Journal List > Korean J Sports Med > v.31(2) > 1054513

TOOLS
Kim and Kim: The Analysis of Physical Fitness and Performance Level Depending on Play Style in Female Table Tennis Players
Clinical Article

Korean J Sports Med 2013;31(2):92-98.

Published online: 10 January 2013

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5763/kjsm.2013.31.2.92

The Analysis of Physical Fitness and Performance Level Depending on Play Style in Female Table Tennis Players

Yong Youn Kim1, Sang Hoon Kim2,

1 Yong In University, Yongin

2 Korea National Sport University, Seoul, Korea

Correspondence: Sang Hoon Kim Korea National Sport University, 1239 Yangjae-daero, Songpa-gu, Seoul 138-763, Korea Tel: +82-2-416-8104, Fax: +82-2-416-8105 E-mail: sportler@hanmail.net

Received 26 April 2013       Revised 10 June 2013       Accepted 1 July 2013

Copyright © 2013 The Korean Society of Sports Medicine

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to analyze the physical fitness and performance level depending on play style in female table tennis players. Thirty-one female players participated in this study. The measurement factors for physical fitness were body composition, cardiopulmonary function and fitness, balance, power, flexibility, agility, isotonic and isokinetic strength, muscle endurance and anaerobic. Kruskal-Wallis test, Mann-Whitney test, and Spearman correlation were used to analyze the data. The results were as follows; in cardiopulmonary function and fitness, FEV1/FVC was significantly higher in defensive style than drive style. Also, Harvard step test was significantly higher in drive style than attack style. In agility, cross run was significantly slower in attack style than the other styles. In isokinetic strength, left flexion strength of knee was significantly higher in driver style than defensive style. Also, in correlations, performance level had association with Harvard step test in defensive and attack style, 20 m run in attack style, cross run in defensive and drive style, push-ups in drive style. As different physical fitness factors were correlated on performance and scientific training program should be applied according to the play styles.

Keywords: Racket sports, Physical fitness, Sports, Performance

References

1. Bae JH, Yoon YJ. Development plans for the increase the number of the elementary table tennis players. Korean J Physic Educ. 2011; 50:119–28.
2. Lee E. A comparative study of the personality traits depending on play style and skill level in female table tennis player. Nonmunjip-Yongindaehakgyo. 2003; 21:139–47.
3. Hyun J. Perfect table tennis. Seoul: Samho Media;2013.
4. Issurin VB. Training transfer: scientific background and insights for practical application. Sports Med. 2013; 43:675–94.
crossref
5. Chung JW, Kim KJ, Kim HJ. Effects of physique and fitness on performance of each event in elite alpine skier. Exerc Sci. 2011; 20:71–80.
6. Kim MJ, Jang JH. Differences in anthropometric variables, body composition, and basal physical fitness in women soccer players according to athletic performance level and playing position. J Korean Soc Study Phys Educ. 2010; 15:185–99.
7. Kim YK. Fitness profiles of the professional soccer players by each position. Korean J Sports Med. 2000; 18:217–26.
8. Park SH, Kim KH, Huh Y. College Ssireum player's strength profile and performance perdictions. J Korean Alliance Martial Arts. 2009; 11:223–35.
9. Cheon IH, Kim KJ, Park DH. A comparative analysis of physical strength of competition performance level in national boxing athletes. Korean J Sport Sci. 2008; 19:161–9.
10. Kim KJ. Aerobic: anaerobic performance and relative functional buffering capacity in middle-distance and marathon runners. J Korean Sports Med. 1997; 15:291–7.
11. Matthys SP, Fransen J, Vaeyens R, Lenoir M, Philippaerts R. Differences in biological maturation, anthropometry and physical performance between playing positions in youth team handball. J Sports Sci. 2013; 31:1344–52.
crossref
12. Rebelo A, Brito J, Maia J, et al. Anthropometric characteristics, physical fitness and technical performance of under-19 soccer players by competitive level and field position. Int J Sports Med. 2013; 34:312–7.
crossref
13. Laudner KG, Lynall R, Meister K. Shoulder adaptations among pitchers and position players over the course of a competitive baseball season. Clin J Sport Med. 2013; 23:184–9.
crossref
14. Lees A. Science and the major racket sports: a review. J Sports Sci. 2003; 21:707–32.
crossref
15. Lee CA, Kim YP. A study on physical fitness, cardiorespiratory function, and body composition in table tennis players of elementary school. Jeju National University Theses Collect. 2007; 13:49–56.
16. Ivanovic J, Dopsaj M. Functional dimorphism and characteristics of maximal hand grip force in top level female athletes. Coll Antropol. 2012; 36:1231–40.
17. Korea Institute of Sports Science. The manual for physical fitness & evaluation. Seoul: Samhan Information Plan;2007.
18. Tomchuk D. Companion guide to measurement and evaluation for kinesiology. Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning;2011.
19. Ilarraza-Lomeli H. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Arch Cardiol Mex. 2012; 82:160–9.
20. Verges S, Flore P, Blanchi MP, Wuyam B. A 10-year follow-up study of pulmonary function in symptomatic elite cross-country skiers: athletes and bronchial dysfunctions. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2004; 14:381–7.
21. Raab M, Masters RS, Maxwell JP. Improving the ‘how' and ‘what' decisions of elite table tennis players. Hum Mov Sci. 2005; 24:326–44.
crossref
22. Zagatto AM, Morel EA, Gobatto CA. Physiological responses and characteristics of table tennis matches determined in official tournaments. J Strength Cond Res. 2010; 24:942–9.
crossref
23. Marinovic W, Iizuka CA, Freudenheim AM. Control of striking velocity by table tennis players. Percept Mot Skills. 2004; 99:1027–34.
crossref
24. Monfort-Panego M, Vera-Garcia FJ, Sanchez-Zuriaga D, Sarti-Martinez MA. Electromyographic studies in abdominal exercises: a literature synthesis. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2009; 32:232–44.
25. Kondric M, Matkovic BR, Furjan-Mandic G, Hadzic V, Dervisevic E. Injuries in racket sports among Slovenian players. Coll Antropol. 2011; 35:413–7.
26. Helgerud J, Engen LC, Wisloff U, Hoff J. Aerobic endurance training improves soccer performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2001; 33:1925–31.
crossref

