Morphological, Physiological and Skating Performance Profiles of Male Age-Group Elite Ice Hockey Players
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to describe the evolution of morphological, physiological and skating performance profiles of elite age-group ice hockey players based on repeated measures spread over one season. In addition, the results of fitness tests and training programs performed in off-ice conditions and their relationship with skating performance were analyzed. Eighteen high level age-group ice hockey players (13.1 ± 0.6 years) were assessed off and on-ice at the beginning and at the end of the hockey season. A third evaluation was also conducted at the beginning of the following hockey season. The players were taller, heavier, and showed bone breadths and muscle girths above the reference population of the same age. Muscular variables improved significantly during and between the two hockey seasons (p < 0.05). However, maximal aerobic power improved only during the off-season. All skating performance tests exhibited significant enhancements during the hockey season, but not during the off-season where some degradation was observed. Finally, weak observed variances (generally <20% of the explained variance) between physiological variables measured off-ice and on-ice skating performance tests indicated important gaps, both in the choice of the off-ice assessment tools as well as in training methods conventionally used. The reflection on the best way to assess and train hockey players certainly deserves to be continued.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it