Analysis Of Test Battery For Elite Ice Hockey Players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose was to conduct a test battery on elite ice-hockey players to better understand the relationships between the different assessments. METHODS: Subject’s (n=41) physical characteristics were measured prior to testing session. Countermovement Jump (CMJ) height was estimated with a Bosco mat. Stationary Broad Jump (BJ) distance was measured from toes (starting line) to the closest heel. The best of 2 completed attempts was retained for both jump tests. On-ice repeated sprints’ time was measured with photo cells timing gates (TCi Smart Start, Brower Timing System, Utah, USA). Protocol consisted of 9 sprints of 40 m with 3 seconds of recovery between sprints that permitted subjects to turn around and return to the finish line which now became the starting line for the next sprint. Heart rate was measured with a heart rate (HR) monitor (RS400, Polar, FI). Local muscle oxygenation (SmO2) was measured on vastus lateralis with a muscle oxygen monitor (MOXY, Minnesota, USA). Blood lactate ([La+]) was measured with a lactate analyzer (Lactate Pro, Akray, Japan). Rated Perceived Exertion (RPE) was measured with a Borg Scale (6-20). Correlations were calculated (SPSS Ver 25) using a 2-tailed Pearson correlation analysis. Significance was set at p<0.05. Subjects characteristics are presented as means and standard deviations. SUMMARY OF RESULTS: Multiple significant (p<0.05) relationships were observed (r=-0.47-0.81). Findings show that age (r=-0.53-0.51), years of experience in resistance training (r=-0.32-0.48), weight (r=-0.33-0.47) and lean body mass (-0.38-0.46) were significantly correlated with jump and on ice sprint performance (Speed, Time, [La+] and RPE). The CMJ seems to be more important than the BJ for on ice sprint performance (r=-0.53-0.40 vs -0.19-0.28). Maximal HR is significantly correlated with fatigue index (r=0.41). The Borg scale seems to be a good tool to see if hockey players gave a maximal effort as it presents multiple significant correlations with sprint performance (r=-0.37-0.34). SmO2 was significantly correlated with [La+] (r=-0.35). CONCLUSION: Results of the present study should be utilised by ice-hockey strength and conditioning coaches to improve their testing battery. Further research should include resistance training exercises in their analysis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".