Printer Friendly

Statistical analysis of balance and anthropometric variables of male basketball players, ages 9-11.

Introduction

Basketball is a physically demanding team game with a variety of movements played by both sexes of all ages (H. Wissel, 2004, E. Uzicanin, 2008). These movements are based on running at different intensities and lengths of times, with sudden fluctuations in direction and speed, fast hand and feet movements, different kinds of jumps, throwing and catching the ball (S. Hatchell, 2006), as well as sudden stopping and starting. Moreover, these dynamic movements form the basis of fundamental basketball skills, such as shooting, passing, dribbling, rebounding, defending and moving both with and without the ball, all of which individual players must master to be successful in a team (H. Wissel, 2004). In order to effectively coordinate these movements and to achieve the maximum potential, athletes must master balance, which is essential for success in any sport (C. Sigmon, 2003, T. Emma, 2006).

Static balance can be defined as "... the ability to maintain a base of support with minimal movement" and dynamic balance as "...the ability to perform a task while maintaining a stable position" (D.A. Winter, A.E. Patla, J.S. Frank, 1990). In short, good balance means that an athlete's body is in control and has the capacity to make quick movements (M.P. Reiman, R.C. Manske, 2009). Balance is one of the most important attributes a player can possess (H. Wissel, 2004). After balance skills are mastered, other features, such as speed, agility, and explosiveness can be trained and developed to the fullest (T. Emma, 2006).

Anthropometric characteristics are also among one of the most significant factors that affect body movements and sports performance. In performance sports, such as basketball, physical characteristics particularly play a significant role in athletes and team success (C. Sen, C. Durgun, M.E. Kozanoglu, 2007). The purpose of this study is to determine whether there is a relationship between body fat percentages and extremity segmental length (upper and lower) with balance in players, ages 9 to 11, of the Gazi University Junior Male Basketball Team.

Material and Methods

Results

Measurements

* Heights of athletes were measured using the Lafeyette measurement tool band on bare foot.

* Body weight measurements were taken using the Tanita brand scale, where, athletes only wore shorts.

* 3 variables: arm span, arm and leg were measured in centimeters using the Lafeyette measurement tool band.

* Skinfold measurements were taken using the Holtain brand skinfold caliper.

* Balance measurements were taken using the Lafayatte 16020 IRF/E stabilometer.

Measurement Methods

Skinfold Measurements:

Skinfold measurements were taken from 7 different areas: Triceps, Biceps, Chest, Scapula, iliac, Abdomen and Femur. Body fat percentages were calculated with the "Zorba" Formula (VY% = 0.99 + 0.0047 (body weight) + 0.132 (skinfold of 7 regions). Anthropometry Measurements:

Anthropometry measurements were taken from 3 areas: Arm Span, Arm and Leg. Balance Measurements:

Balance measurements involved the transfer of weight from right foot to left foot and left foot to right foot. These were repeated 3 times, the first one being the trial measurement. For these 3 measurements, the trial measurement for each direction was not taken into account and the greatest values of the latter 2 measurements were used in analysis of this study.

The measurements were recorded by reading the digital indications on the balance device. Each measurement took 30 seconds and the time during which the athlete was in balance was recorded in unit of seconds. Loss of balance measurements were calculated by subtracting the duration of maintained balance from 30 seconds, the maximum period.

Statistical Analysis

Data was analyzed with SPSS v16.0, 2 sampling t-test, Pearson's correlation coefficient and descriptive statistics analysis methods.

As indicated in the Table 1, the mean height of the subjects is 147.92 (cm), the mean weight is 42.83 (kg), the mean arm span is 147.08 (cm), the mean arm length is 64.69 (cm), the mean leg length is 83.03 (cm), the mean triceps is 14.65 (mm), the mean biceps is 8.82 (mm), the mean chest is 13.06 (mm), the mean scapula is 11.95 (mm), the mean iliac is 11.48 (mm), the mean abdomen is 18.08 (mm) and the mean femur is 23.27 (mm).

The mean DMB of the subjects who started the balance transfer from the right foot was 16.01 and the mean LOB was 13.99.

The mean DMB of the subjects transferring the balance from the left foot was 19.01 and the mean LOB was 10.99.

The mean DMB of the subjects irrespective of the foot direction for the balance transfer was 17.52 and the mean LOB was 12.48.

