Rubin.

: Effects of training on specific-motor abilities of basketball players Serb J Sports Sci 3(4): 135-144

135

Serbian Journal of Sports Sciences Original article

2009, 3(4): 135-144, www.sjss-sportsacademy.edu.rs Received: 26 Apr 2009
UDC 796.323.2.012.1 ISSN 1820-6301 Accepted: 09 Aug 2009
796.323.2.015 ID 171104012

EFFECTS OF TEN-DAY PROGRAMMED TRAINING ON SPECIFIC-MOTOR

ABILITIES OF 15-YEAR-OLD BASKETBALL PLAYERS
Pavle Rubin
Sports Academy, Belgrade, SERBIA.
Abstract The research took place in the basketball camp Kikinda 07. The sample consisted of 20
basketball players, 15 years of age ( 6 months), from Kikinda's basketball clubs. For initial (9th
August) and final (19th August 2007) measurements, 8 tests to measure specific motor abilities
(SMA) were applied. The aim was to prove 10-day training's effectiveness (15 trainings at 90 min.)
on specific motor abilities of cadets. Basketball cadets were trained under the program designed by
the author of this research. The differences between the two measurements were proven using
multivariate analysis of variance. The statistically significant difference appeared between two
measurements at the levels of 0.00. In the final measurement, univariate analysis of variance
showed significantly better results after training in 4 tests (variable): Kamikaze shortened with
driving (at the level of 0.05); Driving the ball around the central circle (at the level of 0.00) for
measuring SMA movement of the player with the ball; and for SMA ball manipulation: Dribbling with
variations and passing the ball around the body (at the level of 0.00). In all 5 tests performed with
the ball, result improvement in the final measurement was achieved. The highest and
informationally very important result improvement was achieved in both tests which measured SMA
Ball manipulation: Dribbling with variations (23%) and passing the ball around the body (10%).
.

Key words: basketball, cadets, programmed training, effects

INTRODUCTION
Increasing interest in basketball in the world requires from specialists to continuously discover new
means and methods in working with basketball players. The complexity and sensitivity of training of
basketball players are undeniable; hence, the scientific and professional approaches are very
important in developing the process and controlling the effects of training.
Effects which are obtained in the training process depend on many factors [1, 4, 11, 13],
ranging from timely selection to the choice of the content and methods of training [2, 9, 12, 14, 17, 19]. It
is known that the formation of high-quality basketball players is implemented systematically through
several
stages. Each stage is characterized by several years of development in different contents, volume and
intensity of training. While the primary aim of working with senior (competitive) teams is achieving
successful results in competitions, the primary aim of training sub-senior categories should be the
creation
of quality players [18].
To contribute to the achievement of this goal, specialists are expected to develop appropriate
methodological solutions, and incorporate more efficient technology in the training process [14, 15,
17]. However, in basketball, scientific methods and scientific features of the training are accepted
slowly. The authority of the coach and his experience are often almost the only factors on which the
work is based [15]. Due to the above-mentioned, and many other reasons, one of the main scientific
and methodical problems at the contemporary stage in the development of basketball is to find the
most effective methods of training for the development of all abilities, especially the specific motor
Rubin.: Effects of training on specific-motor abilities of basketball players Serb J Sports Sci 3(4): 135-144

136

abilities (SMA). If training programs are to achieve optimal preparation of players, they should be
suited to a sports game (in this case, basketball). Only in this way is exercise a means of specific
preparations. Otherwise, exercise starts to build nonspecific coordination of movement and motion. It
is established that, due to disagreement between the structure of the movement training and the
structure of a particular discipline, an inadequate change in athletes appears [10, 16]. It is important to
make sure these abilities can be made more efficient to improve with the appropriate programmed
content designed, among other things, on the basis of research of the structure of the best basketball

players at competitions [15]. Thus, in order to program the training process, it is necessary to view it
from a performance-related aspect. The way to achieve that with a basketball team is to test specific
motor abilities (SMA), i.e. Basketball - motor abilities [7] of players permanently. It is important to
choose and implement a battery of tests that will provide data which will enhance not only the
management of the training process, but also the prediction of efficiency of application of SMA in the
game [16]. One of the most important tasks set before the basketball experts is to establish whether
the efficiency of specific motor abilities can improve with an appropriate program of work through
research on the basis of permanent investigation of the structure of the best basketball players at
competitions. To expect improvement, it is necessary to create tests to be as close to practice, i.e., the
basketball game, as possible.
The topic of this paper is related to the above mentioned requirement for best possible
monitoring i.e. testing of efficiency of the programmed training process of basketball players. This is
the only way to understand effects of programmed training on the SMA of basketball players. Effects
of this process can be statistically significant and informative not only in the positive sense but also in
the negative one.
The aim was to establish the effects of programmed ten-day training work on the SMA in
basketball cadets.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

