The Relationship Between Body Composition and Preseason Performance Tests of Collegiate Male Lacrosse Players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Numerous studies have examined the effects that body composition has on performance in football, soccer, and ice hockey; yet, there are no similar studies examining this relationship in men's lacrosse. The purpose of the study was to examine the physiological profiles and the relationship between body composition and performance in aerobic and anaerobic tests. Fifty-four (19.63 ± 1.21 years; 178.53 ± 6.17 cm; 81.66 ± 14.96 kg) Division III intercollegiate athletes participated. Performance tests, including a 1 repetition maximum power clean (PC), body weight (lbs), bench press repetitions, parallel bar triceps dips to fatigue (DR), two 300-yard shuttles, and a 1-mile run (MT), were completed after the completion of fall preseason practices. Body composition was estimated using air-displacement plethysmography. Correlation coefficients determined relationships between percent body fat (%BF), fat-free mass (FFM), and testing variables. Increased %BF was negatively correlated to DR (r = -0.36, p = 0.01) whereas positively correlated to each 300-yard shuttle time (T1 and T2), total 300-yard shuttle time (TT), and MT (r = 0.64, p = 0.00; r = 0.68, p = 0.00; r = 0.69, p = 0.00; and r = 0.44, p = 0.00, respectively). Increased FFM was positively correlated with PC (r = 0.58, p = 0.00) yet not correlated (p ≥ 0.05) with other variables. Results indicated that increased %BF might be a detriment to the repetitive anaerobic performance and aerobic capacity vital to on-field lacrosse performance. Body composition also demonstrated a significant relationship to moving internal vs. external resistances.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".