ῘJUDOKAS’ HAND GRIP STRENGTH STUDY, ACCORDING TO AGE,
ῘWEIGHT CLASS AND CHAMPIONSHIP PERFORMANCE
Abstract
This study aimed to present a survey with the reference values from 254 Brazilian male judokas hand grip strength
according to their age, weight class and performance during a State Judo Championship. Data were collected during
the weighing-in (critical moment) with a Jamal hand grip apparatus and the mass was measured with the official
federation scale. As expected, the semifinalists showed higher strength values but such difference was not significant to
suggest a tendency that maximal static strength per si should be able to influence the tournament results, regarding
their age and weight class. While comparing ages, significant difference (p<0.05) was found through factor univariate
ANOVA. Post Hoc test have shown significant increases in strength from the pre-juvenile age judokas to juvenile and
also from juvenile until junior age judokas. However no difference was found between junior and senior judokas.
According to these differences, three homogeneous groups were formed. Their values describe a similar curve to those
that represent the general, muscle or even mass growth. These significant gains in strength among male judokas from
13 until 19 years old suggest that strength training should start in these ages. Despite of the discussion presented by
MAIA & LOPES (2001) this seems to be a sensitive or critical period for strength training in agreement to Russian
studies (FILIN & VOLKOV, 1998). As long as strength training plays an essential role in judokas preparation, it should
be included in the training process mainly on adolescence since the age of 13 following the guidelines of American
Academy of Pediatrics (2001). One of the mathematical models presented in this research may help to determine the
strength training loads regarding the growth process, where:
HG = 3,728957 x (mass) - 0,027506 x (mass)2 + 0,00006572 x (mass)3 - 51,318061
r= 0,73; r2= 0,53; SEE= 13,5807
Key words: Judo, growth, strength training, handgrip
Introduction
The first scientific papers about Judo started to be published in the late 50's by the Japaneses,
but only after the 60's the evaluations on judokas were more frequent, and tried to characterize
the judokas' profiles and predict their sport performance [1]. Japanese hand grip studies among
their national team begun since 1969 [2, 3, 4]. In this area of evaluation and control of the
training process, muscle strength is one of the main components of general physical preparation
and essential for Judo [5, 6]. Bompa [7] says that “it improves performance and the execution of
many sport skills”.
Periodical muscle strength evaluations allow: “to classify students, determine their actual
condition, measure their progress, and present more objective ways to test, measure and
evaluate their results, identify talents and predict performance” [8].
Hand grip strength is an important measure to predict performance among teenagers when
associated with push-ups test and seated medicineball throw [9], however it does not have
relation to performance when it is analysed alone [10].
Some studies has dealt with hand grip strength in Judo [11, 12, 13, 14], as did Thomas et al. [15]
have shown the profile of Canadian Judo team, however they didn’t present the results
respecting the weight class characteristics as did Pregnolatto et al. [16] and Nunes et al. [17].
So, there is a need to present such strength profile among competitor judokas respecting their
ages and weight classes.
Mauro Cesar Gurgel de Alencar Carvalho (1, 2, 3, 8)
João Paulo Dubas (4, 5)
Julio Cesar do Prado (1, 6, 7)
Felipe Leal de Paiva Carvalho (1, 3)
Estélio Henrique Martin Dantas (3)
Gerson Gomes Cunha (8)
Luis Landau (8)
Alexandre Janotta Drigo (1, 9)
Paulo Henrique Silva Marques de Azevedo (1, 10)
(1) JUDÔjo – Grupo de estudos e pesquisas de Judô
(2) Colégio Pedro II (RJ)
(3) LABIMH – Universidade Castelo Branco (RJ)
(4) Universidade Santa Cecília
(5) Escola Paulista de Medicina – UFSP
(6) Colégio LaSalle – Manaus – AM
(7) Centro de Treinamento de Alto Rendimento / Região Norte
(8) LAMCE – PEC – COPPE – Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro
(9) FEF – UNICAMP
(10) Universidade Federal de São Carlos
[email protected] ou [email protected]
The exploratory analysis performed alloed the application of ANOVA for age and performance
comparisons.