SAMPLES

The research sample consisted of 20 basketball players in cadet categories (15 years 6 months)
from the basketball teams from Kikinda. Although more than 40 basketball players of that age passed
through the camp, the results of those who attended the optimum number of trainings (fewer than 3
trainings off) were taken into account.

TESTING PROCEDURE

The initial testing was done on 9th August, 2007. The total of 15 90-minute trainings were held to the
final testing on 19th August, 2007. The ten-day training process was designed and conducted by the
author, the manager of the Camp Kikinda 07. All the coaches, who had completed a higher school
for basketball coaching, were given the detailed daily plan of work drawn from the exercise the day
before the initial test.
On the basis of the previous publications [5] and research [3, 17] with the similar sample of
basketball cadets, tests were selected for evaluation of the SMA: Movement with the ball (tests 1, 2,
and 3), Ball manipulation (tests 4 and 5); Movement without the ball (tests 6 and 7) and Polygon (test
8). The following SMA tests were selected:
1. Driving the ball between 4 lines of the basketball court. ("Kamikaze" shortened with driving).
Instruments: a stopwatch with the possibility of measuring 1/10s; the basketball court. Task: the
reference points of this test were the baseline, both free throw lines and the central line of the
basketball court. Starting baseline is indicated with A, the first free throw line with B, the central line
with C, and the second free throw line with D. On the starter sign the subject started to drive the ball at
maximum speed consecutively to paths ABA, ACA and ADA. The subject had to touch ground with a
foot behind the subject line. Rating: Time was measured from the starter sign to reaching the end of
the paths. The time was read in 1/10s. Note: The controller was required at each line.
2. Driving the ball between 5 lines of the basketball court ("Kamikaze" with driving). Instruments:
a stopwatch - 1/10s; the basketball court. Task: as a reference point this test used the head-line, both
free throw lines and the central line of the basketball court. Starting baseline is indicated with A, the
first free throw line with B, the central line with C, the second free throw line with D and the second
baseline with E. On the starter sign the subject started to drive the ball at maximum speed
Rubin.: Effects of training on specific-motor abilities of basketball players Serb J Sports Sci 3(4): 135-144

137

consecutively to paths ABA, ACA, ADA, and AEA. The subject had to touch ground with a foot
behind the subject line. Rating: Time was measured from the starter sign to reaching the end of the
paths. The time was read in 1/10s. Note: the controller was required at each line.
3. Driving the ball around the central circle. Instruments: a stopwatch - 1/10s; the basketball
court. Task: The subject with the ball was with both feet on the line which cut the central circle, just
outside the circle. The subject held the ball in the normal upright stance. On the starter sign from the
parallel stance the subject drove the ball full circle with his outer hand until his feet and the ball
touched the surface of the line, then he turned for 180 degrees, drove the ball full circle with his outer

