Preseason Physiological Profile of Soccer and Basketball Players in Different Divisions

104

119

One of the key components in sports injury prevention is the identification of imbalances in leg muscle strength. However, different leg muscle characteristics may occur in large playing area (field) sports and small playing area (court) sports, which should be considered in regular injury prevention assessment. This study examined the isokinetic hamstrings-to-quadriceps (H:Q) ratio and bilateral leg strength balance in 40 male college (age: 23.4 ± 2.5 yrs) team sport players (field sport = 23, soccer players; court sport = 17, volleyball and basketball players). Five repetitions of maximal knee concentric flexion and concentric extension were performed on an isokinetic dynamometer at two speeds (slow: 60°·s−1 and fast: 300°·s−1) with 3 minutes rest between tests. Both legs were measured in counterbalanced order with the dominant leg being determined as the leg used to kick a ball. The highest concentric peak torque values (Nm) of the hamstrings and quadriceps of each leg were analyzed after body mass normalization (Nm·kg−1). Court sport players showed significantly weaker dominant leg hamstrings muscles at both contraction speeds (P < 0.05). The H:Q ratio was significantly larger in field players in their dominant leg at 60°·s−1 (P < 0.001), and their non-dominant leg at 300°·s−1 (P < 0.001) respectively. Sport-specific leg muscle strength was evident in college players from field and court sports. These results suggest the need for different muscle strength training and rehabilitation protocols for college players according to the musculature requirements in their respective sports.

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

H:Q Ratios and Bilateral Leg Strength in College Field and Court Sports Players

Cheung

Smith

Wong

2012

104

119

“…Limited aerobic capacity was also shown by Metaxas et al (2009) in a comparative study of soccer and basketball athletes of distinct levels at the beginning of the pre-season. Also in contrast to the findings of Apostolidis et al (2004), who reported that the ventilatory threshold occurred in basketball players at 77.6±7.0% VO 2max , we found that the median VO 2AT for perimeter players was 48.15% of VO 2max , while that of post players was 50.1% of VO 2max .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…Consequently typical values of power, oxygen uptake, ventilation and heart rate could be observed using standardized exercise tests for perimeter and post players. The typical values of main cardiorespiratory indices in basketball were described, analysed and compared in respect to age, gender, level of performance, modification of rules and other external factors (Apostolidis et al, 2004; Laplaud et al, 2004; Gocentas et al, 2005; Sallet et al, 2005; Cormery et al, 2008; Castagna et al, 2009; Metaxas et al, 2009; Narazaki et al, 2009; Ziv et al, 2009). Despite the increased popularity of basketball a number of physiological investigations of the players are inadequate.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Position-Related Differences in Cardiorespiratory Functional Capacity of Elite Basketball Players

Gocentas

Jaščaninienė²,

Poprzęcki³

et al. 2011

The purpose of this study was to examine possible differences in cardio respiratory functional capacity between perimeter and post elite basketball players. The subjects included 42 highly trained basketball players subdivided into groups of perimeter and post players. Point guards, shooting guards and small forwards were involved in the group of perimeter players, while power forwards and centers represented the group of post players. All players performed a standardized exercise test to evaluate maximal oxygen uptake using a cycle ergometer and automated breath-by-breath system VMAX229C. Collected data of power, heart rate, pulmonary ventilation and gas exchange were compared between the groups of perimeter and post players. Significant differences in anthropometric features between the investigated subgroups were observed. Post players were heavier and taller. Therefore, the perimeter players had significantly higher values of VO2max and relative power. VO2max was related to relative power. Relations between those variables can be described by linear regression. Given regressions can be used as a source of typical values for male basketball players. The results indicate that the empirical repartition of basketball players into perimeter and post players has not only a morphological but a physiological basis as well.

“…Basketball is a predominantly anaerobic sport discipline, where most of the energy demands for high intensity activities such as, starts, stops, and changes of direction, jumps, shots, blocks and rebounds come from the creatine phosphate system (CP) (Delextrat and Cohen, 2009; Meckell et al, 2009; Metaxas et al, 2009). Anaerobic glycolysis with the production of lactate as a metabolic by-product is incorporated less often in game situations and occurs only when a high intensity activity lasts for 10 to 30 s and energy has to be derived from muscle glycogen stores.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Chosen Physical Fitness Characteristics of Turkish Professional Basketball Players by Division and Playing Position

Köklü

Alemdaroğlu

Koçak

et al. 2011

The purpose of the present study was to compare chosen physical fitness characteristics of Turkish professional basketball players in different divisions (first and second division) and playing positions. Forty-five professional male basketball players (14 guards, 15 forwards, 16 centers) participated in this study voluntarily. For each player, anthropometric measurements were performed, as well as a multi-stage 20 m shuttle run, isokinetic leg strength, squat jump (SJ), countermovement jump (CMJ), 10–30 meter single-sprint and T-drill agility tests. The differences in terms of division were evaluated by independent t-test and the differences by playing position were evaluated by one-way ANOVA with Post Hoc Tukey test. First division players’ CMJ measurements were significantly higher than those of second division players’ (p≤0.05), whereas second division players’ 10 m sprint times were significantly better than those of first division players’ (p≤0.05). In addition, forwards and centers were significantly taller than guards. Centers were significantly heavier and their T-drill test performances were inferior to those of forwards and guards (p≤0.05). Moreover, guards had a significantly higher maximal oxygen uptake (VO2 max) than centers. Guards and forwards showed significantly better performance in the 10 and 30 m sprint tests than centers (p≤0.05). Forwards and centers had significantly better left leg flexor strength at 180°.s−1(p≤0.05). In conclusion, the findings of the present study indicated that physical performance of professional basketball players differed among guards, forwards and centers, whereas there were not significant differences between first and second division players. According to the present study, court positions have different demands and physical attributes which are specific to each playing position in professional basketball players. Therefore, these results suggest that coaches should tailor fitness programs according to specific positions on the court.