Table 1.
Characteristics of study subjects
Type Ranking Age (y) Height (cm) Body weight (kg) BMI (kg/m2)
Defensive style (n=10) 41.70±33.57 25.10±3.07 164.68±5.17 59.90±5.87 22.04±1.11
Attack style (n=11) 39.27±27.87 22.72±4.20 164.65±3.22 58.40±5.39 21.52±1.66
Drive style (n=10) 22.60±18.57 21.80±3.03 162.36±4.62 55.98±3.19 21.24±1.05
p-value 0.251 0.188 0.403 0.223 0.395

Values are presented mean±standard deviation. BMI: body mass index.

Table 2.
The results of fitness assessment in play style
Fitness category Play style p-value Post-hoc
Defensive style (1) Attack style (2) Drive style (3)
Body composition          
   Body fat (%) 19.72±1.08 19.76±2.98 18.05±1.54 0.126  
Cardiopulmonary function          
   FEV1/FVC (%) 95.53±2.85 85.92±8.55 90.42±7.67 0.003 1−3
   Vital capacity (mL) 3,972.00±472.92 3,505.45±347.19 3,656.00±420.87 0.110  
   HRrest 65.20±6.01 68.63±9.95 61.50±3.62 0.092  
Cardiorespiratory fitness          
   Harvard step test 129.24±4.88 116.65±9.73 123.86±12.87 0.021 2−3
Balance          
   Romberg test (s) 13.12±3.01 27.23±17.05 25.78±22.04 0.115  
Power          
   20 m run (s) 3.86±0.17 3.96±0.30 3.76±0.33 0.486  
   Standing long jump (cm) 186.75±10.88 186.00±17.06 193.25±7.68 0.430  
Flexibility          
   Sit and reach test (cm) 20.27±4.86 18.97±6.80 16.44±7.88 0.627  
   Trunk & neck extension test (cm) 53.70±4.00 58.04±9.50 54.56±5.18 0.433  
Agility          
   Reaction time (s) 0.29±0.02 0.34±0.07 0.30±0.52 0.289  
   Cross run (s) 14.97±1.38 16.57±0.50 15.58±1.12 0.044 1, 3−2
Isotonic strength          
   Handgrip strength test (kg) 32.56±4.49 31.05±3.15 32.16±3.43 0.582  
   Lower back strength test (kg) 71.20±12.55 70.72±8.03 80.60±6.53 0.040 1, 2−3
Isokinetic strength          
   R.E. of ankle (%BW) 102.75±25.69 116.39±31.59 108.46±30.41 0.558  
   R.F. of ankle (%BW) 44.33±3.53 44.12±0.76 45.87±4.11 0.322  
   L.E. of ankle (%BW) 105.88±21.19 107.63±16.14 113.57±24.05 0.772  
   L.F. of ankle (%BW) 42.05±2.69 42.61±5.66 44.85±6.29 0.866  
   R.E. of knee (%BW) 257.19±28.83 252.66±39.01 236.05±15.79 0.319  
   R.F. of knee (%BW) 116.41±15.51 124.43±26.09 129.22±7.32 0.207  
   L.E. of knee (%BW) 258.59±27.51 237.33±31.29 259.84±28.93 0.163  
   L.F. of knee (%BW) 122.92±14.94 127.04±17.06 138.69±8.68 0.038 1−3
Muscular endurance          
   Push-ups 43.70±4.87 41.60±6.43 44.09±5.22 0.642  
   Sit-ups 50.40±6.75 51.45±7.44 54.00±8.13 0.689  
Anaerobic power Wingate test          
   Total work (KPM) 900.22±74.20 877.06±62.43 919.98±93.68 0.760  
   Average power (%BW) 4.89±0.36 4.50±0.66 5.37±0.45 0.006 1, 2−3
   Fatigue index (%) 26.87±6.51 31.48±5.84 28.76±8.08 0.598  