superior hand until his both feet touched the ground behind the middle line i.e. the place where he
started. The subject drove the ball two full circles with a turn. Rating: the time was measured from the
starter sign until the contact with the ground behind the middle line with both feet and the ball. The
time was read in 1/10s. Note: The subject was not allowed to touch the line of the central circle.
4. Dribbling with variations. Instruments: a stopwatch (1/10s). Task: the subject was in the
basketball stance. On the starters sign the subject started with two front changes (cross-over dribbles),
passed the ball through his legs (one and the other) then behind his back with one step forward between
each change of hands. Rating: measuring the time was required for all dribbling. The stopwatch was
stopped when the subject assumed the same position as at the beginning of the test.
5. Passing the ball around the body Instruments: the ball; a stopwatch. Task: At the starters
sign, from the basketball stance the subject passed the ball around his body in either direction at the
height of his hip. Rating: measuring the number of complete cycles during 30s. The subject started
moving the ball at the starters sign.
6. Running between 5 lines of the basketball court ("kamikaze"). Instruments: a stopwatch
(1/10s); the basketball court. Task: as a reference point, this test used head-lines, both free throw lines
and the central line of the basketball court. Starting baseline was indicated with A, the first free throw line
with B, the central line with C, the second free throw line with D and the second baseline with E. On the
starter sign the subject started to run at maximum speed consecutively covering the paths ABA, ACA,
ADA, and AEA. The subject had to touch the ground with his foot behind a certain line. Rating: The
time was measured from the starter sign to reaching the end of the paths. The time was read in 1/10s.
Note: The controller was required at each line.
7. Running forward and back (2x15m) in the basketball court. Instruments: a stopwatch 1/10s;
the basketball court. Task: on the starter sign, the subject ran at maximum speed along the middle of
the court from one side line to the other passing it with his both feet after which he ran back and
returned to the start position. Rating: The time was measured from the starter sign until crossing over
the starting line with both feet, on return when the task was completed . The time was read in 1/10s.
8. Polygon. Instruments: a stopwatch (1/10s); the basketball court. The subject moved behind
the baseline without the ball. The ball was on the ground behind the opposite baseline of the
basketball court. On the measurer's sign the subject ran to the center of the court, then turned and ran
backwards keeping the same direction towards the opposite baseline. When he reached the opposite
base line, the player picked up the ball from the ground and performed two cross-over dribbles,
between-the-leg dribbles, and behind-the-back dribbles. Then he drove the ball from the baseline to
the closer free throw line and back and to the middle line of the court, where he continued to drive the
ball around the central circle with one hand first and then with the other, starting and finishing at the
middle line. The subject kept driving the ball to the opposite basket when he scored from a drive step.
When he scored, the time stopped. He threw the maximum of two times. If there was no score, he
would throw once more. The time was measured in 1/10s.

TRAINING PROGRAM

The program was designed by the author of this research with the basic aims to be achieved in the
work with basketball players of this age training and developing group tactics and training activities
necessary for the individual overplaying; didactic principles (from simple to more complex exercises,
for example, exercise fast break of 2:0 to 3:2), getting information (Figure 1) from studies of the
structure of basketball games [15, 16, 17, 18].
Each training started (initial part: 7 min) with exercise in which the ball was used, with applied
game (Chase). In the preparation of the training all the players worked together doing complex
stretching exercises (for 6 min), after which each player was given 2 minutes for individual strain. In
the main part of the training, they simply repeated the exercise from the previous training before they
switched to the new complex training. All exercises (in all parts of the training, except in the
Rubin.: Effects of training on specific-motor abilities of basketball players Serb J Sports Sci 3(4): 135-144

138

preparation part) were with the ball (Table 1). At special daily meetings, the author of the program
explained to the coaches the goal and the way of performance of each exercise.

WHY
WHAT
WHEN
HOW
HOW MUCH
TO TRAIN
RESULT

?
?
?!
Figure 1. Information to be taken into account during elaboration of the training program in order to achieve
the goal (result)

The author of this plan and program was in charge of control and correction of the implementation
The author of this plan and program was in charge of control and correction of the implementation of
the program on the basketball court.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

All the obtained results were statistically evaluated by the method of descriptive statistics (Mean, SD,
%). The differences between the initial and final measurements were established by multivariate
analysis of variance (MANOVA). The significance was set at P < 0.05. Absolute and percentage
values of the differences between the final and initial measurements were also introduced. All
statistical operations were conducted using the SPSSv14 (Chicago, Illinois).

RESULTS
The data for F and P values within the whole system of 8 variables shown in Table 2 can lead to the
conclusion that there is significant statistical difference (at the level of 0.00) between the two
measurements of the SMA in basketball players of cadet categories.
As seen in Table 2, the basketball players achieved significantly better results (at the level of
0.05) in 4 tests out of 8. These were: Kamikaze shortened with driving, Driving around the central
circle, Dribbling with variations and Passing the ball around the body. Based on the values of
arithmetic mean, it can be concluded that four tests showed statistically significant improvement of
results in the final measurement, i.e. after implementation of the training treatment.
Statistically significant improvement was achieved in the final measurement in two of three
applied tests to measure an SMA movement with the ball (tests 1 and 3) both tests for measuring
SMA to manipulate the ball (tests 4 and 5).
No tests of SMA without the ball (tests 6 and 7) showed any significant statistical difference
between the two measurements, nor did the Polygon test.
In terms of percentages, given in Table 2, a great improvement in tests can be noticed, which
was at the level of statistical significance of .05. Dribbling with variations (Table 2, test 4) by 23%,
Passing the ball around the body (10%) and Driving around the central circle (7%). In "Kamikaze"
shortened with driving the improvement of 4% was achieved in the final measurement.
Rubin.: Effects of training on specific-motor abilities of basketball players Serb J Sports Sci 3(4): 135-144

