Sekulic, D, Pehar, M, Krolo, A, Spasic, M, Uljevic, O, Calleja-González, J, and Sattler, T. Evaluation of basketball-specific agility: applicability of preplanned and nonplanned agility performances for differentiating playing positions and playing levels. J Strength Cond Res 31(8): 2278-2288, 2017-The importance of agility in basketball is well known, but there is an evident lack of studies examining basketball-specific agility performances in high-level players. The aim of this study was to determine the reliability and discriminative validity of 1 standard agility test (test of preplanned agility [change-of-direction speed] over T course, T-TEST), and 4 newly developed basketball-specific agility tests, in defining playing positions and performance levels in basketball. The study comprised 110 high-level male basketball players (height: 194.92 ± 8.09 cm; body mass: 89.33 ± 10.91 kg; age: 21.58 ± 3.92 years). The variables included playing position (Guard, Forward, Center), performance level (first division vs. second division), anthropometrics (body height, body mass, and percentage of body fat), T-TEST, nonplanned basketball agility test performed on dominant (BBAGILdom) and nondominant sides (BBAGILnond), and a preplanned (change-of-direction speed) basketball agility test performed on dominant (BBCODSdom) and nondominant sides (BBCODSnond). The reliability of agility tests was high (intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.81-0.95). Forwards were most successful in the T-TEST (F test: 13.57; p = 0.01). Guards outperformed Centers in BBCODSdom, BBCODSndom, BBAGILdom, and BBAGILnond (F test: 5.06, p = 0.01; 6.57, 0.01; 6.26, 0.01; 3.37, 0.04, respectively). First division Guards achieved better results than second division Guards in BBCODSdom (t: 2.55; p = 0.02; moderate effect size differences), BBAGILdom, and BBAGILnond (t: 3.04 and 3.06, respectively; both p = 0.01 and moderate effect size differences). First division Centers outperformed second division Centers in BBAGILdom (t: 2.50; p = 0.02; moderate effect size differences). The developed basketball-specific agility tests are applicable when defining position-specific agility. Both preplanned and nonplanned agilities are important qualities in differentiating between Guards of 2 performance levels. The results confirmed the importance of testing basketball-specific nonplanned agility when evaluating the performance level of Centers.
The importance of jumping ability in basketball is well known, but there is an evident lack of studies that have examined different jumping testing protocols in basketball players at advanced levels. The aim of this study was to assess the applicability of different tests of jumping capacity in identifying differences between (i) playing position and (ii) competitive levels of professional players. Participants were 110 male professional basketball players (height: 194.92±8.09 cm; body mass: 89.33±10.91 kg; 21.58±3.92 years of age; Guards, 49; Forwards, 22; Centres, 39) who competed in the first (n = 58) and second division (n = 52). The variables included anthropometrics and jumping test performance. Jumping performances were evaluated by the standing broad jump (SBJ), countermovement jump (CMJ), reactive strength index (RSI), repeated reactive strength ability (RRSA) and four running vertical jumps: maximal jump with (i) take-off from the dominant leg and (ii) non-dominant leg, lay-up shot jump with take-off from the (iii) dominant leg and (iv) non-dominant leg. First-division players were taller (ES: 0.76, 95%CI: 0.35-1.16, moderate differences), heavier (0.69, 0.29-1.10), had higher maximal reach height (0.67, 0.26-1.07, moderate differences), and had lower body fat % (-0.87, -1.27-0.45, moderate differences) than second-division players. The playing positions differed significantly in three of four running jump achievements, RSI and RRSA, with Centres being least successful. The first-division players were superior to second-division players in SBJ (0.63, 0.23-1.03; 0.87, 0.26-1.43; 0.76, 0.11-1.63, all moderate differences, for total sample, Guards, and Forwards, respectively). Running vertical jumps and repeated jumping capacity can be used as valid measures of position-specific jumping ability in basketball. The differences between playing levels in vertical jumping achievement can be observed by assessing vertical jump scores together with differences in anthropometric indices between levels.
The aims of this investigation were to compile evidence on substance-use-and-misuse (SUM) and to identify factors related to potential-doping-behaviour (PDB) in rugby union. The subjects were 105 rugby athletes (all males; 23.4 ± 4.1 years; 99% respondents). The variables included socio-demographic factors, SUM-data, sport-factors, knowledge-on-doping (KD), and PDB. Data showed high alcohol consumption, with more than 30% of the athletes binge drinking at least once per week. Approximately 52% of the subjects used dietary-supplementation (DS) and 23% reported PDB, whereas 55% believed that doping is present in rugby. Forward conditional logistic regression revealed that less rugby experience (OR:1.286; 95%CI:1.058-1.563; p < 0.05), less smoking (OR:2.034; 95%CI:1.100-3.760; p < 0.05), higher DS usage (OR:5.543; 95%CI:1.666-18.444; p < 0.01), and a stronger belief that doping is present in rugby (OR:0.305; 95%CI:0.066-0.638; p < 0.01) were significant predictors of PDB. The high PDB and alcohol consumption warrant a serious intervention on these problems in rugby.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.