Body Build and the Level of Development of Muscle Strength Among Male Jiu-Jitsu Competitors and Strength-Trained Adults

Open access


Purpose. The aim of the present study was to assess the morpho-functional characteristics of male jiu-jitsu practitioners against a sample of strength-trained university students. Methods. The all-male research sample included 49 jiu-jitsu competitors and 30 university students actively involved in strength training. Measures of body mass and height, lower extremity length, sitting height, arm span, trunk width, skeletal breadths, circumferences and skinfold thicknesses of the trunk and extremities were collected. Body tissue composition was assessed using bioelectrical impedance analysis. Somatotype was classified according to the anthropometric method of Heath and Carter. Participants also performed three motor tests composed of the standing long jump, flexed arm hang, and sit-ups and two dynamometer tests measuring handgrip and back muscle strength. Differences between the measured characteristics in both samples were analyzed using Student’s t test. Pearson’s correlation coefficient was used to the determine the relationships between the morphological characteristics and the results of the motor tests. Results. The jiu-jitsu sample was slightly smaller than the strength-training students. In contrast, body mass was almost identical in both groups. The remaining length, height, and skinfold characteristics also did not differ significantly between the groups. Only hip breadth was significantly larger in the jiu-jitsu sample. No between-group differences were noted in the levels of endomorphy, mesomorphy, and ectomorphy. The composite somatotype of the jiu-jitsu athletes (2.1-5.8-2.0) was very similar to that of the strength-trained students (2.1-5.9-2.4). Statistically significant differences were observed in the tests assessing muscle strength. Handgrip and back muscle strength was greater in the strength-training students, whereas the jiu-jitsu athletes performed better in all three motor tests. Conclusions. The minor morphological differences between the jiu-jitsu and strength-training groups may be due to the different sporting level of the participants. Whereas the intense weight training regime of the strength-training students allowed them to achieve higher results in the dynamometer tests, the more multidimensional aspect of jiu-jitsu training was reflected in achieving better results in the motor tests.

1. Zatsiorsky V.M., Kraemer W.J., Science and practice of strength training. Human Kinetics, Champaign 2006.

2. Tan B., Manipulating Resistance Training Program Variables to Optimize Maximum Strength in Men: A Review. J Strength Cond Res, 1999, 13 (3), 289-304.

3. Sterkowicz-Przybycień K., Ambroży T., Sexual dimorphism in anthropometric and fitness measurements of top ju-jitsu contestants. J Combat Sports and Martial Arts, 2013, 2 (2), 4, 145-151, doi: 10.5604/20815735.1090660.

4. Costa E.C., Santos C.M., Prestes J., Silva J.B., Knackfuss M.I., Acute effect of static stretching on the strength performance of jiu-jitsu athletes in horizontal bench press. Fit Perf J, 2009, 8 (3), 212-217, doi:10.3900/fpj.8.3.212.e.

5. Vidal Andreato L., Franzói de Moraes S.M., Lopes de Moraes Gomes T., Del Conti Esteves J.V., Vidal Andreato T., Franchini E., Estimated aerobic power, muscular strength and flexibility in elite Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu athletes. Science & Sports, 2011, 26, 329-337, doi:10.1016/j.scispo.2010.12.015.

6. Stefaniak T., Atlas of universal strength exercises. Part 1 [in Polish]. BK, Wrocław 2006.

7. Ibri L., Shala S., Discriminative analysis of morphologic and motoric parameter to judo and karate sportiest boys. Crnogorska Sportska Akademija „Sport Mont”, 2013, 37, 38, 39, 547-553.

8. Sterkowicz-Przybycień K., Technical diversification, body composition and somatotype of both heavy and light Polish ju-jitsukas of high level. Science & Sports, 2010, 25, 194-200, doi:10.1016/j.scispo.2009.10.005.

9. Lech G., Sterkowicz S., Rukasz W., Significance of body height in martial arts (as exemplified by judo fighters). Hum Mov, 2007, 8 (1), 21-26.

10. Vidal Andreato L., Franzói de Moraes S.M., Del Conti Esteves J.V, de Araujo Pereira R.R., Lopes de Moraes Gomes T.L., Vidal Andreato T. et al., Physiological responses and rate of perceived exertion in Brazilian jiujitsu athletes. Kinesiology, 2012, 44, 2, 173-181.

11. Pieter W., Bercades L.T., Kim G.D., Relative Total Body Fat and Skinfold Patterning in Filipino National Combat Sport Athletes. J Sports Sci Med, 2006, 5, 35-41.

12. Charzewski J., Głaz A., Kuźnicki S., Somatotype characteristics of elite European wrestlers. Biol Sport, 1991, 8 (4), 213-221.

13. Huygens W., Claessens A.L., Thomis M. et al., Body composition estimations by BIA versus anthropometric equations in body builders and other power athletes. J Sports Med Phys Fitness, 2002, 42 (1), 45-55.

14. Imran M., Hussain I., Murtaza S.T. et al., A Comparative Study of Body Builders and Weight Lifters on Somatotypes. Journal of Education and Practice, 2011, 2 (3), 155-160.

15. Sterkowicz-Przybycień K., Sterkowicz S., Żarów R., Somatotype, Body Composition and Proportionality in Polish Top Greco-Roman Wrestlers. J Hum Kinet, 2011, 28, 141-154.

16. Deschenes M.R., Kraemer W.J., Performance and physiologic adaptations to resistance training. Am J Phys Med Rehabil, 2002, 81 (11), 3-16, doi: 10.1097/01.PHM.00000 29722.06777.E9.

17. Dias J.A., Wentz M., Külkamp W., Mattos D., Goethel M., Borges Júnior M., Is the handgrip strength performance better in judokas than in non-judokas? Science & Sports, 2012, 27 (3), 9-14, doi: 10.1016/j.scispo.2011.10.005.

18. Sertić H., Sterkowicz S., Vuleta D., Influence of latent motor abilities on performance in judo. Kinesiology, 2009, 41 (1), 76-87.

19. Detanico D., Budal Arins F., Dal Pupo J., dos Santos S.G., Strength parameters in judo athletes: an approach using hand dominance and weight categories. Hum Mov, 2012, 13 (4), 330-336, doi: 10.2478/v10038-012-0038-x.

Human Movement

The Journal of University School of Physical Education, Wroclaw

Journal Information

CiteScore 2016: 0.41

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.208
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.230


All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 158 136 16
PDF Downloads 61 56 10