Skok O. Assessing the Reliability and Validity of Agility Testing in Team Sports: A Systematic Review. J Strength Cond Res., 2020, Volume Publish Ahead of Print. Issue. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003753
33. Negra Y., Chaabene H., Hammami M. et al. Agility in Young Athletes: Is it a Different Ability from Speed and Power? J Strength Cond Res., 2017, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 727-735. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001543
34. Nesic G. Structure of Competitive Activity in Female Volleyball Players. L. Radisav-ljevic and L. Moskovljevic (Eds.), 2008, vol. 14, pp.89-111.
35. Nygaard F.H., Guldteig R.H., van den Tillaar R. Effect of Different Physical Training Forms on Change of Direction Ability: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Sports Med., 2019, vol. 19, no. 5 (1), pp. 53-61. DOI: 10.1186/s40798-019-0223-y
36. Ohnjec K., Vuleta D., Milanovic D., Gruic I. Performance Indicators of Teams at the 2003 World Handball Championship for Women in Croatia. Kinesiology, 2008, vol. 40, pp. 69-79.
37. Paul D.J., Gabbett T.J., Nassis G.P. Agility in Team Sports: Testing, Training and Factors Affecting Performance. Sports Med., 2016, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 421-442. DOI: 10.1007/ s40279-015-0428-2
38. Peña J., Moreno-Doutres D., Coma J. et al. Anthropometric and Fitness Profile of HighLevel Basketball, Handball and Volleyball Players. Rev Andal Med Deporte, 2018, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 30-35. DOI: 10.1016/j.ramd.2016.03.002
39. Painzmetal W., McCoolC., Park S. Attention: Reaction Time and Accuracy Reveal Different Mechanisms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2005, vol. 134, no. 1, pp. 73-78. DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.134.1.73
40. Pereira L.A., Nakamura F.Y., Moraes J.E.
et al. Movement Patterns and Muscle Damage During Simulated Rugby Sevens Matches in National Team Players. J Strength Cond Res., 2018, vol. 32, no. 12, pp. 3456-3465. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001866
41. Samozino P., Rabita G., Dorel S. et al. A Simple Method for Measuring Power, Force, Velocity Properties, and Mechanical Effectiveness in Sprint Running. Scand J Med Sci Sports, 2016, vol. 26 (6), pp. 648-658. DOI: 10.1111/ sms.12490
42. Scanlan A.T., Dalbo V. Improving Practice and Performance in Basketball. Human Exercise and Training Laboratory, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University. Rockhampton 4702, Australia, 2009.
43. Schettino L., Luz C.P., de Oliveira L.E. et al. Comparison of Explosive Force Between Young and Elderly Women: Evidence of an Earlier Decline from Explosive Force. Age (Dordr), 2014, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 893-898. DOI: 10.1007/ s11357-013-9612-1
44. Sheppard J.M., Young W.B., Doyle T.L.A. et al. An Evaluation of a New Test of Reactive Agility and its Relationship to Sprint Speed and Change of Direction Speed. J. Sci. Med. Sport, 2006, vol. 9, pp. 342-349. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsams. 2006.05.019
45. Simonek J., Horicka P., Hianik J. The Differences in Acceleration, Maximal Speed and Agility Between Soccer, Basketball, Volleyball and Handball Players. Journal of Human
Sport and Exercise, 2017, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 73-82. DOI: 10.14198/jhse.2017.121.06
46. Spahi A., Bilali A., Jarani J. The Role of a Training Program Based on Fitness and Athletics, to Improve the Cardiorespiratory Fitness and Agility to Young Basketball Players During a 6-Month Period. European Journal of Sports & Science in Sports, 2016, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 11-15.
47. Sporis G., Milanovic L., Jukic I. et al. The Effect of Agility Training on Athletic Power Performance. Kinesiol., 2010, vol. 42, pp. 65-72.
48. Tillin N.A., Pain M.T.G., Folland J.P. Contraction Speed and Type Influences Rapid Utilisation of Available Muscle Force: Neural and Contractile Mechanisms. J Exp Biol., 2018, vol. 10, pp. 221-223. DOI: 10.1242/jeb.193367
49. Trajkovic N., Sporis G., Kristicevic T. et al. The Importance of Reactive Agility Tests in Differentiating Adolescent Soccer Players. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health., 2020, vol. 17, p. 3839. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17113839
50. Trunic N., Mladenovic M. The Importance of Selection in Basketball. SPORT - Science and Practice, 2014, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 65-81.