139

Table 1. Work plan and program (shortened) of the basketball camp Kikinda 07

Data
Time PRACTICE PLAN AND PROGRAM
1
10.08.
18,30 20,00
Practice number 1 (1) Pass 3 players; (2) Get open (GO) - Jump stop (js) - Jump shot
(JS); (3) Fast break (FB) two on zero (2:0); (4) (GO) V cut (VC) - (js) - (JS); (5) Drive
(D) - cross-over dribble (COD) - Penetration (P)(drive step and dish); (6) (FB) (2:0)
outlet pass: baseball pass.
2
11.08.

9,00 10,30
(7) (D) - (js) - (JS), apply in fill court (1/1); (8) (JS), 2x5; (9) (D) - (COD) - rolling dribble
(RD) - (P); (10) (GO) - up fake (UF) (P); (11) one - on - one (1:1), in shot range;
Practice number three (p:3); (12) (FB) 2:0 (rebound outlet pass: hand off pass).
3
11.08.
18,30 20,00
(13) 1:1, (D) (1\1); (14) (JS) 1:1, the most 2 (UF); (15) 1:1, defense of 3 situation; (16)
(FB) two - on - one (2:1); (p:8); (17) 1:1 (D); (18) Five on five (5:5) till field goal.
4
12.08.
9,00 10,30
(e:3;16;15);(19) (GO) - one side step (OSS) - (JS); (20) 1:1, on the half of the court
(1\2); (21) 1:1, (VC) till receiving the ball; (22) 1:1 (1/1) just (COD) is allowed;(e:8;4).
5
13.08.
9,00 10,30
(23) (D) - (COD) - (js) - (JS); (24) (VC) - (OSS) - (js) - (JS); (e:3;6;16); (25) 1:1 without
(COD), 1\1; (e:8); (26) (VC) - pivot (Pi) - (JS); (27) (D) - between the leg dribble (BLD)
- (js) - (JS); (e:21) (28) (VC) (1:1) - 2 fakes the most and one dribble
6
13.08.
18,30 20,00
(29) (D) - Behind the back dribble (BBD) - (js) - (JS); (30) 1:1 (1/1); (31) (GO), L cut
(LC) 1:1 (most one dribble and fake); (e:16;8); (32) (D) (COD) Rolling dribble
(RD) - (js) - (JS); (33) (GO) - (LC) - (UF) - (Pe); (34) (D) and defense (1:1) (1\1).
7
14.08.
9,00 10,30
(e:23;27;29;32);(35) (GO, LC) - (Pi) - (OSS); (36) (FB) three on zero (3:0); (37) (GO,
VC) - (Pi) - (UF) - (Pe); (38) (JS) medium shot; (39) (GO, VC) 1+2x1:1; (40) 2:2 (1/1)
without dribbling and lob pass.
8
14.08.
18,30 20,00
(41) 10x (JS) set shot; (42) 2:2 (1/1) forbidden lob pass; (43) (JS) pair competition to
21 field goals; (44) (D) - (COD, BBD, BLD or COD - RD) - (Pe); (45) (FB) 2:1; (46) (JS)
close shot, 2x10.
9
15.08.
18,30 20,00
(e:3;16;8); (47) (FB) 3:1; (48) Screen with hand of pass (HOP); (e:38); (49) (GO) 2 x
1(VC):1(LC) +1; (50) Screen for player with the ball; (e:43;20); (51) (D) - (COD, BBD,
BLD or COD - RD) - (Pe) (1/1); (52) (D) - (COD) - (Pe) with defense player.
10
16.08.
9,00 10,30
(e:48); (53) Defending against screen with hand off pass; (e:50); (54) Defending
against screen (DAS), fight through the screen; (e:38); (55) (FB) 3:1; (e:43;15;30;8);
(56) 2:2 (1/1) in back court forbiden lob pass and dribble; (57) 2:2 (1/1); (e:16;46).

