year 6, Issue 2 (Summer 2018)
Ann Appl Sport Sci 2018, 6(2): 15-21 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Muñoz J, García-Rubio J, Ramos D, León K, Collado-Mateo D. Effects of Jump Difficulty on the Final Performance in Snowboard-Slopestyle-Winter Olympic Games, Socchi 2014. Ann Appl Sport Sci 2018; 6 (2) :15-21
URL: http://aassjournal.com/article-1-571-en.html
URL: http://aassjournal.com/article-1-571-en.html
1- Faculty of Sports Science, University of Extremadura, Cáceres, Spain. Facultad de Educación, Universidad Autónoma de Chile, Santiago de Chile, Chile
2- Facultad de Educación, Universidad Autónoma de Chile, Santiago de Chile, Chile
3- Faculty of Sports Science, University of Extremadura, Cáceres, Spain
4- Faculty of Sports Science, University of Extremadura, Cáceres, Spain ,danicolladom@gmail.com
2- Facultad de Educación, Universidad Autónoma de Chile, Santiago de Chile, Chile
3- Faculty of Sports Science, University of Extremadura, Cáceres, Spain
4- Faculty of Sports Science, University of Extremadura, Cáceres, Spain ,
Abstract: (7063 Views)
Background. Despite the increasing popularity of the snowboard, there is not scientific literature for sport performance indicators in this sport.
Objectives. To analyze the effects of jump difficulty on the final performance during snowboarding-slopestyle competition.
Methods. All competition sequences (n=214) from the 2014 Winter Olympic Games were analyzed. Of these, 123 were from the men´s competition and 91 were from the women´s competition. The interaction between the final score and number of rotations was calculated using regression models with quadratic or linear equations. All analyses were performed separately for women and men.
Results. Quadratic regression had better R2 and mean absolute errors than linear regression. Linear and quadratic regressions showed that the number of rotations significantly predicts final score in men. However, in the women´s competition, the curve of quadratic regression was almost identical to that from the linear regression.
Conclusion. These results have identified the importance of evaluating the jump difficulty versus its efficacy. Athletes and coaches have to weigh pros and cons of increasing the difficulty of jumps or improve jumps that are already fluent in order to master them.
Objectives. To analyze the effects of jump difficulty on the final performance during snowboarding-slopestyle competition.
Methods. All competition sequences (n=214) from the 2014 Winter Olympic Games were analyzed. Of these, 123 were from the men´s competition and 91 were from the women´s competition. The interaction between the final score and number of rotations was calculated using regression models with quadratic or linear equations. All analyses were performed separately for women and men.
Results. Quadratic regression had better R2 and mean absolute errors than linear regression. Linear and quadratic regressions showed that the number of rotations significantly predicts final score in men. However, in the women´s competition, the curve of quadratic regression was almost identical to that from the linear regression.
Conclusion. These results have identified the importance of evaluating the jump difficulty versus its efficacy. Athletes and coaches have to weigh pros and cons of increasing the difficulty of jumps or improve jumps that are already fluent in order to master them.
Full-Text [PDF 675 kb]
(1351 Downloads)
APPLICABLE REMARKS
APPLICABLE REMARKS
• The number of rotations is a key predictor of the final score in men´s competition. The relation between these two variables is quadratic. This means that there is an optimal number of rotations from which the final score starts to decrease.
Type of Study: Original Article |
Subject:
Motor Control and its Related Branches
Received: 2017/09/14 | Accepted: 2018/01/15
Received: 2017/09/14 | Accepted: 2018/01/15
References
1. Brennan SM, Kollár L, Springer G. Modelling the mechanical characteristics and on-snow performance of snowboards. Sports Engineering. 2003;6(4):193-206. [DOI:10.1007/BF02844023]
2. Engebretsen L, Steffen K, Alonso JM, Aubry M, Dvorak J, Junge A, et al. Sports injuries and illnesses during the Winter Olympic Games 2010. British journal of sports medicine. 2010;44(11):772-80. [DOI:10.1136/bjsm.2010.076992] [PMID]
3. Soligard T, Steffen K, Palmer-Green D, Aubry M, Grant M-E, Meeuwisse W, et al. Sports injuries and illnesses in the Sochi 2014 Olympic Winter Games. British journal of sports medicine. 2015;49(7):441-7. [DOI:10.1136/bjsports-2014-094538] [PMID]
4. Buffinton KW, Shooter SB, Thorpe IJ, Krywicki JJ. Laboratory, computational and field studies of snowboard dynamics. Sports Engineering. 2003;6(3):129-37. [DOI:10.1007/BF02859890]
5. Krüger A, Edelmann‐Nusser J. Biomechanical analysis in freestyle snowboarding: application of a full‐body inertial measurement system and a bilateral insole measurement system. Sports Technology. 2009;2(1‐2):17-23. [DOI:10.1080/19346182.2009.9648494]
6. Klous M, Müller E, Schwameder H. Collecting kinematic data on a ski/snowboard track with panning, tilting, and zooming cameras: is there sufficient accuracy for a biomechanical analysis? Journal of sports sciences. 2010;28(12):1345-53. [DOI:10.1080/02640414.2010.507253] [PMID]
7. Wu Q, Sun Q. A comprehensive skiing mechanics theory with implications to snowboard optimization. Medicine and science in sports and exercise. 2011;43(10):1955-63. [DOI:10.1249/MSS.0b013e318219480c] [PMID]
8. Arruza JA, Telletxea S, Azurza A, Balagué G, Brustad RJ. A Comparison of Physiological and Psychological Indicators in the Evaluation of the Work Capacity of Snowboarders. Journal of Sport Behavior. 2005;28(2):125.
