The Evolution Of Physical Fitness Among Elite Ice Hockey Players During Adolescence In The 2010s: Bigger, Faster, Stronger?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ice hockey is a major sport in North America, gaining popularity worldwide. There is growing interest in optimizing the performance of elite players for major competitions and enhancing their development. Athletes are becoming more physically imposing, faster, and more skillful. Professional teams consider athletic potential when evaluating draft picks. However, research on off-ice performance indicators in youth ice hockey has been limited, making it difficult to analyze the evolution elite athletes' physical condition over time. PURPOSE: This study aims to track the progress of crucial fitness indicators (anthropometrics, upper and lower body power, and aerobic capacity) in players attending Quebec national team camps to prepare for the Canada Games from 2012 to 2018. METHODS:271 female (M age = 17.11 ± 0.78) and 255 male (M age = 14.20 ± 0.30) players participated in Canada Games selection camps. Physical fitness was assessed using weight, height, power, and aerobic capacity. A general linear model analysis identified differences based on the testing year (2012 to 2018) and player position. RESULTS: The study found that cohort year and player position do not predict player height and weight in female samples, but they do in male samples (Height R2 = .16, F (11, 255) = 2.57, p < .001, Weight R2 = .11, F (14, 255) = 1.68, p < .048). Broad jump and aerobic capacity can be predicted by cohort year and player position in both male and female (R2 = .21, F (17, 238) =3.418, p < .001) samples. Broad jump results have improved for females (+9 cm, p < .001) but remain stable for males. In the female sample, forwards have better aerobic capacity than defensemen (p = .021) and goaltenders (p = .007). In comparison, goaltenders have worse aerobic capacity than defensemen (-.61 stage, p = .010) and forwards (-.88 stage, p < .001) in the male sample. The results tend to regress over time in the female sample but improve in the male sample. CONCLUSIONS: This study compares athletic indicators of Canadian elite ice hockey players over the decade and provides norms for youth athletes aiming to reach professional ranks. Caution is advised in analyzing off-ice athletic tests as they don't strongly reflect on-ice performance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".