在不同情境下網球截擊之運動學分析
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2009-09-01
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
國立臺灣大學體育學室
Abstract
研究目的：本研究探討台灣優秀男子網球選手對於不同球速以及不同送球角度截擊動作的生物力學分析。研究方法：15位優秀男子網球選手參與本實驗，一部Prince TE38-11發球機在底線送出快速球(21.3 m/s)及慢速球(10.9 m/s)以及五種不同角度（右邊2 m、右邊1 m、中間0 m、左邊1 m、左邊2 m）。兩部Inline (250 Hz)同步收集3D的運動學資料，Kown 3D分析軟體用來分析計算運動學參數。單因子變異數分析用來考驗在快、慢速中五種不同角度的差異。結果：一、快速球回擊的成功率在各個不同位置小於慢速球的成功率，而快速球截擊左邊2公尺及慢速球是右邊2公尺成功率最低。二、不管球速快慢當球直接送往中間時，受試者選擇正拍截擊的機率高於反拍截擊。結論：對快速或慢速球截擊而言，在五個不同位置球速沒有顯著差異、慢速球截擊比快速球有較高的成功率、當球直接送到球員身上，球員會使用較多的正拍截擊。
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine selected kinematic variables of the elite Taiwanese male tennis players when they performed the volley under different ball velocities and release angles. Methods: Fifteen elite male players (age 21.3�1.5 yr, height 180.3�5.5 cm, mass 73.1�6.61 kg) participated in the study. One Prince TE3811 ball machine was positioned at baseline and projected the fast (21.3 m/s) and slow (10.9 m/s) ball from five different angles (2 m Right, 1 m Right, 0 m Center, 1 m Left, 2 m Left) into the count. Two Inline high-speed cameras (250 Hz) were genlocked to collect 3D kinematic data. Kwon 3D software was used to analyze the data. One way ANOVA was used to test the differences between fast and slow ball velocity on five positions. Results: The fast ball volley has a lower successful rate than the slow ball volley. For the fast ball volley, the 2 m Left position has the lowest successful return rate, and for the slow ball volley, the 2 m Right position has the lowest successful return rate. When the fast or slow ball was project into the subject (0 m), the subjects use more forehand volley than the backhand volley. The fast ball volley has a higher return ball velocity than the slow ball volley. Conclusion: No difference was found on return ball velocities for five positions (both fast and slow ball). The slow ball volley has a greater successful rate than the fast ball volley. The player chose more forehand volley than backhand volley when the ball was projected into the body.
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine selected kinematic variables of the elite Taiwanese male tennis players when they performed the volley under different ball velocities and release angles. Methods: Fifteen elite male players (age 21.3�1.5 yr, height 180.3�5.5 cm, mass 73.1�6.61 kg) participated in the study. One Prince TE3811 ball machine was positioned at baseline and projected the fast (21.3 m/s) and slow (10.9 m/s) ball from five different angles (2 m Right, 1 m Right, 0 m Center, 1 m Left, 2 m Left) into the count. Two Inline high-speed cameras (250 Hz) were genlocked to collect 3D kinematic data. Kwon 3D software was used to analyze the data. One way ANOVA was used to test the differences between fast and slow ball velocity on five positions. Results: The fast ball volley has a lower successful rate than the slow ball volley. For the fast ball volley, the 2 m Left position has the lowest successful return rate, and for the slow ball volley, the 2 m Right position has the lowest successful return rate. When the fast or slow ball was project into the subject (0 m), the subjects use more forehand volley than the backhand volley. The fast ball volley has a higher return ball velocity than the slow ball volley. Conclusion: No difference was found on return ball velocities for five positions (both fast and slow ball). The slow ball volley has a greater successful rate than the fast ball volley. The player chose more forehand volley than backhand volley when the ball was projected into the body.