鞍馬兩種俄羅斯迴旋720°移三部位動作之比較

Comparison of Two kinds of 3/3 Travel in RussianType Wendeswing with 720∘Turning in PommelHorse

目的：透過運動學的分析模式比較鞍馬兩種俄羅斯迴旋 720°移三部位動作技術的差異。方法：以兩部高速攝影機 (JVC-9800；60Hz) 來紀錄3 位男子競技體操選手的動作表現，以APAS 運動影像系統進行分析，並運用MRI 法建立之男子競技體操個人化人體肢段參數，減少實驗結果的誤差。實驗所得資料以t-test 進行檢驗。結果：一、完成兩種動作過程中肩關節的表現上趨於一致，式二動作的肩關節角度皆大於式一動作；二、式二動作在肩關節、身體重心及腳尖高度等皆高於式一動作。三、式一動作在肩關節、身體重心及腳尖合速度等皆大於式二動作。四、式二動作的實施時間多於式一動作。結論：透過本研究分析後得知，式二動作在實施動作過程中右肩關節的移動範圍過大，對動作的穩定性會造成影響，亦較不利於選手對動作的控制。由於鞍馬動作在實施過程中相當容易失誤，因此穩定性是鞍馬專項訓練的重點所在，並建議選手應選擇式一動作來從事訓練較為有利。

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare， through kinematics analysis， two types of3/3 travel in Russian type wendeswing with 720∘turning in pommel horse. Methods: The datawere collected by two JVC-9800 digital video cameras (60 Hz). The kinematics analysis wasperformed by Ariel Performance Analysis System. Moreover， the individual human body segmentparameters were established by the MRI method to minimize discrepancies during the test. Thet-test was used to examine the data. Significance level was set at α < .05. Results: A. Shouldermovements in the two types of skills were similar， but the shoulder angle shown in type Ⅱ wasalways larger than in type Ⅰ; B. The locations of the shoulders， body center of gravity， and toeswere higher in type II than in type I. C. The resultant velocity in the shoulders， the body center ofgravity and the toe were greater in type I than in type Ⅱ. D. The movement execution time in typeII was longer than in type Ⅰ. Conclusion: Based on the results， the displacement of right shoulderin type II is too large to keep the movement stable and in control. As it is easy to make mistakes inpommel horse movement， the focus of pommel horse special training should be on stability. It issuggested that training with type I is more advantageous for gymnasts.