In the table above there was a negative significant relationship between DMB starting the balance transfer from the right foot and Height (0.000), Weight (0.006), Arm Span (0.001), Arm (0.000), Leg (0.000) and Iliac (0.031).

In the table above there was a positive strong relationship between LOB starting the balance transfer from the right foot and Height (0.000), Weight (0.006), Arm Span (0.001), Arm (0.000), Leg (0.000) and Iliac (0.031).

In the Table 7, a negative relationship was seen between DMB measurements of the subjects who started the balance transfer from the left foot and all parameters.

Table 8 revealed a relationship between LOB measurements of the subjects who started the balance transfer from the left foot and all parameters.

In the table above there was a negative significant relationship between DMB values and Height (0.000), Weight (0.001), Arm Span (0.000), Arm (0.000), Leg (0.000), Triceps (0.013), Scapula (0.0199), Iliac (0.002) and Femur (0.007).

Table 10 showed a significant relationship between LOB values and Height (0.000), Weight (0.001), Arm Span (0.000), Arm (0.000), Leg (0.000), Triceps (0.013), Scapula (0.0199), Iliac (0.002) and Femur (0.007).

As indicated in the table above, there was no relationship between the body fat percentage and the balance.

In the table above, there was a significant relationship between DMB and LOB values with the body fat percentages of the subjects who started the balance transfer from the left foot.

There was a reverse relationship between the duration of maintaining balance and the body fat

Discussion and Conclusion

Height, Weight and Body Fat Percentage

In this study, Gazi University Sports Club Male Junior Basketball Team players had the mean height of 147.92 cm, weight of 42.83 and body fat percentage of 14.56. The findings obtained in the study are consistent with the literature. In this study, the mean body fat percentages were calculated using the "Zorba Formula".

Balance and Correlation

The mean DMB of the subjects who started the balance transfer from the right foot was 16.01 and the mean LOB was 13.99. The mean DMB of the subjects who started the balance transfer from the left foot was 19.01 and the mean LOB was 10.99.

Irrespective of the foot direction for the balance transfer, the mean DMB of the subjects was 17.52, and the mean LOB was 12.48. There was a negative significant relationship between DMB of the subjects who started the balance transfer from the right foot and height (0.000), weight (0.006), arm span (0.001), arm (0.000), leg (0.000) and iliac (0.031). There was a positive significant relationship between LOB of the subjects who started the balance transfer from the right foot and height (0.000), weight (0.006), arm span (0.001), arm (0.000), leg (0.000) and iliac (0.031). There was a negative relationship between DMB measurements of the subjects who started the balance transfer from the left foot and all parameters; however there was a positive relationship between LOB measurements and all parameters.

Irrespective of the foot direction for the balance transfer, there was a negative significant relationship between DMB values of the subjects and height (0.000), weight (0.001), arm span (0.000), arm (0.000), leg (0.000), triceps (0.013), scapula (0.0199), iliac (0.002) and femur (0.007).

Irrespective of the foot direction for the balance transfer, there was a positive relationship between LOB values of the subjects and height (0.000), weight (0.001), arm span (0.000), arm (0.000), leg (0.000), triceps (0.013), scapula (0.0199), iliac (0.002) and femur (0.007). No relationship was found between DMB and LOB starting the balance transfer from the left foot with the body fat percentage and the balance.

It was found that there was a significant difference between DMB and LOB values and the body fat percentages of the subjects who started the balance transfer from the left foot. There was a reverse correlation between the DMB and the body fat percentage of subjects who started the balance transfer from the left foot; there was a positive relationship between the LOB and the body fat percentages. As the body fat percentage of the subjects, who started the balance transfer from the left foot, increased, DMB decreases and LOB increases. Under light of the results percentage of the subjects who started the balance transfer from the left foot; and there was a positive relationship between LOB and the body fat percentages. As the body fat percentage of an athlete, who started the balance transfer with the left foot, increased, DMB decreases and LOB increases.

of this study, it was observed that anthropometric measurements such as height and weight had a significant effect on the balance parameters.

As indicated in the result section, as the height, weight, arm, leg and arm span length are increased, LOB in the body increases. In addition to being one of the motoric parameters, balance is important due to the characteristics of basketball. Therefore, it can be concluded that the athletes with higher extremity length should be subject to special balance trainings.