11
16.08.
18,30 20,00
(e:16); (58) (FB) 3:2; (e:8;38); (59) 2:2 pick and roll (PAR) (offense); (60) (PAR)
(defense); (61) 1+2x1:1, at the same time (GO) (VC) and (LC), (after catching the ball 1
dribble and fake); (62) Three man weave (TMW) 3:0; (63)Pick away screen (PAS) (3:0)
12
17.08.
9,00 10,30
(64) Transition game 2:0; (e:62;63); (65) (TMW) + (PAS) 3:0; (e:56;8); (66) Weave
screen (WS) 1+2x1:1; (67) (GO) (HOP), 2x2:2; (68) 3:3+3 (in shot range); (e:8;56);
(69) 3:3+3 (1\2).
13
17.08.
18,30 20,00
(70) Transition game 2:0 (in front court screen and roll) (SAR); (e:8;56); (71) 3:3 (1/1)
without screen and lob pass; (e:38;68;6;8); (72) 3:3 (1/1); (e:38;43); (73) 3:3 in shot
range; (e:23;27;29;32).
14
18.08.
9,00 10,30
(e:23;27;29;32); (74) (FB)3:2; (75) 5:5+5 without: dribbling and switching defense;
(e:17;38); (76) 5:5+5, pressing defense (1/1); (e:6;2;1); (77) 1:1 (1/1) free lance; (78)
Tournament (5:5) (Semifinals 5min, finals 10 min)
15
18.08.
18,30 20,00
(79) 5:5 (1\2); (80) 5:5 (FB) and defense; (81) 5:5 1/1 forbidden dribbling; (82) 5:5
Tournament.
Rubin.: Effects of training on specific-motor abilities of basketball players Serb J Sports Sci 3(4): 135-144

140

Table 2. Statistically significant differences (absolute and percentage) between two measurements of
specific-motor abilities of basketball players (initial and final tests)

Measurement
Initial (i) Final (f)
VARIABLE
AM SD AM SD
i-f
%
(+/-)
Fp
1. Kamikaze shortened
with driving 15.25 0.68 14.63 1.20 0.62s +4.0 4.27 0.05*
2. Kamikaze with driving 31.92 1.70 31.27 2.10 0.65s +2.0 1.12 0.30
3. Driving around the
central circle 8.29 0.43 7.72 0.39 0.57s +7.0 18.9 0.00*
4. Dribbling with
variations 3.64 0.73 2.81 0.44 0.83s +23 19.1 0.00*
5. Passing the ball around
the body 40.30 4.80 44.20 3.10 3.9 +10 9.15 0.00*
6. Kamikaze 29.94 1.90 29.92 2.40 -0.02s -0.02 .001 0.97
7. Running forward and
back 6.93 0.44 7.12 0.49 -0.2s -3.0 1.66 0.21

8. Polygon 29.43 2.90 30.43 2.60 -1s -3.4 1.32 0.26

F= 8.407 P = .000

DISCUSSION
In all 4 tests in which basketball players showed a significantly better result in the final measurement,
it can be noted that the difference was significant at the information level. In the test "Kamikaze"
shortened with ball driving, the difference was in favor of the final measurement by about 1.4 s; in the
test Dribbling around the central circle, the players improved the result under the influence of training
treatment by about half a second; in the test Dribbling with variations an average result improved after
15 trainings by about 0.8 s; in the test Passing the ball around the body the players improved the
result by about 4 circles with the ball (on average). Improving the results by almost one second in the
test Dribbling with variations seemed especially more important if its very short execution time is taken
into account (in the initial measurement, the average performance of the test took about 3.6 s, while in
the final measurement it was about 2.8 s).
Table 2 shows that the highest percentage of the improvement under the influence of the
treatment was achieved in both tests for the evaluation of SMA Ball manipulation: Dribbling with
variations (23%) and Passing the ball around the body (10 %). This great improvement was probably
the result of two reasons: first, that in all exercises (except in the second - the preparation of the
training sessions) the ball was used. Equally important was the fact that the emphasis in the
preparation for training was on correcting the errors observed in the performance of technical and
tactical elements (the author of the research and the manager of the camp held daily meetings with
the coaches). In favor of the previous assumption is that, in relation to the duration of the process
followed by training, not a small improvement was achieved in all three tests measuring SMA
Movement with the ball: Driving around the central circle (7%), "Kamikaze" shortened with driving (4%)
and "Kamikaze" with driving (2%). Worse results in the final measurement, achieved in both tests
Rubin.: Effects of training on specific-motor abilities of basketball players Serb J Sports Sci 3(4): 135-144

