<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<title>Vol. 3 - Nº 1  (2021)</title>
<link href="https://hdl.handle.net/10481/70024" rel="alternate"/>
<subtitle/>
<id>https://hdl.handle.net/10481/70024</id>
<updated>2026-04-18T04:13:49Z</updated>
<dc:date>2026-04-18T04:13:49Z</dc:date>
<entry>
<title>Knowledge and Competences of Racket Sports Coaches: What do They Think and Know?</title>
<link href="https://hdl.handle.net/10481/71157" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name>Motta, Mairin del Corto</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Barreira, Júlia</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Cortela, Caio Corrēa</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Galatti, Larissa Rafaela</name>
</author>
<id>https://hdl.handle.net/10481/71157</id>
<updated>2021-10-28T14:48:51Z</updated>
<summary type="text">Knowledge and Competences of Racket Sports Coaches: What do They Think and Know?
Motta, Mairin del Corto; Barreira, Júlia; Cortela, Caio Corrēa; Galatti, Larissa Rafaela
This study analyzed the professional, interpersonal, and intrapersonal knowledge as well as the most important competences to Brazilian coaches who work with four different racket sports (badminton, squash, tennis, and table tennis). A total of 150 coaches (122 men and 28 women) participated in this study, most of whom were tennis coaches (n=68), followed by badminton (n=39), table tennis (n=21), squash (n=17), and more than one racket sport (n=5). For data collection, a socio-demographic questionnaire and the Coaches’ Knowledge and Competence Questionnaire (CKCQ) (Quinaud et. al., 2018) were applied. The Wilcoxon test was used to compare the importance and domain attributed by the coaches to the items. In general, knowledge and competences had high scores of attributed importance and perceived domain. However, knowledge of program implementation and evaluation, professional development of coaches and competence to develop the coaching philosophy had the lowest values of perceived domain.
</summary>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Placement of inertial measurement units in Racket Sports: Perceptions of coaches for IMU use during training and competition.</title>
<link href="https://hdl.handle.net/10481/70282" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name>Wylde, Matthew James</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Masismadi, Nur Adilah</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Yong, Low Chee</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Callaway, Andrew James</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Williams, Jonathan Mark</name>
</author>
<id>https://hdl.handle.net/10481/70282</id>
<updated>2021-11-02T11:13:12Z</updated>
<summary type="text">Placement of inertial measurement units in Racket Sports: Perceptions of coaches for IMU use during training and competition.
Wylde, Matthew James; Masismadi, Nur Adilah; Yong, Low Chee; Callaway, Andrew James; Williams, Jonathan Mark
While inertial measurement units (IMU) have become an integral part of sports performance analysis, upper body-mounted IMUs have been found to exhibit poor reliability in measuring lower-limb loading. In racket sports, IMUs have been placed in a number of positions on the upper body, lower body and racket in a research setting. A potential limitation to the concurrent use of multiple IMUs is that coaches may be reluctant to allow their athletes to wear the units during training and competition due to concerns that the units would interfere with athlete movement. This study seeks to understand the perceptions of racket sports coaches towards the use of IMUs in training and competition. A total of 58 racket sport coaches responded to a survey on the use of IMUs during training and competition. Based on the responses, 96.6% (56 out of 58) of coaches indicated that they would allow their athletes to wear IMUs in training, while 65.5% (38 out of 58) would allow their athletes to wear IMUs during competition. For use in training, 9 of the 14 suggested IMU placements received significant positive responses. However, none of the suggested IMU placements received significant positive responses for use during competition and 11 of the 14 received significant negative responses. This suggests that coaches understand the benefits of collecting data from IMUs during competition there remains concern regarding inconvenience to the athlete, lack of comfort, and appearance. Despite this, for use in training, a number of upper and lower body- mounted IMUs placements have the potential to be part of regular monitoring in racket sports.
</summary>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Stroke placement in women’s professional tennis: What’s after the serve?</title>
<link href="https://hdl.handle.net/10481/70281" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name>Born, Philipp</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Malejka, Louis</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Behrens, Marius</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Grambow, Ralph</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Meffert, Dominik</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Breuer, Jonas</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Vogt, Tobias</name>
</author>
<id>https://hdl.handle.net/10481/70281</id>
<updated>2021-11-02T11:14:06Z</updated>
<summary type="text">Stroke placement in women’s professional tennis: What’s after the serve?
