Positional Role Differences in the Aerobic and Anaerobic Power of Elite Basketball Players

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to compare the aerobic and anaerobic power and capacity of elite male basketball players who played multiple positions. Fifty-five healthy players were divided into the following three different subsamples according to their positional role: guards (n = 22), forwards (n = 19) and centers (n = 14). The following three tests were applied to estimate their aerobic and anaerobic power and capacities: the countermovement jump (CMJ), a multistage shuttle run test and the Running-based Anaerobic Sprint Test (RAST). The obtained data were used to calculate the players’ aerobic and anaerobic power and capacities. To determine the possible differences between the subjects considering their different positions on the court, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with the Bonferroni post-hoc test for multiple comparisons was used. The results showed that there was a significant difference between the different groups of players in eleven out of sixteen measured variables. Guards and forwards exhibited greater aerobic and relative values of anaerobic power, allowing shorter recovery times and the ability to repeat high intensity, basketball-specific activities. Centers presented greater values of absolute anaerobic power and capacities, permitting greater force production during discrete tasks. Coaches can use these data to create more individualized strength and conditioning programs for different positional roles.

Comparing external total load, acceleration and deceleration outputs in elite basketball players across positions during match play

“…Basketball team playing positions are in general classified into three playing specific positions: guards, forwards and centers (Ben Abdelkrim, Chaouachi, Chamari, Chtara, & Castagna, 2010). Prior research has reported differences between positional roles in aerobic and anaerobic power (Pojskić, Šeparović, Užičanin, Muratović, & Mačković, 2015), maximal aerobic power (Cormery, Marcil, & Bouvard, 2008;Ostojic, Mazic, & Dikic, 2006;Sallet, Perrier, Ferret, Vitelli, & Baverel, 2005), speed (Smith & Thomas, 1991), height (Ackland, Schreiner, & Kerr, 1997;Bale, 1991;Ostojic, et al, 2006;Sallet, et al, 2005), body mass (Latin, et al, 2009;Ostojic, et al, 2006;Sallet, et al, 2005) and body fat (Latin, Berg, & Baechle, 2009;Ostojic, et al, 2006;Sallet, et al, 2005) in men's senior basketball. However, positions should attend to the specific role within the competition: point guard (PG), shooting guard (SG), small forward (SF), power forward (PF) and center (C) .…”

Evaluation of different jumping tests in defining position-specific and performance-level differences in high level basketball players

“…It is reasonable to expect that positional specifics in physical attributes and playing duties will be reflected in position-specific differences in jumping performance. Pojskic et al reported CMJ of 40.40±5.04, 37.62±6.80, and 36.04±3.80 cm for Guards, Forwards and Centres, respectively, with significant ANOVA differences between Centres and the other two positions [ 20 ]. Similarly, Ben Abdelkrim et al found the lowest CMJ for players involved in frontcourt duties (41.6±4.2 and 40.9±3.7 cm for Centres and Power Forwards) in comparison to backcourt players (50.2±5.9, 48.4±5.1, 52.5±5.0 for Point guards, Shooting guards and Small forwards, respectively) [ 15 ].…”

Bodyweight Circuit Training for Basketball Beginner Athletes’ Aerobic Endurance

“…Aggressive, quick, active, and explosive characteristics of basketball [1] should be surely supported by good physical abilities. One of that is aerobic endurance.…”