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects
Dependent Variable: Hand Grip Sum
Source
Model
Semifin
Age
Semifin * Age
Error
Total
Type III Sum
of Squares
2443455,316b
76,659
28303,493
413,216
62933,684
2506389,000
df
Mean Square
305431,914
76,659
9434,498
137,739
255,828
8
1
3
3
246
254
F
1193,896
,300
36,878
,538
Partial Eta
Squared
,975
,001
,310
,007
Sig.
,000
,585
,000
,656
Noncent.
Parameter
9551,165
,300
110,635
1,615
Observed
a
Power
1,000
,085
1,000
,160
a. Computed using alpha = ,05
b. R Squared = ,975 (Adjusted R Squared = ,974)
Objectives:
To present the hand grip strength profile of competitor judokas according to their ages
and weight classes.
To compare the different ages.
To compare semifinalists against non-semifinalists.
ANOVA has shown significant differences between ages where the variability of data may explain 31%
of such difference. There was no significant difference between levels of performance. The applied
model has a strong power.
Multiple Comparisons
Dependent Variable: Hand Grip Sum
Scheffe
Hand Grip Sum
Material and methods
254 competitor judokas, who were previously classified to compete in the State Championship
were measured immediately after the weigh-in moment. The Jamar instrument was used to
take a single measure of the right and left hand grip strength and their sum was calculated.
This one trial measure procedure was already validated [18] and applied in this study due to
the judokas’ anxiety level and the lack of time and space to perform the regular used three
trials.
(I) Age
senior
junior
juvenile
pre-juvenile
Results and Discussion
The hand grip profiles shown in the table below present the first attempting among Brazilian male
judokas according to their ages and weight classes.
Senior
Pewrformance
average
super
Semifinalist
83
ligeiro
Non-semifinalist
91
Total
89,7
Semifinalist
102
Non-semifinalist
95,5
Total
mid
light
ligeiro
sd
n
average
Juvenile
sd
n
average
sd
n
average
93,7
11
3
52,5
16,2
5
84,3
10,7
7
40
14,8
6
87,1
11,1
10
48,3
1
87
24,8
2
93
97,7
17,9
3
92,1
Semifinalist
100
1,41
2
Non-semifinalist
89,3
9,93
6
106,2
10,5
92
9,75
8
106,2
1
Semifinalist
102
sd
4,95
n
2
1
8,02
3
1
74,3
14,6
3
61
1
13,6
6
75,3
4,99
7
46
2,83
2
12,6
7
75
8,03
10
51
8,89
3
77
6
3
5
82,1
8,36
10
55,3
8,02
3
10,5
5
80,9
7,96
13
55,3
8,02
3
102,3
13,6
4
91,3
7,57
3
104,5
11,3
6
108
7,97
5
90,5
4,27
11
65
1
Total
104,1
10,3
7
105,4
10,5
9
90,6
4,8
14
65
1
97,5
6,36
2
63
1
mid
Semifinalist
middle
Non-semifinalist
106,1
16,8
7
106,4
16,4
8
92,8
9,61
11
53
4,24
2
Total
106,3
15,6
8
106,4
16,4
8
93,5
9,13
13
56,3
6,51
3
Semifinalist
105,5
3,54
2
117
6,16
4
103
8,49
4
73
Non-semifinalist
113,7
9,74
7
107,3
11,9
7
97,8
12,7
13
70
8,49
2
Total
111,9
9,27
9
110,8
11
11
99
11,8
17
71
6,25
3
128
1,41
2
123,8
3,59
4
95,7
24
3
middle
1
Semifinalist
heavy
Non-semifinalist
115,5
13,4
6
114,3
17
7
104,7
9,38
9
94,4
13,2
5
Total
118,6
12,8
8
117,7
14,1
11
102,4
13,6
12
94,4
13,2
5
129
31,1
2
118,8
13
4
110
6,25
3
98
Non-semifinalist
122,4
13,3
5
119,6
15,3
10
102,2
12,5
10
75
8,49
2
Total
124,3
17
7
119,4
14,2
14
104
11,6
13
82,7
14,6
3
79
8,49
2
Semifinalist
a,b,c
Age
pre-juvenile
juvenile
senior
junior
Sig.
