不同競技水準拳擊選手預先計劃與反應性運動表現之比較:初步研究

Comparison of planning performance and reactive performance between two different levels boxing athletes: preliminary study

目的 : 預先計劃運動表現 (planning performance, PP) 與反應性運動表現 (reactive performance, RP) 都是賽場所需的技術運用能力，但不同競技水準選手的 PP和 RP可能存有差異。本研究的目的是量化拳擊選手以 PP及 RP執行專項動作與一般動作（蹲踞跳高度、伏地推高度）之運動表現，並分析不同競技水準拳擊選手 PP與 RP之差異。方法 : 16位青少年男子拳擊選手依競賽成績區分為優秀組 (n=6) 及一般組 (n=10)。以運科儀器量化受試者以 PP及 RP的方式執行拳擊專項動作與一般動作之運動表現。以相依樣本t檢定考驗組內 PP及 RP是否具有顯著差異，並以獨立樣本 t檢定比較二組間各依變項之差異，顯著水準定為 α=.05。結果 : 優秀組PP的專項動作反應時間及專項打擊時間 (單拳、雙拳、連續6拳) 顯著優於 RP (p < .05)，但一般運動表現無顯著差異(p > .05)；一般組無論是專項運動表現或一般運動表現，PP均顯著優於RP(p < .05)。優秀組以 RP執行單拳及連續 6拳的專項打擊時間顯著優於一般組 (p < .05)。結論 :相同技能水準的選手，以既定計畫執行的 PP運動表現優於需要因應刺激做出反應的 RP運動表現。競技水準較佳選手執行發力時間較長的動作，不受 PP與 RP的影響。以 RP執行單拳與連續 6拳的能力是優秀拳擊與一般拳擊選手關鍵的差異，故推論優秀拳擊選手的優勢建立於執行專項動作時快速的反應時間及肌肉能連續且快速收縮的能力。

 

Purpose: Planning performance (PP) and reactive performance (RP) are both technical skills required in the competition, but athletes of different levels may have differences in PP and RP. The purpose of this study is to quantify the planning and reactive performance of boxers in specific sport movements and general movements respectively, and to analyze the differences between PP and RP of boxers of different competitive levels. Methods: Sixteen young male boxers were divided into excellent group (n=6) and general group (n=10) according to their competition performance. Force plates, IMU, and reaction testing system were used to quantify the PP and RP performance. Data were analyzed by using Paired-Sample T-test to compare difference of PP and RP within groups. Independent-Sample T-test was used to compare the difference between groups. Results: Reaction time and strike time of specific movement (single punch, double punch, 6 continuous punches) of PP were significantly better than RP in excellent group (p < .05), but there was no significant difference in general movement (p > .05); as for the general group, regardless of specific sports performance or general sports performance, PP was significantly better than RP (p < .05). The strike time of single punch and 6 continuous of RP in excellent group was significantly better than that of general group (p < .05). Conclusion: The performance of PP is better than that of RP in both groups. There is no difference between PP and RP in the performance of countermovement jump and push up in excellence group. The RP of single punch and 6 continuous punches of excellent group are better than those of the general group. It is inferred that the advantage of an excellent boxer is based on reaction time and continuous rapid muscle contraction.