Kinematic variables of table vault on artistic gymnastics

Abstract

The table vault is an event of male and female Artistics Gymnastics. Although it can be performed in a variety of rotations and body positions in different phases, it can be separated in three groups: handspring, Yurchenko and Tsukahara. It is believed that kinematic variables of vault may vary according to group of vault or gymnast body position, but few studies compares the real differences among the three groups of vaults, comparing and describing the variables in different phases. Vault kinematic variables could be diversifying according to the approach or position of the vaulting, but little has been studied about the biomechanical differences, comparing and describing behaviours at different stages. The aim of this study was to organize critical, objective and to systematize the most relevant kinematic variables to performance on vaulting. A Meta analysis over the basis Pubmed, Sport Discus and Web of Science were performed about this issue. From the selected references, we described and analyzed the kinematics of the table vault. Vault can be characterized in seven phases of analysis. Most of the studies are descriptive, and some do not descript all phases. Differences among vault variables according to group vaults, technical level and gender were analysed only in recent studies. There still gaps of knowledge about kinematic variables of table vault, in order to provide comprehensive information about all possibilities of vaults in this gymnastic event. It is concluded that kinematic variables of table vault depends upon vault group and may be considered to the improvement of technical performance. More researches are needed to approach the coaching interface with biomechanics applicable knowledge.

Movement Prototypes in a Complex Teamgym Gymnastics Technique on the Vaulting Table and Their Relationship with Judges’ Scores

“…We observe a significant lower score for cluster three on second phase and for clusters one and two during the fourth phase, confirming that, at least for the variables considered, the range for variability of movement prototypes are reduced. During both phases, gymnasts body position [ 42 ], specially hip flexion/extension angles [ 36 ], velocity and force applied to mini trampoline and vaulting table are crucial for success [ 36 , 39 ], which corroborates the strong associations with score that we found. Despite the short duration of hands contact with vaulting table, it is possible that elite gymnasts make small modifications in linear and angular momentum to improve the distance, height and body rotation during the second flight [ 43 ] (phases five and six, between vaulting table take-off and landing).…”

“…The numbers of clusters allocated to the six phases of movement show that a diversification of movement prototypes is more likely to occur along some phases, which is moderately associated with movement variability. Results showed that statistically significant differences for scores occurred for movement during phases one, two, four and six, confirming the significant correlations of these phases with judges’ scores [ 4 , 34 , 35 , 36 ], while phases three and five have less influence on scores, showing a similar range of scores for all clusters.…”

How Task Constraints Influence the Gaze and Motor Behaviours of Elite-Level Gymnasts

“…Take-off velocity did not differ across groups, but all participants demonstrated greater take-off velocity during the MTVT (see Table 2 ), highlighting that motor behaviour is influenced by task constraints. As we predicted, greater velocities during the approach run and take-off have been shown to be associated with better performances and higher scores on vaulting [ 19 , 21 , 22 , 37 ]. The higher level of complexity on the MTVT task likely explains this discrepancy in take-off velocities between apparatuses [ 20 , 37 ].…”

“…From a technical point of view, MTVT skills present additional constraints specifically during the first flight phase (i.e., from mini-trampoline to vaulting table) and the second flight phase (i.e., from take-off from vaulting table to landing) [ 21 , 34 , 35 ]. The elite group may have more difficulty during these phases of movement, resulting in a reduction in time directing gaze to the mini-trampoline during the approach run, in order to find their hand placement location on the vaulting table.…”

“…Third, we predicted that motor behaviour, more specifically take-off velocity, would be influenced by task constraint with all participants increasing their take-off velocity on MTVT, due to the higher complexity of the task. Finally, we expected that greater take-off velocity would be associated with better scores [ 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 ].…”