Comparison of Physical and Physiological Performance Features of Parkour and Gymnastics Athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare the physical and physiological features of the traceurs with the gymnastics athletes. The study was carried out with twelve volunteer participants (traceurs=6, gymnastics athletes=6). The mean age of the traceurs was 18.67±1.03 years, 172.67±3.78 cm, body mass 62.5±8.94 kg and BMI was 20.98±2.97; gymnastics athletes was 19.33±1.21 years, 175.83±6.18 cm, body mass 65.17±8.06 kg and BMI was 21.11±2.67. Maximal oxygen utilization levels of traceurs and rhythmic gymnastics athletes were 56.13±3.95 ml/kg/min and 57.18±5.33 ml/kg/min respectively, their Illinois test times were 15.22±.42 sec and 15.33±.22 sec respectively, their vertical jump distances were 47.41±6.05 cm and 46.48±3.37 cm respectively, their vertical jump power values were 7252.7±1142.73 W and 7026.55±427.62 W respectively, their horizontal jump distances were 2.53±.61 m and 2.48±.12 m respectively, and finally, their hamstring flexion angles were determined by using goniometer as the measurement of hamstring flexibility (traceurs = 106.67±4.27o; gymnastics athletes = 121.33±5.36o *), and there was a significant difference between the angles hamstring flexibility of the two groups (*p<0.05). According to the results obtained from the study, it was seen that physical and physiological values obtained from two groups of athletes were very close to each other and no significant difference was observed between these two groups. This similarity can be explained by the fact that the training of these two branches does not differ as structural features. In conclusion, the learning of important performance determinants in athletes, such as aerobic power, flexibility, agility and explosive power, by the coaches and their education in this subject may enable the preparation of a better training program.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".