N
Subset
2
1
33
92
56
73
3
72,4242
92,9457
1,000
1,000
106,6429
107,1507
,999
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
Based on Type III Sum of Squares
The error term is Mean Square(Error) = 255,828.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 54,999.
b. The group sizes are unequal. The harmonic mean of the group sizes is used. Type I error levels are not guaranteed.
c. Alpha = ,05.
Scheffe’s post hoc test was performed and shoed were the differences have fallen. Scheffe’s
homogeneous grouping test showed that three different groups were formed where significant increases
of strength were found during the puberty as well as the studies that Filin & Volkov showed [19]. So
strength training should be encouraged within these ages. This increases have show a similar curve to
growth curve, so curve models to predict strength by body mass was developed.
Model Summary
,728
Semifinalist
heavy
Non-semifinalist
83,3
8,38
8
Total
82,4
8,11
10
Std. Error of
the Estimate
13,552
Coefficients for cubic model
Mass
Mass ** 2
Mass ** 3
(Constant)
Unstandardized
Coefficients
B
Std. Error
5,565
1,173
-,052
,014
,000
,000
-95,118
30,372
Standardized
Coefficients
Beta
5,930
-9,166
3,962
t
4,743
-3,568
2,905
-3,132
Sig.
,000
,000
,004
,002
t
-16,772
47,099
Sig.
,000
,000
Coefficients for inverse model
1
super
R Square
,530
Adjusted
R Square
,524
The independent variable is Mass.
1
mid
heavy
Sig.
,998
,000
,000
,998
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
Scheffe
R
Non-semifinalist
107
Std. Error
2,84128
2,71092
3,51009
2,84128
2,50704
3,35512
2,71092
2,50704
3,24547
3,51009
3,35512
3,24547
95% Confidence Interval
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
-8,5058
7,4902
6,0661
21,3283
24,3379
44,0993
-7,4902
8,5058
7,1479
21,2622
25,2820
44,1709
-21,3283
-6,0661
-21,2622
-7,1479
11,3856
29,6572
-44,0993
-24,3379
-44,1709
-25,2820
-29,6572
-11,3856
Based on observed means.
*. The mean difference is significant at the ,05 level.
Pre-juvenile
1
Total
light
Junior
(J) Age
junior
juvenile
pre-juvenile
senior
juvenile
pre-juvenile
senior
junior
pre-juvenile
senior
junior
juvenile
Mean
Difference
(I-J)
-,5078
13,6972*
34,2186*
,5078
14,2050*
34,7264*
-13,6972*
-14,2050*
20,5214*
-34,2186*
-34,7264*
-20,5214*
Model Summary
R
,726
R Square
,527
Adjusted
R Square
,526
Std. Error of
the Estimate
13,532
1 / Mass
(Constant)
Unstandardized
Coefficients
B
Std. Error
-3608,915
215,178
148,197
3,147
Standardized
Coefficients
Beta
-,726
The independent variable is Mass.
Conclusions
A male competitor judoka hand grip profile was established. The results presented in this study showed muscle strength increases at the same sensitive periods for strength training as
Russian sports literature reports. This may indicate that muscle strength training should be potentialized during adolescence to reach higher levels during the adult ages. Curve regressions
models were developed to predict hand grip strength according to body mass.This may help coaches to establish and control strength training needs and increases during the studied ages.
References:
Carvalho, MCGA; Silva, SC; Hausen, IT; Chagas, LS; Mello, ALP; Ramos, MS; Rimes, MAM; Henriques, DDF; Dubas, JP & Cunha, GG First anthropometric parameters for reference and practice analysis upon body structure of LIJUERJ judokas aging 9 to 10 years old, FIEP Bulletin, volume 74, special edition, article, 2004, p. 572.
