Relationship between somatic build and kinematic indices of underwater undulatory swimming performed by young male swimmers

Wądrzyk, Łukasz; Staszkiewicz, Robert; Żegleń, Magdalena; Kryst, Łukasz

doi:10.1080/24748668.2021.1909450

Cited by 5 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The uncertainty of the spatial measurements during UUS seemed to fall within 0.04 m, which represents ≈5% of a typical kicking length for competitive swimmers. This level of uncertainty was greater than previously reported for 3D underwater analysis of swimming motions [33], although it seemed to be decreased when automatic motion capture systems were employed [26,31,39,40].…”

Section: Study Characteristicscontrasting

confidence: 53%

“…Swimmers were instructed to perform maximum efforts of UUS ranging from 7.5 m [33] to 25 m [34][35][36][37], while video filming typically captured from 6 to 12 m away from the starting wall. Those kicking cycles included in the field of view of one camera (usually from one to three cycles) were included in the subsequent analysis, although Yamakawa et al [26], who performed testing in a water flume, measured ten consecutive UUS kicking cycles.…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this way, researchers tried to standardise experimental conditions and to avoid a positive influence of the push-off velocity (close to 3 m/s if performed maximally [35,46,47]) on the subsequent underwater kicking. After pushing off, most studies constrained swimmers to perform maximal UUS efforts on 15 m distances, although trials ranged from 7.5 m [42], 10 m [8,28,32,41], 12 m [33], 20 m [12,31,45], to 25 m [34][35][36][37]. Only Takeda et al [38] and Stosic et al [36,37], in testing conditions, and Gonjo and Olstad [29], in a race simulation, made swimmers maintain the maximal swimming efforts after emersion from under the water.…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The number of cameras employed for filming depended on each research aim, but 11 out of 25 studies employed only one camera for underwater recordings, and its positioning was located between 8 m [33,41] and 12 m [16] away from the swimmers' sagittal plane. Connaboy et al [45] stated that three cycles should be needed to obtain reliable values of the kicking kinematics, and this recommendation was followed by ten studies, although two kicking cycles [13,27], or even one [34,36,37,43], were also monitored in seven studies.…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Kinematic Analysis of the Underwater Undulatory Swimming Cycle: A Systematic and Synthetic Review

Veiga

Calvo

Trinidad

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increase of low-cost technology for underwater filming has made quantitative analysis an affordable resource for swimming coaches on a frequent basis. In this context, a synthesis of the kinematic determinants of underwater undulatory swimming (UUS) seems to be lacking. The aim of the present study was to synthesise the scientific evidence on the kinematic characteristics of competitive swimmers during UUS and the main kinematic determinants of UUS performance, as well as to summarise the main methodological considerations for UUS kinematic analysis. A systematic literature search was performed through four electronic databases following the PRISMA guidelines and STROBE for evaluating the quality of the included studies. Twenty-three research studies from the first search and two from the second search were finally considered. In total, 412 competitive swimmers (321 males and 91 females) with a performance standard of international B (11%), national (51%), or regional (35%) level were analysed. Most studies focused on a two-dimensional analysis of the ventral UUS performed from a push start and filmed 6–12 m from the starting wall. Kinematic analysis of UUS included kicking parameters (kicking length, frequency, and amplitude) as well as selected segmental kinematics in 76% of studies and the analysis of UUS performance determinants in 36%. Information about the determinants of UUS performance was inconsistent due in part to inconsistencies in the definition of kinematic parameters. Further research studies where automatic motion capture systems are applied to the analysis of UUS on the aforementioned conditions should be conducted.

show abstract

Section: Study Characteristicscontrasting

confidence: 53%

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Kinematic Analysis of the Underwater Undulatory Swimming Cycle: A Systematic and Synthetic Review

Veiga

Calvo

Trinidad

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies indicated that in 100 m events, swimmers reaching faster underwater speeds had a meaningful advantage on swimming start, and consequently on the final race times (Olstad et al, 2020;Sánchez et al, 2021). Other studies focused on understanding the undulatory swimming (Wadrzyk et al, 2021) or the transition from the underwater phase to surface swim (Stosic et al, 2021;Trinidad et al, 2020). Overall, for the front crawl stroke (i.e.…”

Section: Prediction Of the Start Main Outcome (15 M Mark Time) In Each Race (50 M And 100 M Freestyle) And Its Relationship With Other Stmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of the start and finish in the 50 m and 100 m freestyle performance in elite male swimmers

Marinho

Barbosa

Neiva

et al. 2021

International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to: (1) verify differences between swimmers of the same competitive level in variables related to the start and finish (50 m and 100 m freestyle); (2) verify if starting and finish variables are responsible for faster race time, and which starting variables are responsible for the start performance in such events. For the 50 m and 100 m freestyle race at the junior European Championships 2019, 86 and 88 male swimmers were analysed, respectively. A set of starting and finishing variables were used for analysis. Both races (50 m: p < 0.001; 100 m: p < 0.001) presented a significant level effect for the final race time. The same trend was observed for the start and finish performances. For both races, hierarchical linear modelling retained the 15 m mark time and finish speed as predictors. The 50 m start retained the reaction time and underwater speed, and the 100 m start retained the reaction time and the water break distance. This indicates the underwater phase of the start is of substantial importance to improve the 15 m mark time. Coaches and swimmers are advised to enhance the start underwater phase, and finish segments to improve the swimmers' performance.

show abstract

The determinant factors of undulatory underwater swimming performance: A systematic review

Ruiz-Navarro

Cuenca-Fernández

Sanders

et al. 2022

Journal of Sports Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Relationship between somatic build and kinematic indices of underwater undulatory swimming performed by young male swimmers

Cited by 5 publications

References 26 publications

Kinematic Analysis of the Underwater Undulatory Swimming Cycle: A Systematic and Synthetic Review

Kinematic Analysis of the Underwater Undulatory Swimming Cycle: A Systematic and Synthetic Review

The effect of the start and finish in the 50 m and 100 m freestyle performance in elite male swimmers

The determinant factors of undulatory underwater swimming performance: A systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About