There was a relationship between the skinfold measurements and the balance parameter. Regional excessive weight has a negative effect on the balance. For this reason, the trainings should aim to give the athletes a more homogenous physical structure so that an increase can be observed in balance skill.

Pinar et al. studied balance on dancers (S. Pinar, L. Tavacioglu, O.E. Atilgan, 2006, 259-265, S. Pinar, L. Tavacioglu, O.E. Atilgan, 2006, 297-302). The findings of Pinar's study are consistent with the results of this study. The researchers reported that there was a positive relationship between the height and the static balance levels of the dancers (S. Pinar, L. Tavacioglu, O.E. Atilgan, 2006, 259-265, S. Pinar, L. Tavacioglu, O.E. Atilgan, 2006, 297-302). It was found that as the height of the dancers decreased, duration of maintaining the balance increased; in other words, it was concluded that the height and the balance were reversely correlated. Based on the data obtained from these two studies, it can be suggested that height factor has a significant effect on the balance.

T. Tot (2009) found a significant relationship between the weight and the balance measurements on elite male basketball players. The findings of Tot are consistent with the results of this study. As the weight of athletes increased, the balance levels decreased. Based on these findings it can also be suggested that the weight affects the balance at all ages. Therefore, maintaining fitness levels of athletes is also important for balance (T. Tot, 2009).

The ability of balance shows individual variations. As a result of the balance measurements at certain intervals, learning factor become active and affects balance skill. In this study, it was also found that, in general terms, among three measurement values taken from the subjects, the highest measurements were the third measurements.

Balance activities should be given importance at young ages, because an athlete starts his/her sports career at a very young age.

As balance is a motor characteristic, balance trainings at young age increase balance levels of the athletes and this has a positive effect on future performances of athletes (I. Holm, N. Vellestad, 2008).

References

EMMA, T., 2006, Peak Conditioning Training For Young Athletes, Choaches Choice.

HATCHELL, S., 2006, The Complete Guide to Coaching Girls' Basketball, McGraw-Hill/Ragged Mountain Pres, USA, 26.

HOLM, I., VOLLESTAD, N., 2008, Significant Effect of Gender on Hamstring-to-Quadriceps Strength Ratio and Static Balance in Prepubescent Children From 7 to 12 Years of Age, The American Journal of Sports Medicine, 36:2007-2013.

PINAR, S., TAVACIOGLU, L., ATILGAN, O.E., 2006, Dansgtlarda Denge Becerileriyle ilgili Olabilecek Faktorlerin incelenmesi, 9. Uluslar Arasi Spor Bilimleri Kongresi Bildiri Kitabi, 259-265.

PINAR, S., TAVACIOGLU, L., ATILGAN, O.E., 2006, Yetiskin Dansgtlarda Denge Becerisinin Sergilenmesinde Cinsiyete Baglt Farkltltklartn Degerlendirilmesi, 9. Uluslar Arasi Spor Bilimleri Kongresi Bildiri Kitabi, 297-302.

REIMAN, M.P., MANSKE, R.C., 2009, Functional Testing in Human Performance, 103-116.

SIGMON, C., 2003, 52-Week Basketball Training, Human Kinetics, 187.

SEN, C., DURGUN,C., KOZANOGLU, M.E., 2007, Deplasmanlt Ligde Basketbol Oynayan Sporculartn Ust Ekstremite Morfolojik Ozelliklerinin Mevkilere Gore Degerlendirilmesi, Spormetre Beden Egitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 3,135.

TOT, T., 2009, Elit Duzeydeki Erkek Hentbol ve Basketbolculartn Antropometrik Olgumleri ve Vucut Yag Oranlart ile Denge Duzeyleri Arastndaki iliskinin Arasttrtlmast, Yuksek Lisans Tezi, Gazi Universitesi, Ankara..

UZICANIN, E., 2008, Elementary Games In Basketball Traning, Sport Scientific And Practical Aspects, International Scientific Journal of Kinesiology, 5, 1-2: 70-74.

Olga Sevim, Ceren Suveren

Gazi University, School of Physical Education and Sports, Ankara, TURKEY

Email: sevimliolga@gmail.com
Table 1: Minimum, maximum, mean and standard deviation
values of each subject's height, weight, arm span, arm,
leg, triceps, biceps, chest, scapula, iliac, abdomen
and femur.

