Model of sport-specific abilities

The area of sport-specific abilities is very large and multi-faceted. Describing them scientifically can be very detailed, multi-dimensional and creative. However, the practical approach to the modeling of sport-specific abilities is restricted by the real possibility of employing the measurable and most relevant characteristics that form a battery of valid indicators. It seems that the major contributors to such models are anthropometric status on the one hand, and the physiological and sport-specific characteristics of motor abilities on the other. Other considerations can also be the focus of attention (psychological characteristics are also very important but for these, readers are referred to other books; see Weinberg and Gould, 2003; Blumenstein,

Li

dor and Tenenbaum, 2007).

8.3.1 Generalized factors of sport-specific abilities

At least four generalized informative factors determine sport-specific abilities and require a correct and concise description in both group and individual models: body build, body composition, relevant physiological capabilities, and sport-specific motor abilities (Table 8.5).

Table 8.5

Modeling of sport-specific abilities: generalized factors and characteristics

Factors Characteristics Comments

Body build Height, length of extremities, body breadths, body weight;

somatotypical indicators

These estimates are necessary for modeling the “ideal athlete” in a given sport

Body composition

Fat component, lean body mass, muscle mass

These estimates are necessary for individual models to monitor a specific athlete

Physiological capabilities

Maximal oxygen consumption, anaerobic threshold, maximal blood lactate, maximal oxygen debt etc.

Both general (for certain sports) and individual model characteristics can be proposed

Sport-specific motor abilities

Maximal speed, power, strength, endurance, flexibility and agility in sport-specific motor tasks

Model characteristics can be proposed for selecting the most promising candidates and for individual training control The impact of the factors mentioned above differs in various sports and their interrelationships are also sport-specific. For instance, it is generally accepted that a specific body build predisposes one to a given sport. Similarly, appropriate

physiological preconditions help elicit more or less favorable training responses and progress in specific sports. Therefore, the generalized models of “ideal athletes” can help to better evaluate several candidates; the individual models, which are usually

prepared for high-level athletes, can assist in monitoring the training and guiding the preparation.

In addition to the four factors mentioned above, psychological characteristics are definitely very important. The problem is that psychological traits of successful athletes vary over a wide range of manifestations. Nevertheless, several personality qualities can be sufficiently described and inserted into generalized models for certain sports (Van den Auweele et al., 2001). Likewise, psycho-sensory characteristics such as time, rhythm and force reproduction can be used for individual diagnostics and modeling.

8.3.2 Body build and body composition

The models of sport-specific body build have traditionally been developed on the basis of investigations of groups of highly successful elite athletes. Interest in this category of athletic prognostication remains consistently high: a number of scientific projects have been conducted in the framework of the Olympic Games, where elite athletes have been studied with respect to their sport-specific anthropometric status. These include the 1964 Tokyo Olympics (Hirata, Kaku, 1968), the 1972 Munich Olympics (DeGaray et al., 1974), the 1976 Montreal Olympics (Carter et al., 1982) and others. The modeling approach presupposes that average data of a sub-population of elite athletes can be used for compiling a generalized model of body build for the corresponding sports. One of the last anthropometric studies of Olympians was conducted during the 2000 Sydney Olympics with canoe/kayak paddlers and rowers (Ackland et al., 2001).

Study and example. 296 rowers and 70 canoe/kayak flatwater paddlers

representing 35 countries were examined using a battery of 35 anthropometric measures. The normative data obtained by the researchers characterizing body size, proportionality and composition can be employed to compile descriptive models of elite athletes in corresponding sports. Several selected estimates (Figure 8.4) display specificity for the sub-populations examined and make it possible to characterize salient anthropometric traits, which can be used for preliminary team selection and general orientation (Ackland et al., 2001) Insert Figure 8.4 about here

Even a brief glance at the above data makes it possible to recognize

somatotypical particularities of world-ranked rowers and canoe/kayak paddlers: tall robust persons with long extremities and low fat component. As was already stated (see 3.1) body characteristics such as body length are strongly dependent on heredity. It is known that body build can be changed slightly with athletic preparation

(Wilmore & Costill, 1993). Therefore, appropriate body build models can be proposed for lower level and junior athletes. Based on such a model, tall teenagers with long arms and low fat component can easily be recognized as suitable candidates for prospective rowing and kayaking groups. Likewise, the appropriate body build models in various sports can help in the preliminary selection of gifted children and potentially successful team members.

