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

2. Structure
Introduction
Material
Method
Result
Discussion
Conclusion

3. 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)

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

5. 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.

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

7. 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.

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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

11. No significant difference between in and out throw
Results
Successful throw
Unsuccessful throw
Mean knee angle (º)
Mean hip angle (º)
Mean armtrunkangle(º)
Mean arm angle(º)
Mean hand angle(º)
147.18
Mean velocity of hand(m/s)
No significant difference between in and out throw

13. 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

14. 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)

15. 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)

16. 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.

17. 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.

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