The aim of this study was to compare the characteristics of somatic maturation, anthropometric and physical performance (vertical jump and aerobic power) in young basketball players of different playing positions (under 13 years) and analyze these relationships using Peak Height Velocity (PHV) as a measure of somatic maturation. For this, 26 male athletes were evaluated. Anthropometric variables were: body mass, standing and sitting height, and length of lower limbs. Maturation was determined by age at PHV. Physical performance was determined by lower limb power (counter movement jump - CMJ) and aerobic power (Intermittent Recovery Test) tests. MANOVA reported significant differences (p<0.05) among playing positions regarding variables Maturity Offset, estimated PHV age, standing height, sitting height, estimated leg length, body mass and Yo-Yo IR1. In addition, it was identified that point guards reached estimated PHV at later age than their peers who act as small forwards and centers. Regarding CMJ, no significant differences were identified among playing positions, but in relation to aerobic power, point guards and small forwards presented higher performance. These findings confirm that maturation has great effect on growth and physical performance measures and the estimated PHV age is an applicable tool in young athletes, mainly aiding professionals in structuring the teaching-learning- training process in this age group.

effects of photobiomodulation on performance in the 30-second Wingate test: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study.

The current study aimed to compare the anaerobic power output through the Wingate test in different positions, i.e., standing and seated, and identify the relationship between power-output and body mass. Methods:Eleven male competitive cyclists (age: 30.3 ± 4.7 years; body mass: 73.7 ± 7.7 kg; body fat: 11.3 ± 4.2%) were submitted to two sessions of the Wingate test (WT) in different positions, on different days. Results: The peak power (W), average power (W), relative peak power (W•kg -1 ), relative average power (W•kg -1 ), average cadence (rpm), and average velocity (km•h -1 ) presented significant differences in the standing position compared with the seated position (p < 0.05), 1155 ± 130 vs. 1082 ± 182 (W), 875 ± 96 vs. 818 ± 116 (W), 15.9 ± 1 vs. 15.0 ± 2 (W kg-1 ), 12.1 ± 1 vs. 11.3 ± 1 (W kg -1 ), 117.5 ± 7 vs. 109.8 ± 10 (rpm), 37.0 ± 2 vs. 34.6 ± 3 (km•h -1 ), respectively. However, when controlled the body mass, the differences in variables power output ceased to exist (p > 0.05). The fatigue and peak heart rate (bpm) indices did not present significant differences between the tests (p > 0.05). Conclusions: Sprint performance was improved when the WT was performed in a standing position in competitive cyclists. The study also reports the important relationship between body mass and anaerobic production capacity in the WT, emphasizing that it is desirable an increase in lean body mass and a reduction in fat mass, similar in competitions. We suggest that, for anaerobic assessment in cyclists, the standing position should be used during the WT, to determine the maximum power-output capacity.