           Minimum   Maximum   Mean Values   Standart Deviation

Height       130       165       147.92             9.81
Weight      27.5      63.5        42.83            11.46
Arm Span     130       164       147.08             8.96
Arm           54        74        64.69             4.83
Leg           70       102        83.03             7.68
Triceps      5.1        29        14.65             6.46
Biceps       3.3      17.3         8.82             4.14
Chest        4.1        27        13.06             6.99
Scapula      4.2        29        11.95             6.94
Iliac        3.2        23        11.48             6.22
Abdomen       5         30        18.08             7.22
Femur        9.4        37        23.27             7.56

           Minimum   Maximum   Mean Values   Standard Deviation

Height       130       165       147.92             9.81
Weight      27.5      63.5        42.83            11.46
Arm Span     130       164       147.08             8.96
Arm           54        74        64.69             4.83
Leg           70       102        83.03             7.68
Triceps      5.1        29        14.65             6.46
Biceps       3.3      17.3         8.82             4.14
Chest        4.1        27        13.06             6.99
Scapula      4.2        29        11.95             6.94
Iliac        3.2        23        11.48             6.22
Abdomen        5        30        18.08             7.22
Femur        9.4        37        23.27             7.56

Table 2: Minimum, maximum, mean and standard deviation values of DMB
(the duration of maintaining balance) and LOB (loss of balance)
measurements of the subjects starting balance transfer from the
right foot.

Starting Balance Transfer from the Right Foot (n = 26)

      Minimum   Maximum   Mean Values   Standart Deviation

DMB    10.43     27.9        16.01             4.4
LOB     2.1      19.57       13.99             4.4

Table 3: Minimum, maximum, mean and standard deviation values of DMB
and LOB measurements of the subjects who started the balance transfer
from the left foot.

      Starting the Balance Transfer from the Left Foot (n=26)

      Minimum   Maximum   Mean Values   Standart Deviation

DMB    12.64     28.14       19.01             4.27
LOB    1.86      17.36       10.99             4.27

Table 4: Minimum, maximum, mean and standard deviation values of
DMB and LOB measurements of the subjects irrespective of the
foot direction for the balance transfer.

      Minimum   Maximum   Mean Values   Standart Deviation

DMB    12.03     28.02      17.52              4.12
LOB    1.98      17.97      12.48              4.12

The mean DMB of the subjects irrespective of the foot direction
for the balance transfer was 17.52 and the mean LOB was 12.48.

Table 5: The relationship between DMB of the subjects who started
the balance transfer from the right foot and the other parameters.

                        Starting the Balance Transfer from
                              the Right Foot (n = 6)

                Pearson
               Coefficient
                 ([rho])       P     Results

DMB-Height       -0.693      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Weight       -0.521      0.006   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Arm Span     -0.625      0.001   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Arm          -0.668      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Leg          -0.698      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Triceps      -0.340      0.090   There is no relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Biceps       -0.243      0.231   There is no relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Chest        -0.234      0.250   There is no relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Scapula      -0.326      0.104   There is no relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Iliac        -0.424      0.031   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Abdomen      -0.229      0.261   There is no relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Femur        -0.383      0.054   There is no relationship between
                                       two parameters

Table 6: The relationship between LOB of the subjects who started
the balance transfer from the right foot and the other parameters

                          Starting the Balance Transfer
                            from the Right Foot (n=26)

                Pearson
               Coefficient     p     Results
                 ([rho])

LOB-Height        0.693      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Weight        0.521      0.006   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Arm Span      0.625      0.001   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Arm           0.668      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Leg           0.698      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Triceps       0.340      0.090   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Biceps        0.243      0.231   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Chest         0.234      0.250   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Scapula       0.326      0.104   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Iliac         0.424      0.031   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Abdomen       0.229      0.261   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Femur         0.383      0.054   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters

Table 7: The relationship between DMB of the subjects who started
the balance transfer from the left foot and the other parameters

                         Starting the Balance Transfer
                           from the Left Foot (n = 26)

                Pearson
               Coefficient
                 ([rho])       p     Results

DMB-Height       -0.691      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Weight       -0.653      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Arm Span     -0.663      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Arm          -0.683      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Leg          -0.697      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Triceps      -0.579      0.002   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Biceps       -0.495      0.010   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Chest        -0.469      0.016   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Scapula      -0.546      0.004   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Iliac        -0.672      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Abdomen      -0.509      0.008   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Femur        -0.595      0.001   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters

