Rule change incidence on physiological characteristics of elite basketball players: a 10-year-period investigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate, by examining data collected on professional basketball players during a 10-year period, the differences in aerobic capacity in function of the playing position and the impact on these parameters of the change in time regulation of 2000, which shortened the time allowed to attempt a field goal by 6 s and divided the duration of play in four quarters. METHODS: Twice a year between 1994 and 2004, professional basketball players (n = 68) were studied for anthropometric characteristics and were submitted to an incremental exercise test on a cycle ergometer. Statistical analyses were carried out to determine the interaction between the playing position and the effect of the change in time regulation on the physiological characteristics of the players. RESULTS: Anthropometric measurements were different in function of the playing position, the centres being taller and heavier than the forwards and the guards. Guards exhibited the highest Vo(2)max (54.0 (SE 1.6) ml/min/kg) and were the most affected by the change in time regulation of 2000 with a 19.5% increase. Significant main effects of "before" versus "after" rule changes were found for maximal and submaximal O(2) consumption, which were increased by 12.8% at ventilatory threshold, 7.3% at respiratory compensation point and 7.8% at Vo(2)max. CONCLUSION: While anthropometric characteristics remained constant during the last decade, the change in rule of 2000 may have contributed in modifying the physiological profile of basketball players, by generally increasing their level of fitness.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".