Unlike body build, body composition can be substantially changed with training and appropriate diet. Generally speaking, two major elements determine body composition: the fat component, and lean body mass, that is body mass without fat (bones, muscles, internal organs, skin etc.). It has already been noted that training monitoring can be remarkably enhanced by controlling body mass and the fat component (Tables 6.8; 6.11; and 6.14). Both research findings and practical observation indicate that substantial alterations of body composition occur under various circumstances. These are the most typical cases:

- increase of fat component due to excessive dietary intake;

- increase of fat component when dietary intake is constant but energy expenditure is reduced (for instance, in taper);

- reduction of muscle mass (and lean body mass) due to catabolic action of stress hormones associated with emotional tension;

- reduction of muscle mass (and lean body mass) due to catabolic action of cortisol during altitude training (see 9.1.2);

- reduction of muscle mass when the residual training effect of the preceding hypertrophy program is attenuated.

It is obvious that variations of body composition are very specific in different sports. Marathon runners, soccer players and heavyweight wrestlers differ enormously in body mass, fat component, and they vary considerably during training. Therefore, sport-specific models for certain athletic sub-populations can serve the same purpose as body-build models. However, individual models of body composition can

effectively contribute to training monitoring and assist in guiding preparation.

Case study. The follow-up program of world-class swimmers Alexander Popov

and Michael Klim included systematic anthropometric monitoring using a specially constructed original index. Over a period of six years body mass (BM- kg) and sum of 6 skinfolds (SSk-mm) were measured at the initial and

culmination phase of each training stage. Their ratio gave an indication of individual body composition status. When body mass was stable or slightly increased but fat component increased sufficiently, the ratio BM/SSk declined and this was typical for the beginning of a training stage. When muscle mass increased and fat component decreased, body mass remained stable, but skinfold sums decreased remarkably. Correspondingly, the BM/SSk ratio rose and this was typical of the culmination phase of the training stage just prior to the competition (Table 8.6). These individual variations were analyzed by the personal coach of both swimmers, Guennadi Touretski, who immediately corrected the program following marked deviations. Therefore, individuals using this index try to have their values correspond to these top-performance athletes (by courtesy of Guennadi Touretski, personal communication). Table 8.6

Individual variations of Body Mass/Skinfold Sum ratio in world class swimmers

Athlete Range of variations Variations at the beginning of stage Variations at the culmination of stage Alexander Popov (RUS) 2.04 – 2.45 2.04 – 2.23 2.3 – 2.45

• Michael Klim –two-time Olympic Champion, three-time Olympic silver medal winner, many time World Champion and medal winner in swimming

Summarizing the data, it can be stated that body build models have primary importance for orientation and for the preliminary selection of athletes for certain sports and disciplines, while the body composition model can optimize training monitoring and individual diagnostics of high-performance athletes.

8.3.3 Physiological capabilities

Both sub-population and individual models of physiological capabilities can contribute considerably to athletes’ preparation. Certainly, the selection of

physiological variables that should be included in the model depends first of all on specific demands of the sport. Such characteristics as maximal oxygen consumption and anaerobic threshold are relevant for many sports and definitely for ball games. Thus, the appropriate model characteristics of these indicators can be used for general evaluation of candidates for several teams (Figure 8.5).

Insert Figure 8.5 about here

Study and example. Four groups of qualified players (each one – 40 male

athletes) from different ball games were examined with respect to various physiological functions. The highest values of maximal oxygen consumption and anaerobic threshold were found in soccer players; handball players had somewhat lower values but they were superior to basketball and volleyball players (Figure 8.5). The highest anaerobic alactic abilities were found in soccer and volleyball players while the highest anaerobic glycolitic power and capacity were obtained in basketball players. Thus, sport-specific physiological demands determine the general development of certain physiological abilities and this should be taken into consideration when compiling corresponding models of physiological capabilities (based on Jaruzhnyj, 1993).

