Motion analysis of a free throw in basketball Docents: Prof.Dr. Anita Höekelmann Prof.Dr. Peter Blaser Speaker: Nedal Abu Al-Failat

Structure Introduction Material Method Result Discussion Conclusion

1.Introduction Ability to throw important for success Free throw is the single most important shot in the game of Basketball (Way & Alexander, without year) Moment of release the ball is a projectile Therefore basic principles we must consider speed, height and angle of release (Miller & Bartlett, 1991 / Okazaki & Rodacki, 2012) Kinematic variables have often been used to investigate technique (Mullineaux & Uhl, 2010)

Introduction Picture 1. Biomechanical Model of free throw (Okazaki & Rodacki, 2012)

Introduction Do the kinematic parameters have influence to the successful and unsuccessful throw? Hypothesis: H0: There are no significant differences in body angles, hand velocity or duration of phases between successful or un successful trials of basketball free throw determined with simi-motion. H1: : There are significant differences in body angles, hand velocity or duration of phases between successful or un successful trials of basketball free throw determined with simi-motion.

2.Material Ball Basket Markers and hat Cameras (Simi-Motion / 2-D)

3.Method N=1 ( fifteen basketball free throw performed with the right hand ) The sample was prepared for simi-motion system with placing (9) number of markers ANALSYIS : Calibrated video: Auto tracking has been applied in the simi-motion software In order to remove angels error manully tracking. Made/Missed balls records. The data was exported in excell. Calculation with SPSS.

Mean velocity of hand m/s Mean preparation phase (s) 4.Results   Mean velocity of hand m/s Mean preparation phase (s) Mean mainphase (S) Spearman's rho Mean velocity of hand Correlation Coefficient 1,000 -,064 -,079 Sig. (2-tailed) ,820 ,780 N 15 Mean preparationphase ,388 ,153 No significant correlation between any of the variables

Correlation Coefficient Results   Mean velocity of_hand Mean knee angle Mean hipangle Mean armtrunkangle Mean armangle Mean handangle Spearman's rho Mean velocity of hand Correlation Coefficient 1,000 0,000 -,236 ,296 ,239 .529* Sig. (2-tailed) ,398 ,283 ,390 ,043 N 15 Mean kneeangle -.686** ,221 ,264 ,093 ,005 ,428 ,341 ,742 -,114 -,286 -,343 ,685 ,302 ,211 ,261 .657** ,348 ,008 ,507 ,054

Results Significant correlation between : Velocity of the hand and hand angle α = 0,05 / r = 0,529 Mean hip angle and mean knee angle α = 0,01 / r = -0,686 Mean arm trunk angle and mean hand angle α = 0,01 / r = 0,657

No significant difference between in and out throw Results   Successful throw Unsuccessful throw Mean knee angle (º) 198.2525 194.9536 Mean hip angle (º) 153.8375 155.9063 Mean armtrunkangle(º) 179.7975 195.0163 Mean arm angle(º) 240.4075 241.1481 Mean hand angle(º) 147.18 146.2445 Mean velocity of hand(m/s) 0.39185 0.40203 No significant difference between in and out throw

Pretest kognitivetime_in_s Pretest motorictime_in_s Results There is no significant correlation between Pretest cognitive time and Posttest motoric time   Pretest kognitivetime_in_s Pretest motorictime_in_s Spearman's rho Correlation Coefficient 1,000 -,277 Sig. (2-tailed) ,317 N 15

5.Discussion The correlation show us that there is a connection between hip and knee angle and between hand velocity and hand angle. But, there is no connection between movement parameters and successful throw in our study. Therefore we have to accept H0, that there are no significant differences in body angles, hand velocity or duration of phases between successful or un successful trials of basketball free throw determined with simi-motion. It is in contrast to previous findings, that found a connection between movement parameters and successful throw (Woo,Kim and Lim, 2007 / Mullineaux and Uhl, 2010 / Miller and Bartlett, without year / Okazaki and Rodacki,2012 / Hamilton and Reinschmidt,2010 / Okubo and Hubbard,2006)

Limitations Caused by small sample size ? Use other ball (not basketball – other flying characteristics?) Skill-level – more movement variability ? Lower variability is good for performance (Woo,Kim and Lim, 2007) “Basketball free throw shooting is a widely artificial movement an unnatural movement that has to be learned.” (Schmidt,2012)

6. Conclusion Connection between hip and knee angle and between hand velocity and hand angle, let me assume that all body movements are coupled and define the movement. No valid assumption can be drawn – controversy results of our and other studies. Perhaps have to take all results of our group and analyze them.

References for literature Way, D., & Alexander, M. (without year).MECHANICS OF THE BASKETBALL Free Throw.Supported by: Bison Sports Faculty of Kinesiology and Recreation Management, University of Manitoba and Canadian Sport Center Manitoba. Miller, S.,& Bartllet, R.(1991).THE EFFECTS OF INCREASED DISTANCE ON BASKETBALL SHOOTING KINEMATICS. Sport and Exercise Research and Deve /opment Unit, Crewe+A/sager College ofHigher Education, A/sager, S77 2HL, UK. Woo, C.W Kim & Y.K Lim.(2007).VARIABILITY OF BASKETBALL FREE THROW. HanYang University, Journal of Biomechanics 40(S2). . Mullineaux ,D.,& Uhl,L.(2010). Coordination-variability and kinematics of misses versus swishes of basketball free throws. Journal of Sports Sciences. Okazaki,V.H & Rodacki,A.(2012). Increased distance of shooting on basketball jump shot. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine. Hamilton,R., & Reinschmidt,C.(2010).Optimal trajectory for the basketball free Throw. Journal of Sports Sciences. H. Okubo & M. Hubbard.(2006).Dynamics of the basketball shot with application to the free throw. Journal of Sports Sciences. Schmidt.A.(2012).Movement pattern recognition in basketball free-throw shooting. German Sport University Cologne, Institute of Cognitive and Team/Racket Sport Research, Am Sportpark Müngersdorf 6, 50933 Cologne, Germany.

Danke für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit! Viel Spaß beim LERNEN!!! ☺