Performance Characteristics and Accuracy in Perceptual Discrimination of Leather and Synthetic Basketballs

Abstract

Performance characteristics of leather and synthetic basketballs were examined by measuring the basketballs' rebound heights on five types of playing surfaces (Tartan, asphalt, glass, concrete, hardwood). Comparing the basketballs' performance on the basis of their coefficients of restitution (e = height of rebound/height of drop) analysis of variance showed that the leather basketball rebounded significantly higher than the synthetic basketball on all surfaces. To assess the capability of individuals to discriminate perceptually between the balls 30 male and 30 female undergraduates were asked to determine whether basketballs randomly presented 20 times under four different treatment conditions (visual, tactual-kinesthetic static, tactual-kinesthetic dynamic, auditory) were leather or synthetic. Chi squared analysis of their accuracy across all four perceptual modes showed no significant difference. However, analysis by perceptual mode did produce significant differences, indicating subjects were more accurate in identification in the tactual-kinesthetic dynamic and static modes than in the visual and auditory.

Effect of Basketball Mass on Shot Performance among 9–11 Year-Old Male Players

“…24,25 The reliability of the observation (Table 2) was measured through an inter-observer evaluation at the end of the observation process. 26,27 In accordance with Crisco et al 28 Isaacs and Karpman, 2 Mathes and Flatten 29 as well as basketball regulations, the properties of the ball that were controlled were: a) mass, b) circumference, and c) bounce height. Three collaborators monitored this a half hour before and after each game.…”

Leather Balls Influence Three-Point Scores by University Basketball Players more than Synthetic or Rubber Balls Do

“…Previous studies have reported that materials used in manufacturing the balls influence the properties of the ball. Mathes and Flatten (1982) found that leather basketballs rebounded significantly higher than synthetic basketballs on different playing surfaces (polyurethane, asphalt, glass, concrete, hardwood). A study by Inaba et al (2017) also found different coefficients of restitution, friction, and trajectories in table tennis ball post-collision for celluloid and plastic balls.…”

“…Recent studies conducted with different types of balls suggest that changing the ball type influences the youth footballers' performance during small-sided games (Santos et al, 2020), cricket batters' performance (Connor et al, 2019), and tennis players' performance and physiological responses (Cooke & Davey, 2005). Although no recent study has been conducted on the influence of the type of basketball used for shooting performance, an earlier study by Mathes and Flatten (1982) reported that synthetic basketballs do not have the same rebound characteristics as leather basketballs. The results also suggested that in play, the leather basketball would rebound further from backboards and could be dribbled with less effort than the synthetic basketballs (Mathes & Flatten, 1982).…”

“…Although no recent study has been conducted on the influence of the type of basketball used for shooting performance, an earlier study by Mathes and Flatten (1982) reported that synthetic basketballs do not have the same rebound characteristics as leather basketballs. The results also suggested that in play, the leather basketball would rebound further from backboards and could be dribbled with less effort than the synthetic basketballs (Mathes & Flatten, 1982).…”

Free-throw accuracy and success as a function of ball weight in 9- to 11-year-old male players

“…In accordance with Crisco et al, (2005), Isaacs and Karpman (1981), Mathes and Flatten (1982) as well as with basketball regulations, the properties of the ball that were controlled were: (a) weight, (b) circumference, and (c) bounce height. Three collaborators monitored this half an hour before and after each game.…”