Effect of Three Technical Arms Swings on The Elevation of the Center of Mass During a Standing Back Somersault

• Authors: Bessem Mkaouer , Monèm Jemni , Samiha Amara , Helmi Chaabène , Johnny Padulo , Zouhair Tabka
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Arms swing during standing back somersaults relates to three different “gymnastics schools”, each is considered “optimal” by its adepts. In the three cases, technical performance, elevation and safety differ. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the mechanical variables of three different arms swing techniques in the performance of a standing back tucked somersault. Five high-level male gymnasts (age: 23.17±1.61 yrs; body height: 1.65±0.05 m; body mass: 56.80±7.66 kg) randomly performed standing somersaults under three conditions, each following a different arms’ swing technical angle (270°, 180° and 90°). A force plate synchronized with a three dimensional movement analysis system was used to collect kinetic and kinematic data. Significant differences were observed between somersaults’ performance. The back somersault performed with 270° arms swing showed the best vertical displacement (up to 13.73%), while the back somersaults performed with 180° arms swing showed a decrease in power (up to 22.20%). The back somersault with 90° arms swing showed the highest force (up to 19.46%). Considering that the higher elevation of the centre of mass during the flight phase would allow best performance and lower the risk of falls, this study demonstrated that optimal arms’ swing technique prior to back tucked somersault was 270°.

Keywords

EN

Gymnastics; motion analysis; kinematics; backswing; performance analysis

• Publisher: De Gruyter Open
• Journal: Journal of Human Kinetics
• Year: 2014
• Volume: 40
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 37-48

Dates

published

1 - 3 - 2014

online

9 - 4 - 2014

Contributors

author

Bessem Mkaouer

• Higher Institute of Sport and Physical Education of Ksar Saïd, Univercity of Manouba, Tunisia

author

Monèm Jemni

• School of Science, University of Greenwich, London, United Kingdom

author

Samiha Amara

• Higher Institute of Sport and Physical Education of Ksar Saïd, Univercity of Manouba, Tunisia

author

Helmi Chaabène

• Higher Institute of Sport and Physical Education of Ksar Saïd, Univercity of Manouba, Tunisia