51. Watanabe K., Tsubota S., Chin G., Aoki M. Differences in Parameters of the Explosive Grip Force Test between Young and Older Women. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci., 2011, vol. 66, no. 5, pp. 554-558. DOI: 10.1093/ gerona/glr005
52. Zatsiorsky B.M., Kraemer W.J. Science and Practice of Strength Training. 2nd edition book, Human Kinetics, 2006.
Received 24 March 2021
УДК 796.012.11 + 796.3 DOI: 10.14529/hsm210218
АНАЛИЗ РАЗЛИЧИЙ РАЗВИТИЯ ВЗРЫВНОЙ СИЛЫ И ЛОВКОСТИ У БАСКЕТБОЛИСТОВ, ГАНДБОЛИСТОВ И ВОЛЕЙБОЛИСТОВ
Ф. Мифтари1, М. Селими1*, Д. Бадау2 *, Д. Келменди1
1Приштинский университет, г. Косовска-Митровица, община Приштина, Косово, 2Университет медицины, фармации, науки и технологий им. Джорджа Эмиля Паладе в Тыргу-Муреш, г. Тыргу-Муреш, Румыния,
*Корреспондирующие авторы: E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Selimi), [email protected] (D. Badau)
В контексте настоящего исследования изучалось влияние специализированных тренировок на взрывную силу и ловкость у баскетболистов, гандболистов и волейболистов. Цель: выявить различия между видами спорта и результативностью тренировок на подготовительном этапе и после него, чтобы помочь тренерам в усовершенствовании спортивных
программ. Материалы и методы. В исследовании приняли участие студенты факультета физической культуры и спорта Приштинского университета. Были сформированы три группы. В первую группу вошли 15 студентов - действующих баскетболистов, выступающих за разные команды в Суперлиге. Вторая группа состояла из 15 студентов - действующих гандболистов, а третья группа была представлена 15 студентами - действующими волейболистами. Для определения взрывной силы и ловкости использовалось семь различных двигательных тестов: прыжковый тест с использованием специализированной платформы Леонардо, прыжок в длину, бросок медицинского мяча сидя, тест на развитие скорости (20 м), тест на ловкость (Т-тест), Иллинойский тест на ловкость, тест на ловкость «Шестигранник». Результаты. Анализ переменных показал, что программы тренировок по баскетболу, волейболу и гандболу способствовали улучшению взрывной силы и ловкости у игроков. Улучшение ловкости происходит по мере развития взрывной силы и скорости, что в свою очередь способствует улучшению баланса и координации. Выводы. Благодаря специализированным тренировкам, направленным на развитие ловкости и взрывной силы, студенты, занятые в профессиональных баскетбольных клубах, показали самые высокие результаты.
Ключевые слова: взрывная сила, развитие ловкости, командные виды спорта, тест на ловкость, прыжок, тренировка.
Мифтари Флориан, PhD в области спортивных наук, преподаватель, факультет физического воспитания и спорта, Приштинский университет. Ул. Филипа Вишнича, 66, 38220, г. Косовска-Мит-ровица, община Приштина, Косово. E-mail: florian.miftari @ uni-pr.edu, ORCID: 0000-0003-0242-1151.
Селими Муса, PhD в области спортивных наук, доцент, факультет физического воспитания и спорта, Приштинский университет. Ул. Филипа Вишнича, 66, 38220, г. Косовска-Митровица, община Приштина, Косово. E-mail: [email protected], ORCID: 0000-0002-4537-9531.
Бадау Дана, PhD в области спортивных наук, профессор, факультет гуманитарных наук им. Петру Майора, Университет медицины, фармации, науки и технологий им. Джорджа Эмиля Паладе в Тыргу-Муреш. Ул. Георге Маринеску, 38, 540142, г. Тыргу-Муреш, Румыния. E-mail: [email protected], ORCID: 0000-0002-1881-3531.
Келменди Диеллза, PhD в области спортивных наук, профессор, факультет физического воспитания и спорта, Приштинский университет. Ул. Филипа Вишнича, 66, 38220, г. Косовска-Митро-вица, община Приштина, Косово. E-mail: [email protected], ORCID: 0000-0003-3640-1132.
Поступила в редакцию 24 марта 2021 г.
ОБРАЗЕЦ ЦИТИРОВАНИЯ
FOR CITATION
Identifying Differences Between Basketball, Handball and Volleyball Players in Increasing Explosive Force and Agility / F. Miftari, M. Selimi, D. Badau, D. Kel-mendi // Человек. Спорт. Медицина. - 2021. - Т. 21, № 2. - С. 144-154. DOI: 10.14529/hsm210218
Miftari F., Selimi M., Badau D., Kelmendi D. Identifying Differences Between Basketball, Handball and Volleyball Players in Increasing Explosive Force and Agility. Human. Sport. Medicine, 2021, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 144-154. DOI: 10.14529/hsm210218
