Detail
Article
Online article
FT
Medvik - BMC
  • Something wrong with this record ?

Kinematic Analysis of 2-Point and 3-Point Jump Shot of Elite Young Male and Female Basketball Players

T. Vencúrik, D. Knjaz, T. Rupčić, G. Sporiš, F. Li

. 2021 ; 18 (3) : . [pub] 20210122

Language English Country Switzerland

Document type Journal Article

Persistent link   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc21019414

Basketball shooting is one of the most important offensive skills in basketball. Winning or losing a game mostly depends on the shooting effectiveness. The study aims to compare the selected kinematic variables of 2-point (2-pt) and 3-point (3-pt) jump shots (after making a cut and receiving the ball) and ascertain the differences between elite male under 16 and 18 (U16M, U18M) and female under 16 and 18 (U16F, U18F) basketball players. Overall, forty-eight young male and female basketball players participated in the study. 3D motion analysis using an inertial suit with the addition of utilizing a smart ball was performed for assessing the 2-pt and 3-pt shooting techniques. Players in male categories shot for 2-pt with a higher center of mass difference in the vertical direction (U16M 5.7 cm, U18M 3.9 cm vs. U16F 1.4 cm, U18F 0.6 cm), with higher release shoulder angle (U16M 110.9, U18M 113.8 vs. U16F 103, U18F 105), and with a higher entry angle of the ball (U16M 34, U18M 32 vs. U16F 30, U18F 30) when compared to female categories (p < 0.001). In the 3-pt shooting, there were differences between male and female categories in the shoulder angle when releasing the ball (p < 0.001). In the players shooting speed, there were differences between U16M vs. U18F (0.95 ± 0.1 vs. 0.88 ± 0.1; p = 0.03) and U16F vs. U18F (0.96 ± 0.06 vs. 0.88 ± 0.1; p = 0.02) players. Male categories shot 3-pt shots with a smaller center of mass difference in the horizontal direction when compared to 2-pt shots (p < 0.001). The entry angle was higher in successful shooting attempts compared to unsuccessful shooting attempts when shooting for 3-pt (p = 0.02). Player shooting speed was higher in all categories (except U18F) when shooting for 3-pt (p < 0.001). It appears that performers show difference in kinematic variables based on distance from the basket. Basketball coaches and players should work to minimize the kinematic differences between 2-pt and 3-pt shooting and to optimize the shooting technique.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc21019414
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20210830100954.0
007      
ta
008      
210728s2021 sz f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.3390/ijerph18030934 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)33498975
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a sz
100    1_
$a Vencúrik, Tomas $u Department of Sports, Faculty of Sports Studies, Masaryk University, 62500 Brno, Czech Republic
245    10
$a Kinematic Analysis of 2-Point and 3-Point Jump Shot of Elite Young Male and Female Basketball Players / $c T. Vencúrik, D. Knjaz, T. Rupčić, G. Sporiš, F. Li
520    9_
$a Basketball shooting is one of the most important offensive skills in basketball. Winning or losing a game mostly depends on the shooting effectiveness. The study aims to compare the selected kinematic variables of 2-point (2-pt) and 3-point (3-pt) jump shots (after making a cut and receiving the ball) and ascertain the differences between elite male under 16 and 18 (U16M, U18M) and female under 16 and 18 (U16F, U18F) basketball players. Overall, forty-eight young male and female basketball players participated in the study. 3D motion analysis using an inertial suit with the addition of utilizing a smart ball was performed for assessing the 2-pt and 3-pt shooting techniques. Players in male categories shot for 2-pt with a higher center of mass difference in the vertical direction (U16M 5.7 cm, U18M 3.9 cm vs. U16F 1.4 cm, U18F 0.6 cm), with higher release shoulder angle (U16M 110.9, U18M 113.8 vs. U16F 103, U18F 105), and with a higher entry angle of the ball (U16M 34, U18M 32 vs. U16F 30, U18F 30) when compared to female categories (p < 0.001). In the 3-pt shooting, there were differences between male and female categories in the shoulder angle when releasing the ball (p < 0.001). In the players shooting speed, there were differences between U16M vs. U18F (0.95 ± 0.1 vs. 0.88 ± 0.1; p = 0.03) and U16F vs. U18F (0.96 ± 0.06 vs. 0.88 ± 0.1; p = 0.02) players. Male categories shot 3-pt shots with a smaller center of mass difference in the horizontal direction when compared to 2-pt shots (p < 0.001). The entry angle was higher in successful shooting attempts compared to unsuccessful shooting attempts when shooting for 3-pt (p = 0.02). Player shooting speed was higher in all categories (except U18F) when shooting for 3-pt (p < 0.001). It appears that performers show difference in kinematic variables based on distance from the basket. Basketball coaches and players should work to minimize the kinematic differences between 2-pt and 3-pt shooting and to optimize the shooting technique.
650    12
$a basketbal $7 D001490
650    _2
$a biomechanika $7 D001696
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    _2
$a pohyb těles $7 D009038
650    _2
$a rameno $7 D012782
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Knjaz, Damir $u Laboratory for Sports Games, Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
700    1_
$a Rupčić, Tomislav $u Laboratory for Sports Games, Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
700    1_
$a Sporiš, Goran $u Laboratory for Sports Games, Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
700    1_
$a Li, Feng $u Laboratory for Sports Games, Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
773    0_
$w MED00176090 $t International journal of environmental research and public health $x 1660-4601 $g Roč. 18, č. 3 (2021)
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33498975 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
990    __
$a 20210728 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20210830100955 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1690273 $s 1139860
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2021 $b 18 $c 3 $e 20210122 $i 1660-4601 $m International journal of environmental research and public health $n Int. j. environ. res. public health $x MED00176090
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20210728

Find record

Citation metrics

Archiving options