Characteristics of Muscle Power and Agility in Top-Level Junior Soft Tennis Players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the characteristics, such as muscle power and agility, of top-level junior soft tennis players. 36Japanese top-level junior (under-14) boys soft tennis players (age 13.4 ± 0.8 years，height 165.0 ± 9.7cm，andweight 53.9 ± 11.1 kg) with experience in international meet participation and 25 junior boys soft tennis players(age 13.1 ± 0.7 years，height 158.2 ± 9.5cm，weight 47.0 ± 8.2 kg) with experience in prefectural meetparticipation were the subjects of this study. Medicine ball (2 kg) throws to the right or left by trunk rotation andforward and backward by trunk extension (exercises recommended by Japan’s soft tennis association) were selectedto evaluate the muscle power of the subjects. Side step, spider, and front–back shuttle run tests (used by an Americantennis association) were selected to test the agility of the subjects. The top-level athletes were significantly superiorto the other junior players in the forward medicine ball throw, side step, and spider tests. These results suggest thatmuscle power in the forward direction and agility when moving to the right, left or diagonal direction are moredeveloped in top-level soft tennis players than in other players.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".