Physique and motor performance characteristics of US national rugby players

Abstract

Anthropometric and performance data were collected on 65 US rugby players (mean age = 26.3 years) to make comparison on these characteristics by player position and performance level. Anthropometry included stature, body mass, nine skinfolds, two girths and two bone breadths. Skinfold patterns, estimated percent fat and Heath-Carter somatotypes were calculated from anthropometry. Motor performance measures included standing vertical jump, 40 yard dash, 110 yard dash, shuttle run, repeated jump in place, push-up, sit-up and squat thrust. Descriptive statistics were used for the total sample as well as selected sub-groups. Discriminant function analyses were employed to determine which combination of variables best discriminated between position and level of performance for the anthropometric and performance data. The results indicated that forwards were taller, heavier and had more subcutaneous adiposity than backs. Additionally, forwards and backs differed in somatotypes, with forwards being more endo-mesomorphic than backs and with a greater scatter about their mean. The anthropometric variables that best discriminated between backs and forwards were body mass, femur breadth and arm girth, with 88% correctly classified using these variables. The motor performance variables that best discriminated between backs and forwards were repeated jump in place, push-up and standing vertical jump, with 76% correct classification using these variables. Classification into three playing levels was unsatisfactory using either anthropometric or motor performance variables. These data can be used to assess present status and change in players, or potential national players, by position to locate strengths and weaknesses.

Physical Characteristics and Somatotype of Soccer Players according to Playing Level and Position

“…The ideal somatotype for an athlete differs according to the requirements of the particular sport (Fry et al, 1991;Igbokwe, 1991;Foley et al, 1989;Toriola et al, 1985). Significant variations were determined in team sports regarding somatotype components, both for the different sports and the different playing positions (Gualdi-Russo and Zaccagni, 2001;Carlson et al, 1994;Carda and Looney, 1994). The somatotype scores of elite or professional soccer players were 2.2-5.4-2.2, 2.4-4.8-2.3, 2.70-4.94-2.95, and 2.2-5.4-2.9, respectively, in studies conducted in South America (Rienzi et al, 2000), Europe (Casajús, 2001), Asia-Pacific (Rahmawati et al, 2007), and Africa (Mathur et al, 1985).…”

Fitness and body composition profiling of elite junior South African rugby players

“…Many studies have examined the physical characteristics of elite, 3,9 amateur, 16,19 adolescent 6,18,19 and pre-adolescent rugby players. 17 A majority of these analyses divide players into two distinct categories -forwards and backs, based on unique physiological criteria specific to these positions.…”

“…17 A majority of these analyses divide players into two distinct categories -forwards and backs, based on unique physiological criteria specific to these positions. 3,6,16,19 Information derived from these studies may be used to identify superior rugby players and also guides conditioning strategies that may enhance team and individual performance.…”

Propiedades Antropométricas y Somatotipo de Jugadores de Baloncesto de Diferente Nivel Competitivo

“…Es necesario plantear y utilizar procesos de valoración del jugador de baloncesto durante todas las fases de formación deportiva, para documentar los procesos morfológicos, correspondientes a cada una de las etapas determinadas por las diferentes categorías de competición (Carlson et al, 1994; Jecilic et al, 2002;Drinkwater et al, 2008). Orientar la evaluación deportista, tanto para la diferenciación como del reconocimiento de la similitud entre los deportistas, permite identificar la efectividad de los procesos de formación revelar con ello la especificidad y diferenciación deportiva.…”

“…La evaluación cineantropométrica y en especial el somatotipo, son de utilidad para la selección y el control de los atletas en formación. Los estudios en este ámbito se han enfocado a documentar y analizar las dimensiones: morfológicas, funcionales y de tipo técnico táctico deportivo del atleta, caracterizándolos en función del deporte, posición o prueba (Norton & Olds, 1996;Popovic et al, 2013).En el contexto de la evaluación del deportista, las téc-nicas que en general han sido utilizadas tradicionalmente son la valoración antropométrica y sus diferentes estimaciones que de estos datos se derivan, los test de evaluación de la condición física y aquellos enfocados a las habilidades técnicas o destrezas motoras de cada deporte (Apostolidis et al, 2003).Es necesario plantear y utilizar procesos de valoración del jugador de baloncesto durante todas las fases de formación deportiva, para documentar los procesos morfológicos, correspondientes a cada una de las etapas determinadas por las diferentes categorías de competición (Carlson et al, 1994; Jecilic et al, 2002;Drinkwater et al, 2008). Orientar la evaluación deportista, tanto para la diferenciación como del reconocimiento de la similitud entre los deportistas, permite identificar la efectividad de los procesos de formación revelar con ello la especificidad y diferenciación deportiva.…”