9. Popovic ML, Morrow D. Stomping the Shadow: The Elevation of Snowboarding to the Olympic Pedestal from a Jungian Perspective. Sport History Review. 2008;39(2):170-91. [DOI:10.1123/shr.39.2.170]
10. Harding J, Lock D, Toohey K. A social identity analysis of technological innovation in an action sport: judging elite half-pipe snowboarding. European Sport Management Quarterly. 2016;16(2):214-32. [DOI:10.1080/16184742.2016.1140796]
11. Harding JW, Toohey K, Martin DT, Hahn AG, James DA. Technology and half-pipe snowboard competition—insight from elite-level judges (p240). The Engineering of Sport 7: Springer; 2009. p. 467-76.
12. Harding J, Small JW, James DA, editors. Feature extraction of performance variables in elite half-pipe snowboarding using body mounted inertial sensors. Microelectronics, MEMS, and Nanotechnology; 2007: International Society for Optics and Photonics.
13. Harding JW, James DA. Performance assessment innovations for elite snowboarding. Procedia Engineering. 2010;2(2):2919-24. [DOI:10.1016/j.proeng.2010.04.088]
14. Harding JW, Mackintosh CG, Hahn AG, James DA. Classification of aerial acrobatics in elite half-pipe snowboarding using body mounted inertial sensors (p237). The Engineering of Sport 7: Springer; 2009. p. 447-56.
15. Gathercole R, Sporer B, Stellingwerff T, Sleivert G. Alternative countermovement jump analysis to quantify acute neuromuscular fatigue. International journal of sports physiology and performance. 2015;10:84-92. [DOI:10.1123/ijspp.2013-0413] [PMID]
16. Hilfiker R, Hübner K, Lorenz T, Marti B. Effects of drop jumps added to the warm-up of elite sport athletes with a high capacity for explosive force development. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 2007;21(2):550-5.
https://doi.org/10.1519/00124278-200705000-00045 [DOI:10.1519/R-20215.1]
17. Sporer BC, Cote A, Sleivert G. Warm up practices in elite snowboard athletes. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2012;7(3):295-7. [DOI:10.1123/ijspp.7.3.295] [PMID]
18. Platzer H-P, Raschner C, Patterson C, Lembert S. Comparison of physical characteristics and performance among elite snowboarders. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 2009;23(5):1427-32. [DOI:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181aa1d9f] [PMID]
19. Barris S, Button C. A review of vision-based motion analysis in sport. Sports Medicine. 2008;38(12):1025-43. [DOI:10.2165/00007256-200838120-00006] [PMID]
20. Randolph JJ. Free-Marginal Multirater Kappa (multirater K [free]): An Alternative to Fleiss' Fixed-Marginal Multirater Kappa. Joensuu Learning and Instruction Symposium 2005; Joensuu, Finland. 2005.
21. Pedhazur E, Pedhazur Schmelkin L. Exploratory factor analysis. Measurement, Design and Analysis: an integrated approach. 1991:590-630.
22. Gonzales J, Mishra S, Camp RD. For the Win: Risk‐Sensitive Decision‐Making in Teams. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. 2016.
23. Leyton M, García J, Morenas J, Roldán A. Relationship between elements and score in floor exercise, in Artistic Gymnastic, in the Beijing 2008 Olympics Games. E-balonmano com: Revista de Ciencias del Deporte. 2010;6(1):39-47.
24. Veličković S, Petković D, Petković E. A case study about differences in characteristics of the run-up approach on the vault between top-class and middle-class gymnasts. Science of Gymnastics Journal. 2011;3(1):25-34.
25. Kirby R. Development of a real‐time performance measurement and feedback system for alpine skiers. Sports Technology. 2009;2(1‐2):43-52. [DOI:10.1080/19346182.2009.9648498]
26. Fuss FK. Instrumentation of athletes and equipment during competitions. Sports Technology. 2008;1(6):235-6. [DOI:10.1080/19346182.2008.9648479]
27. Casartelli N, Müller R, Maffiuletti NA. Validity and reliability of the Myotest accelerometric system for the assessment of vertical jump height. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 2010;24(11):3186-93. [DOI:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181d8595c] [PMID]
28. Sato K, Smith SL, Sands WA. Validation of an accelerometer for measuring sport performance. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 2009;23(1):341-7. [DOI:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181876a01] [PMID]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
