Statistical Differences in Set Analysis in Badminton at the RIO 2016 Olympic Games

被引:18
|
作者
Torres-Luque, Gema [1 ]
Ivan Fernandez-Garcia, Angel [2 ]
Carlos Blanca-Torres, Juan [1 ]
Kondric, Miran [3 ]
Cabello-Manrique, David [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Jaen, Dept Didact Mus Plast & Body Express, Jaen, Spain
[2] Univ Zaragoza, Dept Physiatry & Nursing, Zaragoza, Spain
[3] Univ Ljubljana, Fac Sport, Dept Racket Sports, Ljubljana, Slovenia
[4] Univ Granada, Dept Phys Educ & Sports, Granada, Spain
来源
FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY | 2019年 / 10卷
关键词
notational analysis; match analysis; racket sports; performance indicators; performance analysis; badminton; MENS SINGLES; MATCHES; COMPETITION; PLAYERS; TENNIS;
D O I
10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00731
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
The aim of the present study was to determine statistical differences in a set of badminton competition matches in five different modalities with regard to competition level (Group Phase vs. Eliminatory Phase). Data from 453 sets (125 in men's singles; 108 sets in women's singles; 77 sets in men's doubles; 73 in women's doubles and 70 in mixed doubles) from the RIO 2016 Olympics Games were recorded and classified in two groups of variables to analyze variables related to match (5) and set (15). A descriptive analysis and univariate test (Mann-Whitney U) for non-parametric data were conducted. The results show in men's and women's singles all the variables related to match were higher in the Elimination Phase than in the Group Phase (p < 0.01). In Sets 1 and 3, the longest set duration, rally and average rally were found in the Elimination Phase than Group Stage (p < 0.05). In women's singles, these differences were also recorded in Set 2. For doubles, the results are more stable among groups. Men's doubles had a longer duration of the match and set (sets 1 and set 2) (p < 0.01), and also scored highest for average rally strokes (sets 1 3) < 0.05) and shuttles used in the Elimination Phase vs. the Group Phase along the match (p < 0.01). In women's doubles, more shuttles were used in a match in the Elimination than in the Group Phase. Moreover, the same results are established for Set 2, including for average rally. Mixed doubles saw no match going to three sets. However, the greatest differences showed a longer rally and average rally being registered in the Elimination than in the Group Phase. In conclusion, the timing factors of the badminton singles and doubles games were different in the Elimination and Group Phases. This information may help players and coaches prepare and administer different types of workouts or, more specifically, competition schedules adapted to the characteristics of modern badminton.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Statistical Comparison of Singles Badminton Matches at the London 2012 and Rio De Janeiro 2016 Olympic Games
    Torres-Luque, Gema
    Carlos Blanca-Torres, Juan
    Cabello-Manrique, David
    Kondric, Miran
    JOURNAL OF HUMAN KINETICS, 2020, 75 (01) : 177 - 184
  • [2] Serving Patterns of Women's Badminton Medalists in the Rio 2016 Olympic Games
    Gomez-Ruano, Miguel-Angel
    Cid, Adrian
    Rivas, Fernando
    Ruiz, Luis-Miguel
    FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY, 2020, 11
  • [3] Olympic education at the Rio 2016 Games: A georeferenced analysis
    Kirst, Flavio Valdir
    Tavares Da Silva, Otavio Guimaraes
    JOURNAL OF HUMAN SPORT AND EXERCISE, 2019, 14 : S412 - S422
  • [4] Gender differences through the lens of Rio: Australian Olympic primetime coverage of the 2016 Rio Summer Olympic Games
    Xu, Qingru
    Billings, Andrew C.
    Scott, Olan K. M.
    Lewis, Melvin
    Sharpe, Stirling
    INTERNATIONAL REVIEW FOR THE SOCIOLOGY OF SPORT, 2019, 54 (05) : 517 - 535
  • [5] Doping control analysis at the Rio 2016 Olympic and Paralympic Games
    Gualberto Pereira, Henrique Marcelo
    Sardela, Vinicius Figueiredo
    Padilha, Monica Costa
    Mirotti, Luciana
    Casilli, Alessandro
    de Oliveira, Fabio Azamor
    Cavalcanti, Gustavo de Albuquerque
    Lisandro Rodrigues, Lucas Martins
    Dutra de Araujo, Amanda Lessa
    Levy, Rachel Santos
    Castelo Teixeira, Pedro Antonio
    Gomes de Oliveira, Felipe Alves
    Giordani Duarte, Ana Carolina
    Dudenhoeffer Carneiro, Ana Carolina
    Medeiros Evaristo, Joseph Albert
    Cardoso dos Santos, Gustavo Ramalho
    Verissimo da Costa, Giovanni Carlo
    Castro, Fernando de Lima
    Sousa Nogueira, Fabio Cesar
    Scalco, Fernanda Bertao
    Pizzatti, Luciana
    de Aquino Neto, Francisco Radler
    DRUG TESTING AND ANALYSIS, 2017, 9 (11-12) : 1658 - 1672
  • [6] TENNIS COMPETITION STATISTICS DIFFERENCES IN RIO DE JANEIRO 2016 OLYMPIC GAMES
    Sanchez-Alcaraz Martinez, Bernardino Javier
    Courel-Ibanez, Javier
    Fernandez-Amor, Jose Luis
    Sanchez-Pay, Alejandro
    Alfonso-Asencio, M.
    REVISTA IBEROAMERICANA DE CIENCIAS DE LA ACTIVIDAD FISICA Y EL DEPORTE, 2019, 8 (03): : 1 - 12
  • [7] Olympic Games Rio 2016: The Legacy for Coaches
    Padrao dos Santos, Ana Lucia
    PHYSICAL CULTURE AND SPORT STUDIES AND RESEARCH, 2019, 81 (01) : 87 - 98
  • [8] Rio 2016 Olympic Games and imaterial legacy
    Dasilva, Carolina Fernandes
    Guarise Katcipis, Luiz Felipe
    Mazo, Janice Zarpellon
    JOURNAL OF HUMAN SPORT AND EXERCISE, 2018, 13 : S17 - S25
  • [9] Equine vets at the Rio 2016 Olympic Games
    Malcolm, Emma
    AUSTRALIAN VETERINARY JOURNAL, 2016, 94 (10) : N2 - +
  • [10] The Olympic Games 2016 in Rio de Janeiro
    Goeppert, Knut
    Stockhusen, Knut
    STAHLBAU, 2014, 83 (06) : 390 - 393