Strategies for defending a dribbler: categorisation of three defensive patterns in 1-on-1 basketball

To clarify the defending-dribbler mechanism, the interaction between the dribbler and defender should be investigated. The purposes of this study were to identify variables that explain the outcome (i.e. ‘penetrating’ and ‘guarding’) and to understand how defenders stop dribblers by categorising defensive patterns. Ten basketball players participated as 24 dribbler–defender pairs, who played a real-time, 1-on-1 sub-phase of the basketball. The trials were categorised into penetrating trials, where a dribbler invaded the defended area behind the defender, and guarding trials, where the defender stopped the dribbler's advance. Our results demonstrated that defenders in guarding trials initiated their movements earlier and moved quicker than the defenders in penetrating trials. Moreover, linear discriminant analysis revealed that the differences in initiation time and medio-lateral peak velocity between the defenders and dribblers were critical parameters for explaining the difference between penetrating and guarding trials. Lastly, guarding trials were further categorised into three process patterns during 1-on-1 basketball (i.e. ‘early initiation’ trials, ‘quick movement’ trials, and ‘dribbler's stop’ trials). The results suggest that there are three defending strategies and that one strategy would be insufficient to explain the defending-dribbler mechanism, because both players' anticipation and reactive movement must be considered.     

Landing ground reaction forces in figure skaters and non-skaters

Abstract

Researchers and clinicians have suggested that overuse injuries to the lower back and lower extremities of figure skaters may be associated with the repeated high impact forces sustained during jump landings. Our primary aim was to compare the vertical ground reaction forces (GRFs) in freestyle figure skaters (n = 26) and non-skaters (n = 18) for the same barefoot single leg landing on a force plate from a 20 cm platform. Compared with non-skaters, skaters exhibited a significantly greater normalised peak GRF (3.50 ± 0.47 × body weight for skaters vs. 3.13 ± 0.45 × body weight for non-skaters), significantly shorter time to peak GRF (81.21 ± 14.01 ms for skaters vs. 93.81 ± 16.49 ms for non-skaters), and significantly longer time to stabilisation (TTS) of the GRF (2.38 ± 0.07 s for skaters vs. 2.22 ± 0.07 s for non-skaters). Skaters also confined their centre of pressure (CoP) to a significantly smaller mediolateral (M–L) (25%) and anterior–posterior (A–P) (40%) range during the landing phase, with the position of the CoP located in the mid to forefoot region. The narrower and more forward position of the CoP in skaters may at least partially explain the greater peak GRF, shorter time to peak, and longer TTS. Training and/or equipment modification serve as potential targets to decrease peak GRF by distributing it over a longer time period. More comprehensive studies including electromyography and motion capture are needed to fully characterise the unique figure skater landing strategy.     

The effects of baseball bat mass properties on swing mechanics,ground reaction forces,and swing timing

Swing trajectory and ground reaction forces (GRF) of 30 collegiate baseball batters hitting a pitched ball were compared between a standard bat, a bat with extra weight about its barrel, and a bat with extra weight in its handle. It was hypothesised that when compared to a standard bat, only a handle-weighted bat would produce equivalent bat kinematics. It was also hypothesised that hitters would not produce equivalent GRFs for each weighted bat, but would maintain equivalent timing when compared to a standard bat. Data were collected utilising a 500 Hz motion capture system and 1,000 Hz force plate system. Data between bats were considered equivalent when the 95% confidence interval of the difference was contained entirely within ±5% of the standard bat mean value. The handle-weighted bat had equivalent kinematics, whereas the barrel-weighted bat did not. Both weighted bats had equivalent peak GRF variables. Neither weighted bat maintained equivalence in the timing of bat kinematics and some peak GRFs. The ability to maintain swing kinematics with a handle-weighted bat may have implications for swing training and warm-up. However, altered timings of kinematics and kinetics require further research to understand the implications on returning to a conventionally weighted bat.     

Effect of shoe wearing time and midsole hardness on ground reaction forces,ankle stability and perceived comfort in basketball landing

ABSTRACT

This study examined the effect of wearing time on comfort perception and landing biomechanics of basketball shoes with different midsole hardness. Fifteen basketball players performed drop landing and layup first step while wearing shoes of different wearing time (new, 2-, 4-, 6- and 8-week) and hardness (soft, medium and hard). Two-way ANOVA with repeated measures was performed on GRF, ankle kinematic and comfort perception variables. Increased wearing time was associated with poorer force attenuation and comfort perception during landing activities (p < 0.05). The new shoes had significantly smaller forefoot (2- and 4-week) and rearfoot peak GRF impacts (all time conditions) in drop landing and smaller rearfoot peak GRF impact (6- and 8-week) in layup; shoes with 4-week of wearing time had significantly better perceptions of forefoot cushioning, forefoot stability, rearfoot cushioning, rearfoot stability and overall comfort than the new shoes (p < 0.05). Compared with hard shoes, the soft shoes had better rearfoot cushioning but poorer forefoot cushioning (p < 0.05). Shoe hardness and wearing time would play an influential role in GRF and comfort perception, but not in ankle kinematics. Although shoe cushioning performance would decrease even after a short wearing period, the best comfort perception was found at 4-week wearing time.     

Step-to-step spatiotemporal variables and ground reaction forces of intra-individual fastest sprinting in a single session

We aimed to investigate the step-to-step spatiotemporal variables and ground reaction forces during the acceleration phase for characterising intra-individual fastest sprinting within a single session. Step-to-step spatiotemporal variables and ground reaction forces produced by 15 male athletes were measured over a 50-m distance during repeated (three to five) 60-m sprints using a long force platform system. Differences in measured variables between the fastest and slowest trials were examined at each step until the 22nd step using a magnitude-based inferences approach. There were possibly–most likely higher running speed and step frequency (2nd to 22nd steps) and shorter support time (all steps) in the fastest trial than in the slowest trial. Moreover, for the fastest trial there were likely–very likely greater mean propulsive force during the initial four steps and possibly–very likely larger mean net anterior–posterior force until the 17th step. The current results demonstrate that better sprinting performance within a single session is probably achieved by 1) a high step frequency (except the initial step) with short support time at all steps, 2) exerting a greater mean propulsive force during initial acceleration, and 3) producing a greater mean net anterior–posterior force during initial and middle acceleration.     

The effects of an unanticipated side-cut on lower extremity kinematics and ground reaction forces during a drop landing

Unanticipated direction to cut after landing may alter the lower extremity landing biomechanics when performing landing motions. These alterations may potentially increase the risk of ACL injury. The purpose of this study was to determine if an unanticipated side-cut affects lower extremity landing biomechanics in females. Eighteen recreational female athletes participated in two blocks of testing: the first block of testing consisted of three acceptable trials of anticipated dominant limb and non-dominant limb 45-degree diagonal cutting after landing, which were performed in a counterbalanced order. The second block of testing consisted of three acceptable trials of unanticipated dominant limb and non-dominant limb diagonal cutting after landing. Data analysis mainly focused on the dominant limb landing biomechanics. Unanticipated side-cut landing, compared (paired t-test, p < 0.05) to the anticipated landings, resulted in less hip abduction and tibial internal rotation angle at initial contact (IC) and a lower maximum ankle inversion angle and a greater maximum knee abduction angle, and knee and hip displacement. Also, greater posterior GRF and a longer time to peak medial GRF were exhibited. These outcomes indicate that athletes may adapt their landing mechanics to land unsafely when encountering an unanticipated event.