• Libraries
    • Log in to:
    View Item 
    •   MSpace Home
    • Faculty of Graduate Studies (Electronic Theses and Practica)
    • FGS - Electronic Theses and Practica
    • View Item
    •   MSpace Home
    • Faculty of Graduate Studies (Electronic Theses and Practica)
    • FGS - Electronic Theses and Practica
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    A kinematic comparison of the running A and B drills with sprinting

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    MQ32155.pdf (9.919Mb)
    Date
    1997-11-01
    Author
    Kivi, Derek M. R.
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    The A and B drills are commonly used by sprinters as part of training. The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanics of the A and B drills to sprinting. Eight university level sprinters were recruited to participate in the study. The participants completed the A and B drills as fast and as technically perfectly as possible, followed by two 60 metre runs at maximum speed. While performing the drills and sprinting, the participants were videotaped from the frontal and sagittal views. These videotapes were then used for a kinematic comparison of the drills and sprinting, based on select variables associated with sprint performance. There were significant differences in vertical displacement, vertical velocity, step frequency, support time, non-support time, shoulder range of motion (ROM), elbow flexion angular velocity (AV), trunk flexion, trunk rotation, pelvic rotation, hip flexion, hip extension AV, knee extension AV, ankle ROM, plantarflexion AV, and dorsiflexion AV. There were no significant differences in shoulder extension AV, elbow ROM, elbow extension AV, hip flexion AV, knee ROM, and knee flexion AV. Differences among the three skills were seen in the timing of peak angular velocity at the shoulder, hip, and knee. Differences among the three skills were also seen in the angle at which peak angular velocity occurred in the shoulder and ankle joint range of motion. It was concluded that the kinematics in the A and B drills were not the same as sprinting. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/1993/1215
    Collections
    • FGS - Electronic Theses and Practica [25494]

    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2016  DuraSpace
    Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Theme by 
    Atmire NV
     

     

    Browse

    All of MSpaceCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    My Account

    Login

    Statistics

    View Usage Statistics

    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2016  DuraSpace
    Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Theme by 
    Atmire NV