Abstract The aim of the present study was to compare the aerobic and anaerobic power and capacity of elite male basketball players who played multiple positions. Fifty-five healthy players were divided into the following three different subsamples according to their positional role: guards (n = 22), forwards (n = 19) and centers (n = 14). The following three tests were applied to estimate their aerobic and anaerobic power and capacities: the countermovement jump (CMJ), a multistage shuttle run test and the Running-based Anaerobic Sprint Test (RAST). The obtained data were used to calculate the players’ aerobic and anaerobic power and capacities. To determine the possible differences between the subjects considering their different positions on the court, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with the Bonferroni post-hoc test for multiple comparisons was used. The results showed that there was a significant difference between the different groups of players in eleven out of sixteen measured variables. Guards and forwards exhibited greater aerobic and relative values of anaerobic power, allowing shorter recovery times and the ability to repeat high intensity, basketball-specific activities. Centers presented greater values of absolute anaerobic power and capacities, permitting greater force production during discrete tasks. Coaches can use these data to create more individualized strength and conditioning programs for different positional roles.

Original scientific paper The aim of this study was to find out the differences between perimeter and post basketball players in aerobic and anaerobic parameters. Thirty-four basketball players from four Bosnian teams were measured for body composition (body height and weight, fat%, fat free mass), aerobic power (VO2max prediction estimated using the multistage shuttle run test), anaerobic capacities (repeated anaerobic sprint test – RAST) and anaerobic power (peak and relative power output generated during the CMJ). The sample was divided in two sub-samples: the first was a group of perimeter basketball players (n = 17) and the second was a group of post players (n =17). The main finding of this research was the existence of differences between the perimeter and post basketball players in aerobic power and relative anaerobic parameters, but not in vertical jump height. The perimeter players had higher aerobic power and higher values of relative anaerobic power and capacities, while the post players have higher values of absolute anaerobic power. The findings confirm that the aerobic and anaerobic tests can be discriminative variables between perimeter and post basketball players. Additionally, the results emphasize the need for improvement of explosive power of the lower limbs in Bosnian players. Also, the coaches can use information obtained in the study to create more individualized strength and conditioning programs for different positional role in order to maximize players’ physiological potential which is very important for basketball to be successfully played.

Model development and testing is essential part of successful turbine refurbishment. The philosophy of development and testing in an independent institution is analysed on the basis of experience at hydropower plants owned by HEP Generation. The results of model development and testing performed in independent institute before turbine refurbishment tendering are analysed for HPP Peruca, Gojak and Dubrovnik (all Francis turbines), Varazdin (Kaplan turbine) and Dubrava (bulb turbine), experience with retesting is analysed for HPP Vinodol (Pelton turbine) and with competitive model testing for HPP Zakucac 1, 2 (Francis turbine). The advantages of independent institute at model development and testing are discussed in the light of its responsibilities for the final result of turbine refurbishment. The practice of using the services of an independent institute in the refurbishment of hydropower plants in Croatia has yielded good results. After the implementation of all initiated refurbishment projects, it will be much easier to clearly formulate the obtained experiences and to analyse any shortcomings of such an approach.