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.

Objective The community of residence (ie, urban vs rural) is one of the known factors of influence on substance use and misuse (SUM). The aim of this study was to explore the community-specific prevalence of SUM and the associations that exist between scholastic, familial, sports and sociodemographic factors with SUM in adolescents from Bosnia and Herzegovina. Methods In this cross-sectional study, which was completed between November and December 2014, the participants were 957 adolescents (aged 17 to 18 years) from Bosnia and Herzegovina (485; 50.6% females). The independent variables were sociodemographic, academic, sport and familial factors. The dependent variables consisted of questions on cigarette smoking and alcohol consumption. We have calculated differences between groups of participants (gender, community), while the logistic regressions were applied to define associations between the independent and dependent variables. Results In the urban community, cigarette smoking is more prevalent in girls (OR=2.05; 95% CI 1.27 to 3.35), while harmful drinking is more prevalent in boys (OR=2.07; 95% CI 1.59 to 2.73). When data are weighted by gender and community, harmful drinking is more prevalent in urban boys (OR=1.97; 95% CI 1.31 to 2.95), cigarette smoking is more frequent in rural boys (OR=1.61; 95% CI 1.04 to 2.39), and urban girls misuse substances to a greater extent than rural girls (OR=1.70; 95% CI 1.16 to 2.51,OR=2.85; 95% CI 1.88 to 4.31,OR=2.78; 95% CI 1.67 to 4.61 for cigarette smoking, harmful drinking and simultaneous smoking-drinking, respectively). Academic failure is strongly associated with a higher likelihood of SUM. The associations between parental factors and SUM are more evident in urban youth. Sports factors are specifically correlated with SUM for urban girls. Conclusions Living in an urban environment should be considered as a higher risk factor for SUM in girls. Parental variables are more strongly associated with SUM among urban youth, most probably because of the higher parental involvement in children’ personal lives in urban communities (ie, college plans, for example). Specific indicators should be monitored in the prevention of SUM.

Background: The application of whole body vibration (WBV) as a warm-up scheme has been receiving an increasing interest among practitioners. Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine the effect of loaded and unloaded WBV on countermovement jump, speed and agility. Patients and Methods: Twenty-one healthy male college football players (age: 20.14 ± 1.65 years; body height: 179.9 ± 8.34 cm; body mass: 74.4 ± 13.0 kg; % body fat: 9.45 ± 4.8) underwent randomized controlled trials that involved standing in a half squat position (ST), ST with 30% of bodyweight (ST + 30%), whole body vibration at f = 50 Hz, A = 4 mm (WBV), and WBV with 30% bodyweight (WBV + 30% BW) after a standardized warm-up. Post measures of countermovement jump, 15-m sprint, and modified t-test were utilized for analyses. Results: One way repeated measures ANOVA revealed a significant difference in the countermovement jump performance, F (3, 60 = 9.06, η2 = 2.21, P = 0.000. Post-hoc showed that WBV + 30% BW posted significant difference compared to (P = 0.008), ST + 30% BW (P = 0.000) and WBV (P = 0.000). There was also a significant difference in the sprint times among interventions, F (3, 60) = 23.0, η2 = 0.865, P = 0.000. Post hoc showed that WBV + 30% BW displayed significantly lower time values than ST (P = 0.000), ST + 30% BW (P = 0.000) and WBV (P = 0.000). Lastly, there was a significant difference in the agility performance across experimental conditions at F(2.01, 40.1) = 21.0, η2 = 0.954, P = 0.000. Post hoc demonstrated that WBV have lower times than ST (P = 0.013). Also, WBV + 30% BW posted lower times compared to ST (P = 0.000), ST + 30% (P = 0.000) and WBV (P = 0.003). Conclusions: Additional external load of 30% bodyweight under WBV posted superior gains in countermovement jump, speed and agility compared to unloaded WBV, loaded non-WBV and unloaded non-WBV interventions.

The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of different warm-up interventions on jump, sprint and agility performance in collegiate soccer players. Twenty-one healthy male college soccer players (age: 20.14 ± 1.65 years; body height: 179.9 ± 8.34 cm; body mass: 74.4 ± 13.0 kg; % body fat: 9.45 ± 4.8) participated in the study. Subjects underwent four different randomized warm-up protocols separated by at least 48 hours. The warm-up schemes were: 1. no conditioning contraction protocol (NCC); 2. dynamic stretching (DS); 3. prolonged intermittent low-intensity isometric exercise (ST); and, 4. ST with an additional external load equal to 30% of body weight (ST + 30% BW). All interventions were preceded by a general warm-up. Results from one-way repeated measures ANOVA demonstrated a significant difference in countermovement jump (CMJ) at F(3,60) = 10.2, ηρ2 = 0.337, p < 0.01. Post hoc analysis revealed a significant difference in CMJ performance in DS when compared to NCC and ST + 30% BW. No significant difference in CMJ was observed between DS and ST. CMJ scores in NCC, ST, and ST + 30% BW were non-significant. There was a significant difference in speed; F(3, 60) = 6.61, ηρ2 = 0.248, p < 0.01. Post hoc analysis revealed significantly better time in DS than NCC and ST. However, no difference in speed was observed between DS and ST + 30% BW. Similarly, speed was similar in NCC, ST and ST + 30% BW. A significant difference in agility performance was also observed; F(3, 60) = 24.1, ηρ2= 0.546, p < 0.01. Post hoc analysis revealed significantly greater performance gains in DS than NCC. No significant difference in agility was observed in DS, ST and ST + 30% BW. In conclusion, a prolonged intermittent low-intensity isometric protocol using bodyweight only showed similar benefits with dynamic stretching in countermovement jump performance. When the same isometric condition with additional load equal to 30% of bodyweight was applied, effects in speed and agility were similar to dynamic stretching.

The aim of this study was to examine the relationships among physical fitness of professional Bosnianbasketball players (n = 38) and shooting accuracy during one basketball season. A related, secon ...

The aim of this research was the estimation of anthropometric characteristics of elite male basketball players from four Bosnian first league teams, as well as the identification of possible differ ...

The purpose of this study was to identify the effects of warm-up strategies on countermovement jump performance. Twenty-nine male college football players (age: 19.4 ± 1.1 years; body height: 179.0 ± 5.1 cm; body mass: 73.1 ± 8.0 kg; % body fat: 11.1 ± 2.7) from the Tuzla University underwent a control (no warm-up) and different warm-up conditions: 1. general warm-up; 2. general warm-up with dynamic stretching; 3. general warm-up, dynamic stretching and passive stretching; 4. passive static stretching; 5. passive static stretching and general warm-up; and, 6. passive static stretching, general warm-up and dynamic stretching. Countermovement jump performance was measured after each intervention or control. Results from one way repeated measures ANOVA revealed a significant difference on warm-up strategies at F (4.07, 113.86) = 69.56, p < 0.001, eta squared = 0.72. Bonferonni post hoc revealed that a general warm-up and a general warm-up with dynamic stretching posted the greatest gains among all interventions. On the other hand, no warm-up and passive static stretching displayed the least results in countermovement jump performance. In conclusion, countermovement jump performance preceded by a general warmup or a general warm-up with dynamic stretching posted superior gains in countermovement jump performance.