author

Johnny Padulo

• Faculty of Medicine and Surgery, University of “Tor Vergata” Rome, Italy

author

Zouhair Tabka

• Faculty of Medicine of Sousse, University of Sousse, Tunisia

References

• Bardy BG, Laurent M. How do somersaulters control their moment of inertia during flight? Journal of Sport and Exercise Physiology, 1994; 16: 28
• Cheng KB, Hubbard M. Role of arms in somersaulting from compliant surfaces: A simulation study of springboard standing dives. Human Movement Science, 2008; 27(1): 80-95[Crossref][PubMed][WoS]
• Clansey AC, Lees A. Changes in lower limb joint range of motion in countermovement vertical jumping. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Society of Biomechanics in Sport. Marquette, USA: ISB ; 2010
• Domire ZJ, Challis JH An induced energy analysis to determine the mechanism for performance enhancement as a result of arm swing during jumping. Sports Biomechanics, 2010; 9(1): 38-46.[Crossref][WoS]
• Duboy J, Junka A, Lacouture P. Human mechanics: Sports and movements analysis in two dimensions. Paris, Revue EP.S Edition, 69-74; 1994
• Faul F, Erdfelder E. GPOWER: A Priori, Post-Hoc, and Compromise Power Analyses for MS-DOS (Computer Program). Bonn, FRG: Bonn University, Department of Psychology; 2004
• Hara M, Shibayama A, Arakawa H, Fukashiro S. Effect of arms wing direction on forward and backward jump performance. Journal of Biomechanics, 2008a; 41(13): 2806-2815[WoS][Crossref]
• Hara M, Shibayama A, Takeshita D, Hay DC, Fukashiro S. A comparison of the mechanical effect of arms swing and countermovement on the lower extremities in vertical jumping. Human Movement Science, 2008b; 27(4): 636-648[WoS][Crossref][PubMed]
• Heinen T, Jeraj D, Vinken P, Velentzas K. Rotational preference in gymnastics. Journal of human kinetics, 2012; 33(1): 33-43
• King MA, Yeadon MR. A comparison of activation timing profiles for single and double layout somersaults. Journal of Biomechanics, 2006; 39(1): 184[Crossref]
• Lacouture P, Junqua A, Duboy J, Durand B. Dynamographic and cinematographic study of backward somersault. Biology of Sport, 1989; 6(3): 207-213
• Leboeuf F, Seguin P, Lacouture P. Optimal synthesis versus dynamic analysis for an acrobatic aerial movement. Movement and Sport Sciences, 2012; 75: 19-25
• Marina M, Jemni M, Rodríguez FA, Jimenez A. Plyometric jumping performances’ comparison between elite male and female gymnasts and similar age groups. J Strength Cond Res, 2012; 26(7): 1879-1886[WoS][Crossref]
• Mathiyakom W, McNitt-Gray JL, Wilcox R. Lower extremity control and dynamics during backward angular impulse generation in forward translating tasks. Journal of Biomechanics, 2006; 39(6): 990-1000[Crossref]
• Matsui S. Center of gravity of the human body. In: MOVIAS for Windows. California, NAC Image Technology Edition, 56-63; 1993
• McNitt-Gray JL, Munkasy B, Welch M. External reaction forces experienced by gymnasts during the take-off and landing of tumbling skills. Technique, 1994; 14(9): 10-16
• McNitt-Gray JL, Hester DM, Mathiyakom W, Munkasy BA. Mechanical demand and multi-joint control during landing depend on orientation of the body segments relative to the reaction force. Journal of Biomechanics, 2001; 34(11): 1471-1782[Crossref]
• McNitt-Gray JL. Impulse generation during jumping and landing movements. In: Proceedings of the Biomechanics Symposia. University of San Francisco, 95-99; 2001
• McNitt-Gray JL, Requejo PS, Flashner H. Multijoint Control Strategies Transfer Between Tasks. Biological Cybernetics, 2006; 94(6): 501-510[Crossref]
• Medved V, Tonkovíc S. Method to evaluate the skill level in fast locomotion through myoelectric and kinetic signial analysis. Med and Biol Eng and Comput, 1991; 29: 406-412[PubMed][Crossref]
• Medved V, Tonkovíc S, Cifrek M. Simple neuro-mechanical measure of the locomotors skill: an example of backward somersault. Medical progress through technology, 1995; 21(2): 77-84
• Mkaouer B, Jemni M, Amara S, Chaabèn H, Tabka Z. Kinematic and kinetic analysis of counter movement jump versus two different types of standing back somersaults. Science of Gymnastics Journal, 2012; 4(3): 61-71
• Moran KA, Wallace ES. Eccentric loading and range of knee joint motion effects on performance enhancement in vertical jumping. Human Movement Science, 2007; 26: 824-840[Crossref][PubMed][WoS]
• Munkasy BA, McNitt-Gray JL, Michele D, Welch MD. Kinematics prior to contact in landings preceded by rotation. In: Proceedings of the 20th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Biomechanics. Atlanta, Georgia, USA; 1996 Okubo Y. Muscle activity during back tuck somersault. In: Neuroplasticity, Motor control, Cutting-Edge Technology and Rehabilitation (Eds.). Brisbane, Australia. Proceedings of the XIXth Congress of the International Society of Electrophysiology and Kinesiology, 253; 2012
• Sadowski J, Boloban V, Wisniowski W, Mastalerz A, Niznikowski T. Key components of acrobatic jump. Biology of Sport, 2005; 22(4): 387-395
• Salles AS, Baltzopoulos V, Rittweger J. Differential effects of countermovement magnitude and volitional effort on vertical jumping. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 2011; 111: 441-448[PubMed][WoS][Crossref]
• Sands WA. Biomechanics for gymnastics. In: M. Jemni Eds. The Science of Gymnastics. Routledge, Francis and Taylor Grp. London, 55-104; 2011
• Scanlan AT, Dascombe BJ, Reaburn PRJ. The construct and longitudinal validity of the basketball exercise simulation test. J Strength Cond Res, 2012; 26: 523-530[WoS][Crossref][PubMed]
• Zar JH. The Latin Square Experimental Design-ultiway Factorial Analysis of Variance. In: Biostatistical Analysis. 2nd Eds. Englewoods Cliff: Prentice - Hall, 248; 1984

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/hukin-2014-0005