Gymnastics: Comparative analysis of selected Biomechanic

The aim of our research was to study the relationships between performance variables in a support backward swing (SBS), which was used as a progressive step in the learning procedure for a 1#fr1/4> straddle-piked front somersault and the swing prior to a 1#fr1/4> straddle-piked front somersaul...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Sports biomechanics 2002-01, Vol.1 (1), p.69-78
Hauptverfasser: Kolar, Edvard, Kolar, Katarina Andlovic, Stuhec, Stanko
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 78
container_issue 1
container_start_page 69
container_title Sports biomechanics
container_volume 1
creator Kolar, Edvard
Kolar, Katarina Andlovic
Stuhec, Stanko
description The aim of our research was to study the relationships between performance variables in a support backward swing (SBS), which was used as a progressive step in the learning procedure for a 1#fr1/4> straddle-piked front somersault and the swing prior to a 1#fr1/4> straddle-piked front somersault from support to bent arm support on the parallel bars (5/4S). Mitja Petkovsek, parallel bars gold medallist at the 2000 EC in Bremen, performed these elements. Kinematic analysis involved CMAS software (Praha, 1993), and the Suskana body segment model that has 17 points and 15 segments. Kinetic variables were estimated using 2D IMGIM software, which has 8 points and 6 segments (Colja and Cuk, 1994). The results indicated that some kinematic aspects of the two types of swings were similar but there were important differences in kinetic aspects of the motion. During the swing for the 5/4S, force and torque were higher than in the SBS.
doi_str_mv 10.1080/14763140208522787
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_20872783</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>20872783</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_miscellaneous_208727833</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNjksKwjAUALNQsH4O4C4rd9UkrSa4VPwcwH0J8RUj-dS-VOjtreABXA0MsxhClpytOVNsw0u5K3jJBFNbIaSSI5J9XT5IPiFTxCdjXHFRZkRdeh80JmtwT4_RN7rVyb6B6qBdjxZprCmCA5PgTg82ejAPHayZk3GtHcLixxlZnU-34zVv2vjqAFPlLRpwTgeIHVbDjBxeiuLv8ANaJj4a</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>20872783</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Gymnastics: Comparative analysis of selected Biomechanic</title><source>Taylor &amp; Francis</source><creator>Kolar, Edvard ; Kolar, Katarina Andlovic ; Stuhec, Stanko</creator><creatorcontrib>Kolar, Edvard ; Kolar, Katarina Andlovic ; Stuhec, Stanko</creatorcontrib><description>The aim of our research was to study the relationships between performance variables in a support backward swing (SBS), which was used as a progressive step in the learning procedure for a 1#fr1/4&gt; straddle-piked front somersault and the swing prior to a 1#fr1/4&gt; straddle-piked front somersault from support to bent arm support on the parallel bars (5/4S). Mitja Petkovsek, parallel bars gold medallist at the 2000 EC in Bremen, performed these elements. Kinematic analysis involved CMAS software (Praha, 1993), and the Suskana body segment model that has 17 points and 15 segments. Kinetic variables were estimated using 2D IMGIM software, which has 8 points and 6 segments (Colja and Cuk, 1994). The results indicated that some kinematic aspects of the two types of swings were similar but there were important differences in kinetic aspects of the motion. During the swing for the 5/4S, force and torque were higher than in the SBS.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1476-3141</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/14763140208522787</identifier><language>eng</language><ispartof>Sports biomechanics, 2002-01, Vol.1 (1), p.69-78</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kolar, Edvard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kolar, Katarina Andlovic</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stuhec, Stanko</creatorcontrib><title>Gymnastics: Comparative analysis of selected Biomechanic</title><title>Sports biomechanics</title><description>The aim of our research was to study the relationships between performance variables in a support backward swing (SBS), which was used as a progressive step in the learning procedure for a 1#fr1/4&gt; straddle-piked front somersault and the swing prior to a 1#fr1/4&gt; straddle-piked front somersault from support to bent arm support on the parallel bars (5/4S). Mitja Petkovsek, parallel bars gold medallist at the 2000 EC in Bremen, performed these elements. Kinematic analysis involved CMAS software (Praha, 1993), and the Suskana body segment model that has 17 points and 15 segments. Kinetic variables were estimated using 2D IMGIM software, which has 8 points and 6 segments (Colja and Cuk, 1994). The results indicated that some kinematic aspects of the two types of swings were similar but there were important differences in kinetic aspects of the motion. During the swing for the 5/4S, force and torque were higher than in the SBS.</description><issn>1476-3141</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2002</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNjksKwjAUALNQsH4O4C4rd9UkrSa4VPwcwH0J8RUj-dS-VOjtreABXA0MsxhClpytOVNsw0u5K3jJBFNbIaSSI5J9XT5IPiFTxCdjXHFRZkRdeh80JmtwT4_RN7rVyb6B6qBdjxZprCmCA5PgTg82ejAPHayZk3GtHcLixxlZnU-34zVv2vjqAFPlLRpwTgeIHVbDjBxeiuLv8ANaJj4a</recordid><startdate>20020101</startdate><enddate>20020101</enddate><creator>Kolar, Edvard</creator><creator>Kolar, Katarina Andlovic</creator><creator>Stuhec, Stanko</creator><scope>7TS</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20020101</creationdate><title>Gymnastics: Comparative analysis of selected Biomechanic</title><author>Kolar, Edvard ; Kolar, Katarina Andlovic ; Stuhec, Stanko</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_miscellaneous_208727833</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2002</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kolar, Edvard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kolar, Katarina Andlovic</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stuhec, Stanko</creatorcontrib><collection>Physical Education Index</collection><jtitle>Sports biomechanics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kolar, Edvard</au><au>Kolar, Katarina Andlovic</au><au>Stuhec, Stanko</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Gymnastics: Comparative analysis of selected Biomechanic</atitle><jtitle>Sports biomechanics</jtitle><date>2002-01-01</date><risdate>2002</risdate><volume>1</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>69</spage><epage>78</epage><pages>69-78</pages><issn>1476-3141</issn><abstract>The aim of our research was to study the relationships between performance variables in a support backward swing (SBS), which was used as a progressive step in the learning procedure for a 1#fr1/4&gt; straddle-piked front somersault and the swing prior to a 1#fr1/4&gt; straddle-piked front somersault from support to bent arm support on the parallel bars (5/4S). Mitja Petkovsek, parallel bars gold medallist at the 2000 EC in Bremen, performed these elements. Kinematic analysis involved CMAS software (Praha, 1993), and the Suskana body segment model that has 17 points and 15 segments. Kinetic variables were estimated using 2D IMGIM software, which has 8 points and 6 segments (Colja and Cuk, 1994). The results indicated that some kinematic aspects of the two types of swings were similar but there were important differences in kinetic aspects of the motion. During the swing for the 5/4S, force and torque were higher than in the SBS.</abstract><doi>10.1080/14763140208522787</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1476-3141
ispartof Sports biomechanics, 2002-01, Vol.1 (1), p.69-78
issn 1476-3141
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_20872783
source Taylor & Francis
title Gymnastics: Comparative analysis of selected Biomechanic
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-29T12%3A14%3A29IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Gymnastics:%20Comparative%20analysis%20of%20selected%20Biomechanic&rft.jtitle=Sports%20biomechanics&rft.au=Kolar,%20Edvard&rft.date=2002-01-01&rft.volume=1&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=69&rft.epage=78&rft.pages=69-78&rft.issn=1476-3141&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/14763140208522787&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E20872783%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=20872783&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true