Born, Philipp; Malejka, Louis; Behrens, Marius; Grambow, Ralph; Meffert, Dominik; Breuer, Jonas; Vogt, Tobias
The aim of the present study was to investigate the placement of the return, and the 3rd and 4th strokes in professional women’s tennis, the possible differences related to the level of play and to derive practical recommendations from the results. In total this study contains an examination of 2562 returns, 2065 3rd strokes and 1606 4th strokes from 28 players in 19 professional women’s tennis matches (WTA &amp; ITF 2018-2020 season). All strokes were classified using a specific court division method taking outcome (i.e., in, out, net) and placements into account for statistical analyses. Results show that returns are mainly placed into the court’s middle zones whereas 3rd strokes are placed more into offensive zone groups with 4th strokes similarly placed but more scattered. No correlation was found between the placement of the return and the 3rd stroke. Correlations were found between the placement of 4th stroke and the return, between the 4th and the 3rd stroke as well as between WTA and ITF players regarding all three strokes (return, 3rd stroke, 4th stroke). Present findings may be of interest to female tennis players and their coaches aiming to improve practice patterns in training and competitive performance in matches.
</summary>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Knowledge and Competences of Racket Sports Coaches: What do They Think and Know?</title>
<link href="https://hdl.handle.net/10481/70280" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name>Motta, Mairin del Corto</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Barreira, Júlia</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Cortela, Caio Corrēa</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Galatti, Larissa Rafaela</name>
</author>
<id>https://hdl.handle.net/10481/70280</id>
<updated>2021-11-02T11:09:09Z</updated>
<summary type="text">Knowledge and Competences of Racket Sports Coaches: What do They Think and Know?
Motta, Mairin del Corto; Barreira, Júlia; Cortela, Caio Corrēa; Galatti, Larissa Rafaela
This study analyzed the professional, interpersonal, and intrapersonal knowledge as well as the most important competences to Brazilian coaches who work with four different racket sports (badminton, squash, tennis, and table tennis). A total of 150 coaches (122 men and 28 women) participated in this study, most of whom were tennis coaches (n=68), followed by badminton (n=39), table tennis (n=21), squash (n=17), and more than one racket sport (n=5). For data collection, a socio-demographic questionnaire and the Coaches’ Knowledge and Competence Questionnaire (CKCQ) (Quinaud et. al., 2018) were applied. The Wilcoxon test was used to compare the importance and domain attributed by the coaches to the items. In general, knowledge and competences had high scores of attributed importance and perceived domain. However, knowledge of program implementation and evaluation, professional development of coaches and competence to develop the coaching philosophy had the lowest values of perceived domain.
</summary>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Are Technical and Timing Components in Para-Badminton Classifications Different?</title>
<link href="https://hdl.handle.net/10481/70279" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name>Strapasson, Aline Miranda</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Simim, Mário Antônio de Moura</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Chiminazzo, João Guilherme C Chiminazzo</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Leonardi, Thiago José</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Rodríguez-Paes, Roberto</name>
</author>
<id>https://hdl.handle.net/10481/70279</id>
<updated>2021-11-02T11:10:17Z</updated>
<summary type="text">Are Technical and Timing Components in Para-Badminton Classifications Different?
Strapasson, Aline Miranda; Simim, Mário Antônio de Moura; Chiminazzo, João Guilherme C Chiminazzo; Leonardi, Thiago José; Rodríguez-Paes, Roberto
Considering the smaller number of studies investigating Para-Badminton (PBd) and the need to understand the technical, tactical and functional classes, the purpose of this research is to investigate the frequency of techni- cal components and timing characteristics in the PBd categories of WH1(Wheelchair/severe impairment) and WH2 (Wheelchair/minor impairment) and to compare between classes. Twenty PBd matches were analyzed in the men’s individual category at the 11th World PBd Championship. The mean playing time of the matches was 1,780 (± 575) s for the WH1 class and 2,012 (± 1,098) s for WH2. The average rally time was 10.2 (± 8.4) min for the WH1 and 12.5 (± 12.5) min for WH2. The mean pause time was 15 (± 10.3) s for the WH1 class and 14.1 (±10.5) s for the WH2. The mean number of shots per game was 552 (±197) and 719 (±480) for class WH1 and WH2 respectively. In both classes: the most frequent shots performed by the players were Clear, Lob, Drop, and Net-shot; the players used backhand more often than the forehand service and the short service compared to the long one; the errors stood out in relation to the winner points. In addition, there was a higher proportion of shots at the front of the court in both classes. It was found that the WH2 class showed a higher intensity (longer rally time and shorter pause time) and a higher frequency of tech-nical actions (higher number of shuttle hits) when compared to the WH1. This information can assist coaches during training to guide the development of the temporal and technical aspects of the PBd, as well as monitor them during matches to obtain victory.
</summary>
</entry>
</feed>
