Recoil Effect of the Ice Hockey Stick during a Slap Shot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the "recoil" effect of the ice hockey stick shaft during a stationary slap shot. Nine male adult subjects (four elite and five recreational) were tested. Their performances were evaluated by simultaneously recording stick movement and internal bending from high-speed digital video (1,000 Hz) and puck acceleration from a triaxial accelerometer positioned inside the puck. In addition, an electrical circuit measured blade-puck contact time. Data were analyzed with a one-way MANOVA for several dependent variables, including final puck velocity, puck acceleration, maximum stick shaft bending (angle and distance deflection), stick shaft angular velocities, blade-puck contact time, and corresponding time events. The results indicate the following. First, blade-puck contact time was greater for the elite than for recreational players (38 +/- 9 ms and 27 +/- 5 ms); however, measures for puck acceleration were essentially the same (63.8 g +/- 9.9 and 61.8 g +/- 19.5). Two, the elite players were able to generate greater puck velocities (120 +/- 18 km/h and 80.3 +/- 11.6 km/h). Three, the recoil timing was found to be reater for elite players (59.8% of blade-puck contact).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".