...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of strength and conditioning research >PHYSIOLOGICAL AND TECHNICAL DEMANDS OF NO DRIBBLE GAME DRILL IN YOUNG BASKETBALL PLAYERS
【24h】

PHYSIOLOGICAL AND TECHNICAL DEMANDS OF NO DRIBBLE GAME DRILL IN YOUNG BASKETBALL PLAYERS

机译:青少年篮球运动员无盘游戏操的生理和技术要求

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Conte, D, Favero, TG, Niederhausen, M, Capranica, L, and Tessitore, A. Physiological and technical demands of no dribble game drill in young basketball players. J Strength Cond Res 29(12): 3375-3379, 2015This study assessed the physiological and technical demands of no dribble game drill (NDGD) in comparison with a regular drill (RD). Twenty-three young basketball players performed RDs and NDGDs in a random order. All basketball rules were followed for RDs, whereas dribbling was not permitted for NDGDs. The independent variable was the drill condition, and the dependent variables were percentage of maximal heart rate (%HRmax), rate of perceived exertion (RPE), Edwards training load (TL), and the following technical actions (TAs): pass (total, correct, wrong, and percent of correct passes), shot (total, scored, missed, and percent of made shots), interception, steal, turnover, and rebound. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were applied to assess differences between NDGD and RD conditions for each dependent variable, and the level of statistical significance was set at p 0.05. Results showed higher values for %HRmax (p = 0.007), Edwards TL (p = 0.006), and RPE (p = 0.027) in NDGD compared with RD condition. Technical action analysis revealed higher values in NDGD than RD for total (p = 0.000), correct (p = 0.000), and wrong pass (p = 0.005), and interception (p = 0.001), whereas no significant differences were found for the other TAs. The main finding of this study was that NDGD condition elicited a greater physiological demand and a higher number of passes and interceptions than the RD one. Basketball coaches should consider the NDGD as a viable method to increase the physiological load of their training sessions and to teach passing skills in a game-based situation.
机译:孔戴(Conte,D),法弗罗(Favero),TG,密德豪森(Niederhausen),男,卡普兰尼卡(L.Capranica)和特塞蒂雷(Tessitore).A J Strength Cond Res 29(12):3375-3379,2015该研究评估了无运球游戏训练器(NDGD)与常规训练器(RD)的生理和技术要求。 23名年轻的篮球运动员以随机顺序进行RD和NDGD。 RD遵循所有篮球规则,而NDGD不允许运球。自变量是训练条件,因变量是最大心率百分比(%HRmax),感知劳累率(RPE),爱德华兹训练负荷(TL)和以下技术动作(TAs):通过(总计) ,正确,错误和正确传球的百分比),投篮(总命中率,得分,错失和命中率),拦截,抢断,失误和篮板。应用Wilcoxon符号秩检验来评估每个因变量的NDGD和RD条件之间的差异,并将统计显着性水平设置为p 0.05。结果显示,与RD条件相比,NDGD中的%HRmax(p = 0.007),Edwards TL(p = 0.006)和RPE(p = 0.027)的值更高。技术操作分析表明,NDGD的总值(p = 0.000),正确(p = 0.000),错误通过(p = 0.005)和拦截(p = 0.001)的值均高于RD,而对于其他TA。这项研究的主要发现是,与RD相比,NDGD引起的生理需求更大,通过和拦截的次数也更多。篮球教练应将NDGD视为一种可行的方法,以增加他们在训练中的生理负担并在基于比赛的情况下传授传球技巧。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号