Introduction. Some of the most important roles of coaches are organising the technical training for evaluating movement technique and indicating errors as gymnasts perform the elements of this movement. This can only be applied in individual gymnasts [2, 3], and there are gaps in our knowledge about the details of the technique of individual gymnasts. Therefore, due to the structural complexity of acrobatic elements, the evaluation of a technique should precisely locate errors indicated in specific phases of the exercise. Material and methods. In this paper, the results of the atypical back tucked somersault and counter movement jump of one of the participants are reported on. This participant was a 16-year-old female gymnast with a body mass of 51 kg and a height of 156 cm. While coaches use a subjective qualitative analysis of the sporting movement to determine what advice must be given, a sports biomechanics researcher must make use of objective quantitative data. In our study, we have used the multimodular measuring system SMART when studying the structure of the acrobatic jumps, and we conducted a complex analysis of these exercises. Results. These exercise approaches may be used to achieve important training goals. It seems logical, therefore, that physical educators, coaches, and athletes should look to biomechanics for a scientific basis for the analysis of the individual techniques used in sports. As for practical implications, we recommend that coaches and physical education educators carefully monitor the gymnast’s leg joints and avoid extension of the knee and ankle at the counter movement phase during standing acrobatic jumps.
If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.
1. Panitente G. Merni F. Sands W.A. (2011). Kinematic analysis of the centre of mass in the back handspring: A case study. Gym Coach 4 1-11.
2. Miller D.I. Henning E. Pizzimenti M.A. Jones I.C. Nelson R.C. (1989). Kinetic and kinematic characteristics of 10-m platform performances of elite divers: Back takeoffs. International Journal of Sport Biomechanics 5 60-88.
3. Król H. Klyszcz-Morciniec M. Sobota G. (2014). Takeoff mechanics of the acrobatic tumbling exercises (case study). In C. Urbanik A. Mastalerz D. Iwańska (eds) Selected problems of biomechanics of sport and rehabilitation vol. II (pp. 62-75). Warsaw: Józef Piłsudski University of Physical Education in Warsaw.
4. Prassas S. Know Y-H. Sands W.A. (2006). Biomechanical research in artistic gymnastics: A review. Sports Biomechanics 5 261-291.
5. Yeadon M.R. Challis J.H. (1994). The future of performance- related sports biomechanics research. Journal of Sports Science 12 3-32.
6. Omorczyk J. Nosiadek L. Nosiadek A. Chwała W. (2014). Use of biomechanical analysis for technical training in artistic gymnastics using the example of a back handspring. In C. Urbanik A. Mastalerz D. Iwanska (eds) Selected problems of biomechanics of sport and rehabilitation vol. II (pp. 104-115). Warsaw: Józef Piłsudski University of Physical Education in Warsaw.
7. Czaplicki A. Silva M.T. Ambrósio J.C. (2004). Biomechanical modelling for whole body motion using natural coordinates. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics 42 927-944.
8. Freriks B. Hermens H.J. (1999). SENIAM 9: European Recommendations for Surface ElectroMyoGraphy results of the SENIAM project. Roessingh Research and Development B.V. (CD-rom).
9. Hara M. Shibayama A. Takeshita D. Hay D.C. Fukashiro S. (2008). A comparison of the mechanical effect of arm swing and countermovement on the lower extremities in the vertical jumping. Human Movement Science 27 636-648.
10. Domire Z.J. Challis J.H. (2010). An induced energy analysis to determine the mechanism for performance enhancement as a result of arm swing during jumping. Sports Biomechanics 9 38-46.
11. Marina M. Jemni M. Rodriguez F.A. Jimenez A. (2012). Plyometric jumping performances’ comparison between elite male and female gymnasts and similar age groups. Journal of Strength Conditioning Research 26 1879-1886.