1. Research and Coaching Application for USA Seated Shot Put Paralympians

2. With high Performance Director for U.S. Paralympic Track and Field

3.  The projection conditions (release height, speed, and angle) determine the throw distance.  Purpose  Analyze the projection conditions of the athletes competed in the 2012 US Paralympic Trials (track and field) ▪ Determine how each projection condition affects the distance thrown ▪ Compare the projection conditions between male and female athletes

5.  Participants  Sixteen shot-put athletes ▪ 11 males and 5 females; disability categories F53-F58  Equipment  4 digital video cameras (60Hz)  Calibration frame (2×2×1m)  16 body points ▪ Hand, wrist, elbow, shoulder for both sides of the body and right, left, anterior heads, sternum, and shot  Kwon3D & Matlab

6.  Experimental setting

7.  Data reduction and processing  First synchronized to the instant of shot release  Digitized to obtain the stick figures and analyze the motions  Reconstructed from the image coordinates of the digitized points and camera calibration information using the DLT method (Abdel-Aziz & Karara, 1971)  Filtered using a zero phase-lag fourth-order Butterworth low-pass filter  A cutoff frequency: 6Hz

9.  Data analysis ϴ: Release angle H: Release height V: Release speed Y Z X

10.  Data analysis  Release angle:

11.  Data analysis  Release speed: The resultant linear velocity of a shot at shot release  Release height: The difference in height from the land to the vertical position of hand at shot release.  Distance thrown from the official records ▪ The best 3 attempts of 6 attempts

12.  Statistical analysis  Multiple regression (enter method) ▪ IVs: Release angle, release speed, and release height ▪ DV: Distance thrown  Two-Way Factorial MANOVA between subjects ▪ IVs: Gender and class ▪ DVs: Release angle, release speed, release height, and throwing distance

13.  Correlations of distance thrown and IVs using Pearson’s correlation VariableCorrelation with the distance thrownp value Release angle.415.002 Release speed.897p<.001 Release height.271.031 Moderate Strong Weak

14.  Multiple regression model coefficients Dependent variables: Distance thrown ModelCoefficient (B)SE Standardized Coefficient (β) tp (Constant)-8.1643.219 -2.536.015 Release angle.174.050.2103.467.001 Release speed1.626.119.87913.694P <.001 Release height-2.1961.476-.094-1.488.144 Note: R =.922, R 2 =.850, Adjusted R 2 =.840 Distance thrown = -8.164 + (.174*release angle) + (1.626*release speed)

15. F53: Have normal shoulders, elbows, and wrists, with mild limitation of hand function. No trunk or leg function. F54: Have normal arm and hand function. Have no trunk or leg function. F55: Have normal arm and hand function. In relation to the trunk, can extend the spine in an upward direction and can rotate the spine. No leg function. F56: Have normal arm and hand function. Can extend the trunk upward, can rotate, and can move backward and forward in a sitting position. Have some leg function. F57: Have normal arm and hand function. Can move the trunk in an upward direction, can rotate, can move backward and forward, and can move side to side. Have an increase in leg function in comparison with F56. F58: Have normal arm and hand function. Have normal trunk function. Have more leg function than F57.

16.  Two-way Factorial MANOVA results F53F54F55F56F57F58Sig. effects Release angle (⁰)M29.22 ± 2.1932.36 ± 6.5737.79 ± 3.3837.04 ± 2.1134.9 ± 3.637.02 ±1.28 GENDER CLASS F-26.8 ± 3.31-29.33 ± 0.6832.13 ± 4.81- Release speed (m/s) M7.14 ±.0.56.78 ± 0.468.25 ± 0.185.48 ± 0.178.03 ± 0.259.86 ± 0.29 GENDER × CLASS F-5.89 ± 0.54-8.32 ± 0.158.47 ± 0.2- Release height (m) M1.95 ± 0.011.81 ± 0.071.83 ± 0.111.72 ± 0.021.95 ± 0.071.81 ± 0.13 GENDER × CLASS F-1.78 ± 0.03-1.96 ± 0.011.98 ± 0.03- Distance thrown (m) M7.67 ± 0.066.48 ± 0.410.16 ± 0.416.31 ± 0.099.26 ± 0.8612.82 ± 1.33 GENDER × CLASS F-5.36 ± 0.66-9.22 ± 0.118.75 ± 0.09-

17.  Release speed > release angle > and release height  Differences in projection conditions  Among classes  Between male and females ×

18. The effect of release speed and release angle on the throwing distance of a shot with a constant release height(Linthorne, 2001) Optimum angle: 37° Male Female Change in release speed > Change in release angle

19.  Release speed is the most important projection condition  Differences in projection conditions  Among classes  Between male and females

20. So what??

21.  Athletes should increase release speed as high as possible and release angle as close to 37° as possible AT THE SAME TIME  The projection conditions are NOT INDEPENDENT (Hay, 1993; Dyson, 1986; Hubbard, 1988; de Mestre, 1990; de Mestre et al., 1998; Maheras, 1998)  Release speed decreases linearly with increasing release angle  The release angles could be their optimum angles  Due to the nature of their physical structure and muscular strength  The change in release speed > the change in release angle Throwing with a high release speed is more important to performance than throwing at the optimum release angle

22. Questions?