MATSUMOTO, Y; OGAWA, S, ASAMI, T; ISHIKO, T; KAWAMURA, T; DAIGO,T; MASUDA, M & SHIBAYAMA, H Physical Fitness of top judoists in Japan (1967), Bulletin of the Association for the Scientific Studies on Judo, Japão: Kodokan, Report 3, 1969a, p. 1.
MATSUMOTO, Y; OGAWA, S, ASAMI, T; ISHIKO, T; KAWAMURA, T; DAIGO,T; MASUDA, M & SHIBAYAMA, In making up the standard physical fitness test of judoists, Bulletin of the Association for the Scientific Studies on Judo, Japão: Kodokan, Report 3, 1969b; p. 13.
MATSUMOTO, Y; OGAWA, S, ASAMI, T; ISHIKO, T; KAWAMURA, T; DAIGO,T; MASUDA, M & SHIBAYAMA, Evaluation method of judoists’ standard physical fitness test Bulletin of the Association for the Scientific Studies on Judo, Japão: Kodokan, Report 3, 1969c, p. 27.
Inokuma, I & Sato, N, Best Judo. Japão: Kodansha International, 1986, p. 210.
Dantas, EHM A prática da preparação física (the practice of physical preparation). RJ: Shape Ed., 5ª. Ed., 2003.
Bompa, T Treinamento total para jovens campeões (Total training for young champions), SP: Ed. Manole, 2000, p. 107.
CARVALHO, MCGA Testes motores específicos para o Judô: necessidade frente a uma limitada quantidade, Kinesis, 2000, no 23, p. 180.
PAULA, JC Elaboração de uma bateria de testes para predizer a performance em judocas, Kinesis, no 3(1), 1987, p. 55-74.
BORGES, AO Estudo da eficácia do “Kumi Kata” em lutas de Judô. (Master Thesis) Universidade de São Paulo, Escola de Educação Física e Esportes, 1989.
BRITO, CJ; FABRINI, SP; MENDES, EL & MARINS, JCB Estudo da força isométrica e lombar em judocas. www.judobrasil.com.br/estudos, accessed in 2007.
GAYA, A; CARDOSO, M; TORRES, L & SIQUEIRA, O Os jovens atletas brasileiros. RS: Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Centro INDESP de Excelência Esportiva, 1997, p. 104.
FRANCHINI, E; TAKITO, MY & KIS, MAPDM Variáveis antropométricos e força isométrica em função do período de treinamento em atletas de Judô. IV CICEEFE e II SPGEEFE, Anais. São Paulo: Escola de Educação Física e Esporte da Universidade de São Paulo, 1997, p. 79.
LITTLE, NG Physical performance attributes of Junior and Senior women and Juvenile, Junior and Senior men. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, v. 31, pp. 510-20, 1991.
THOMAS, JR & NELSON, JK Métodos de pesquisa em atividade física. RS: Artmed Ed., 3ª ed., 2002.
PREGNOLATTO, KU; LOPES, MA; CARVALHO, FLP & CARVALHO, MCGA Campeonato Paulista Sênior de Judô de 1999: uma descrição cineantropométrica de sues participantes. VI CICEEFE e IV SPGEEFE, Anais. São Paulo: Escola de Educação Física e Esporte da Universidade de São Paulo,1999, p. 22.
Nunes, AV, Moraes; JM & Franchini, E Avaliação da seleção brasileira de Judô de 2002, www.judobrasil.com.br/estudos, accessed in 2007.
COLDHAM, F; LEWIS, J and LEE, H The reliability of one vs. three grip trials in symptomatic and asymptomatic subjects. Journal of hand therapy, volume 19, issue 3, July-September 2006, pages 318-327.
FILIN, VP & VOLKOV, VM Seleção de talentos nos desportos. PR: Ed. Midiograf, 1998, p. 72.