Table 8: The relationship between LOB of the subjects who started
the balance transfer from the left foot and the other parameters

                           Starting the Balance Transfer
                            from the Left Foot (n = 26)

                Pearson
               Coefficient
                 ([rho])       p     Results

LOB-Height        0.691      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Weight        0.653      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Arm Span      0.663      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Arm           0.683      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Leg           0.697      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Triceps       0.579      0.002   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Biceps        0.495      0.010   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Chest         0.469      0.016   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Scapula       0.546      0.004   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Iliac         0.672      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Abdomen       0.509      0.008   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Femur         0.595      0.001   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters

Table 9: Comparison of DMB values of the subjects irrespective of the
foot direction for the balance transfer and height, weight, arm span,
arm, leg, triceps, biceps, chest, scapula, iliac, abdomen and femur
variables.

                        Irrespective of the Foot Direction
                         for the Balance Transfer (n = 26)

                 Pearson
               Coefficient
                 ([rho])       p     Results

DMB-Height       -0.727      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Weight       -0.616      0.001   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Arm Span     -0.676      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Arm          -0.710      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Leg          -0.733      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Triceps      -0.481      0.013   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Biceps       -0.386      0.051   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Chest        -0.368      0.065   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Scapula      -0.457      0.019   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Iliac        -0.574      0.002   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Abdomen      -0.386      0.052   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DMB-Femur        -0.512      0.007   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters

Table 10: Comparison of LOB values of the subjects irrespective of
the foot direction for the balance transfer and height, weight, arm
span, arm, leg, triceps, biceps, chest, scapula, iliac, abdomen and
femur variables.

                       Irrespective of the Foot Direction for
                            the Balance Transfer (n = 26)

                Pearson
               Coefficient
                 ([rho])       p     Results

LOB-Height        0.727      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Weight        0.616      0.001   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Arm Span      0.676      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Arm           0.710      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Leg           0.733      0.000   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Triceps       0.481      0.013   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Biceps        0.386      0.051   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Chest         0.368      0.065   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Scapula       0.457      0.019   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Iliac         0.574      0.002   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
DK-Abdomen        0.386      0.052   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters
LOB-Femur         0.512      0.007   There is a relationship between
                                       two parameters

Table 11: Minimum, maximum, mean and standard deviation values
of body weight percentages of the subjects

                     Range   Minimum   Maximum

Body Weight          20.36    5.89      26.25
Percentages (n=26)

                     Mean Values   Standart Deviation

Body Weight             14.56             5.68
Percentages (n=26)

In the table above, the mean body fat percentage of the subjects
were 14.56. These mean values are consistent with literature data.

Table 12: The relationship between DMB and LOB with the body fat
percentage of the subjects who started the balance transfer from
the right foot.

                              Starting the Balance Transfer
                               from the Right Foot (n = 26)

                       Pearson
                      Coefficient
                        ([rho])       p     Results

Body Fat Percentage      0.337      0.093   There is no relationship
  DMB                                         between two parameters
Body Fat Percentage      0.337      0.093   There is no relationship
  LOB                                         between two parameters

Table 13: The relationship between DMB and LOB with the body fat
percentage of the subjects who started the balance transfer from
the left foot.

                              Starting the Balance Transfer
                               from the Left Foot (n = 26)

                        Pearson
                      Coefficient
                          (P)         p     Results

Body Fat Percentage     -0.592      0.001   There is a relationship
  DMB                                         between two parameters
Body Fat Percentage      0.592      0.001   There is a relationship
  LOB                                         between two parameters
COPYRIGHT 2010 Ovidius University of Constanta
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2010 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:SPORT AND PERFORMANCE
Author:Sevim, Olga; Suveren, Ceren
Publication:Ovidius University Annals, Series Physical Education and Sport/Science, Movement and Health
Article Type:Report
Geographic Code:7TURK
Date:Jun 1, 2010
Words:3997
Previous Article:Angiotensin-converting enzyme polymorphism in elite taekwondo athletes of Turkish and Azerbaijan taekwondo teams.
Next Article:The comparative study of anthropometrical characteristics in Tabriz elite football and volleyball players.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters