IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rpanxx/v13y2013i1p11-22.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development of a lab based epee fencing protocol

Author

Listed:
  • Lindsay Bottoms
  • Jonathan Sinclair
  • Peter Rome
  • Kim Gregory
  • Michael Price

Abstract

The aims were to undertake a movement analysis of a simulated epee fencing competition and to develop and validate a laboratory based protocol (LAB). Seven male club epee fencers undertook a simulated competition (SIM) comprising of the ‘Poule’ and ‘direct elimination’ (DE) structure of competition. Video analysis was completed to identify fencing specific movements and work to rest ratios from which a LAB was developed. Six different fencers undertook the second part of the experiment involving the LAB. Heart rate and RPE were monitored throughout both trials. Statistical analysis was undertaken to compare HR and RPE responses within and between SIM and LAB. A work to rest ratio of 9:8s was calculated for the Poule and 10:12s for the DE. Poule (first round) fights lasted 139 ±12 s whereas a DE fights lasted 491 ±20 s. Although HR was lower during the DE phase of LAB, a similar intensity to those reported for previous fencing competitions was elicited. Lower HR during the second phase of the LAB is likely due to lower circulating adrenaline in a non competitive situation. However, based on mean HR and RPE responses and specific movement patterns involved the protocol may be useful for examining interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • Lindsay Bottoms & Jonathan Sinclair & Peter Rome & Kim Gregory & Michael Price, 2013. "Development of a lab based epee fencing protocol," International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 11-22, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rpanxx:v:13:y:2013:i:1:p:11-22
    DOI: 10.1080/24748668.2013.11868628
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/24748668.2013.11868628
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/24748668.2013.11868628?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rpanxx:v:13:y:2013:i:1:p:11-22. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RPAN20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.