Compilation of individual models of physiological capabilities seems very promising and useful for practical implementation although several methodological difficulties can are discernible. For example, such a model presupposes the prediction of individual upper limits of the function being evaluated and this requires a correct and scientifically proven procedure, which is still not in common use.

8.3.4 Sport-specific motor abilities

Examination of sport-specific motor abilities usually does not require expensive sophisticated equipment and can therefore be found in the domain of coaching

routine. The usefulness of such models is apparent: a group model serves as the set of norms, which make it possible to objectively evaluate merits and demerits of each athlete in comparison with the desired level; the individual model makes it possible to

monitor changes in sport-specific physical fitness induced by training. Group models can be easily be compiled for different athlete categories including elite and sub-elite.

Example. The Russian artistic gymnastics national team, one of the most

successful in the world, actively utilized modeling approaches for both technical and physical preparation. Over a number of decades, sport-specific motor fitness has been evaluated by a test battery that contains a number of carefully selected exams. The model of sport-specific motor abilities proposed for the national team gives model characteristics, which serve as the norms for all team members and potential newcomers (Table 8.7). The importance of this model can not be underestimated. An additional benefit of this model is that each high- performance gymnast can independently estimate his/her own physical fitness against the national team level (Arkajev & Suchilin, 2004).

Table 8.7

Model of sport-specific motor abilities in high-level male gymnasts (by Arkajev & Suchilin, 2004)

Motor abilities

Tests Indicator Model

characteristics Maximal

speed

Running 20 m Time, s 3.0 – 3.1

Run to vault Velocity in last 5m

prior take-off, m/s 7.8 – 8.2 Explosive

strength

Standing high jump with arm swing

Height, cm 60 - 65 Isometric

strength

"Cross" on the rings Sustaining time, s 5 – 6 "Inverted cross" on the

rings

Sustaining time, s 5 - 6 Hanging scale on the rings Sustaining time, s 5 - 6 Support scale on the rings Sustaining time, s 5 - 6 Dynamic

strength Climbing up a rope to 4 m height using arms only Time, s 5 – 5.5

Individual fitness models can be developed with respect to specific demands on and particularities of an athlete. Based on a coach's estimation, one athlete may need to reinforce the strength component of his/her performance, while another one should improve his/her endurance. Correspondingly, the individual models of these two athletes emphasize respective demands and give them additional motivation to reduce the gap between the actual and desired levels of sport-specific fitness.

Both collective and individual models of sport-specific motor abilities serve to facilitate training by eliminating or at least reducing the gap between modeled and available level of athletic fitness. In other words, a reasonable and well balanced individual model can serve as an efficient instrument to motivate athletes to work conscientiously towards a specific goal. Usually such models are compiled for rather qualified athletes and they are particularly suited for helping ambitious young

individuals to progress. We can see this approach in action through the example of a junior high-performance kayaker.

Example. A 17-year-old athlete with three years of experience in kayak training

bench pull with a 40 kg barbell, one-minute bench press with a 50 kg barbell, sit ups during two minutes, 3 km run, and one arm kayak stroke simulation in sitting position on a pulley machine with a 40 kg weight, one minute for each arm separately. The initial findings revealed that the athlete had a relatively high level of running endurance, but insufficient strength endurance of arms and in particular abdominal muscles. As a result, his kayak-specific strength endurance in stroke simulation was far from the desired level. The individual motor fitness model was compiled with respect to the athlete's personal weaknesses (Figure 8.6). The athlete received special home tasks for individual morning workouts and additional motivation to focus on paddling resistance exercises. During the next six months the athlete substantially enhanced his fitness profile and approached the individual model. This gain resulted in impressive progress in the athlete's 500 and 1000 m kayak-single racing events.

Insert Figure 8.6 about here

It is logical that individual models for relatively young and developing athletes should be renewed each year following the general tendency of their progress while the models for aged athletes may reflect their stable state of sport-specific motor abilities.