Values are presented mean±standard deviation. FEV1/FVC: the ratio of forced expiratory volume in one second to forced vital capacity, HRrest: resting heart rate, R.E: right extension, R.F.: right flexion, L.E.: left extension, L.F.: light flexion, KPM: kilopounds per meter.

Table 3.
The correlation between physical fitness and performance depending on play style
Fitness category Defensive style Attack style Drive style
r p r p r p
Body composition            
   Body fat (%) –0.346 0.328 –0.445 0.170 –0.272 0.448
Cardiopulmonary function            
   FEV1/FVC (%) 0.098 0.774 0.393 0.336 0.687 0.060
   HRrest –0.190 0.559 –0.045 0.894 –0.050 0.892
   Vital capacity 0.049 0.908 0.034 0.920 0.121 0.819
Cardiorespiratory fitness            
   Harvard step test 0.765 0.010 0.667 0.035 0.198 0.584
Power            
   20 m run –0.683 0.089 –0.903 0.001 –0.400 0.326
   Standing long jump –0.632 0.092 0.198 0.584 0.049 0.908
Flexibility            
   Sit and reach test 0.098 0.817 0.342 0.304 0.222 0.537
   Trunk & neck extension test 0.196 0.6410 0.118 0.729 0.025 0.946
Agility            
   Reaction time –0.308 0.387 –0.430 0.187 –0.500 0.141
   Cross run –0.665 0.036 –0.147 0.728 –0.857 0.002
Isotonic strength            
   Handgrip strength test 0.344 0.405 0.545 0.083 0.025 0.946
   Lower back strength test –0.220 0.542 0.169 0.619 0.025 0.946
Isokinetic strength            
   R.E. of ankle (%BW) 0.121 0.819 0.393 0.336 0.393 0.336
   R.F. of ankle (%BW) 0.606 0.202 0.344 0.405 0.344 0.405
   L.E. of ankle (%BW) 0.121 0.819 0.049 0.908 0.049 0.908
   L.F. of ankle (%BW) 0.606 0.202 0.196 0.207 0.196 0.641
   R.E. of knee (%BW) 0.321 0.366 0.272 0.448 0.272 0.448
   R.F. of knee (%BW) 0.198 0.584 0.593 0.071 0.593 0.071
   L.E. of ankle (%BW) 0.272 0.448 0.074 0.839 0.030 0.933
   L.F. of ankle (%BW) 0.344 0.405 –0.473 0.142 0.595 0.069
Muscular endurance            
   Push-ups 0.700 0.024 0.098 0.774 0.632 0.092
   Sit-ups 0.600 0.067 0.034 0.920 0.100 0.783
Anaerobic power            
   Total work 0.606 0.202 0.500 0.391 0.099 0.786
   Average power (%BW) 0.519 0.125 0.074 0.839 0.622 0.055
   Fatigue index 0.687 0.060 0.147 0.728 0.147 0.728

FEV1/FVC: the ratio of forced expiratory volume in one second to forced vital capacity, HRrest: resting heart rate, R.E: right extension, R.F.: right flexion, L.E.: left extension, L.F.: light flexion, KPM: kilopounds per meter.

TOOLS
Similar articles