An Assessment of Maximal Isometric Hand Grip Strength and Upper Body Explosive Strength and Endurance in Various Ball Sports
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Playing with the ball and using hand-arm strength and power are very crucial for ball game players. It takes arm force and endurance, as well as isometric hand grip strength, to accomplish ball-game skills. Study purpose. The aim of the study was to evaluate maximal isometric hand grip strength, arm and shoulder explosive strength, and endurance in basketball, handball, and volleyball athletes. Materials and methods. The study randomly selected 135 male athletes, including 45 basketball, 45 handball, and 45 volleyball players, aged 17 to 24, all competing at the inter-university level. Hand grip strength (HGS) for both dominant (DHGS) and non-dominant (NDHGS) hands was measured using a JAMAR hydraulic hand grip dynamometer. An over-the-head seated medicine ball throw (SMBT) test assessed explosive arm strength, while a push-up (PU) test evaluated muscular strength and endurance. Results. The F-values (F) (2, 132) of DHGS, NDHGS, SMBT, and PU tests among basketball, handball, and volleyball players were .499 (p = .608); 1.166 (p = .315); 5.595 (p = .005); and 10.339 (p = .000), respectively. The results indicated that no notable distinctions were observed in DHGS and NDHGS among athletes in the three sports. However, considerable differences were found in the SMBT and PU tests. Conclusions. The study concluded that basketball, handball, and volleyball players’ maximum isometric hand grip strength was nearly the same, but in both cases, the handball player's mean value was superior to others. Upper-body explosive power, muscular strength, and endurance showed distinct differences from one group to another.
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) | 0.000 | 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".