141

measuring SMA Movement without the ball (in the test "Kamikaze" -0.2%, and Running forward and
back -3%) fit the previous explanation.
In the test "Kamikaze" with ball driving (to measure the movement of the SMA with the ball)
statistically significant difference was not obtained, but a significant difference can be noticed between
the two information measurements (because the result improved by about 0.7s). In tests to measure
the SMA Movement of players without the ball no statistically significant difference was found. In the
initial and final measurement basketball players achieved similar results, since in the final
measurement they were slightly better than in the initial one.
It would be both interesting and necessary to compare several results with those of a similar
research on the sample of identical age (15 years 6 months) from basketball clubs in Novi Sad, also
conducted by the author of this study [17]. The aim was to determine the effectiveness of three-month
training conducted according to the program made on the basis of the game of best basketball players
[15]. That research of the game was implemented in the training of the 1 st experimental group,
compared to the work by the standard program of the 2nd experimental group. The control group
consisted of secondary school students of the same age. The present study compared results mostly
with the results of the 1st experimental group because it trained according to the same principles, i.e.
the program designed on the basis of the research structure of the best basketball game. Thus:
In the test "Kamikaze" shortened with driving the ball, respondents of the 1 st experimental group
[17], achieved worse results in both measurements (20.95s initial; 20.35s final measurement)
compared to the sample of basketball players in this study (20.25s and 19.63s). Relevant data
(improvement after training) were almost identical to this study (0.6s, compared to 0.62s in this
study). It should be taken into account that the improved results in the previous study were a
consequence of the effects of longer training treatment (which lasted 3 months, compared to 10
days in this study);
In the test Driving the ball around the central circle, the 1st experimental group achieved similar
results to this research. In initial measuring it was 8.53s (compared to 8.29s - Table 1), while in the
final it was 7.69s (versus 7.72s). So in the previous research, the improvement in the results was
slightly higher (0.84s) in relation to the improvement achieved in the current study (0.57s).
In the test Passing the ball around the body in the previous research [17] after three-month training the
result improved by about 2 circles. The 1st group achieved 39 and 41 circles in the initial and final

measurements, respectively. The 2nd experimental group was significantly worse in both
measurements; they achieved 34 and 36 circles in the initial and final measurements, respectively.
Basketball players included in this study achieved more progress since they made about 4 extra circles of
the ball around the body in the final measurement (44 circles) whereas initially they made only 40 circles.
In
previous research [9] the basketball players aged 12.6 years improved their experimental result after the
training by about 1.5 circles, as they had a weaker result in the initial measurement i.e. 35 circles
compared
to 36 circles with the ball around the body in the final measurement.
In the test "Kamikaze", the subjects of the previous research [17] achieved significantly worse
results (31.56s and 32.73s) in the initial measurement compared to the subjects in this study (29.94s).
In the final measurement, although they were much better than in the initial tests (1 st experimental
group: 30.85s; 2nd group: 31.52s) they had weaker results than the basketball players at the basketball
camp "Kikinda '07" (29.92s). It would be desirable that the results of the current testing were
compared with those of the best players. Although we deal with reference times valid for the
basketball players of competition level (seniors), they should be taken into account as reference
information. In one of the previous studies (20) the required value for top basketball players for the
suicide test (kamikaze) for the grade 5 (i.e. maximum one) was below 25 seconds and for the grade
1 it was below 29 seconds.
In the test Running forward and back for the evaluation of the SMA movement without the ball,
the players had somewhat worse results in the final measurement (about 7.1s) than in the initial
(approximately 6.9s). This improvement of about 0.2s did not show statistically significant difference.
In the previous research [17], the best result in the final measurement (7.14s) was made by the control
group subjects the secondary school students of the same age who were engaged in sporting
activities within the classes of physical education at school (even though they had the worst initial
result: 8.30s). The basketball players from the other two experimental groups were slightly worse in
the second measurement (2nd group: 7.51s v. 7.53s in the initial and final measurements,
Rubin.: Effects of training on specific-motor abilities of basketball players Serb J Sports Sci 3(4): 135-144

142

respectively), or slightly better (1st group: 7.39s v. 7.27s in the initial and final measurements,
respectively). The reason for this is that the method of conducting this test on basketball players is
less specific than the one used for those who do not train basketball to achieve better results.
While in the test of "Kamikaze" with driving the ball no significant statistical difference was found
in the average (AM) results between the two measurements, it can be noticed that at the information
level, the difference is significant (Table 2). Namely, after ten days of experimental treatment the
basketball players improved the results by about 0.7s. The average time in both measurements (Table
2) of this research were expected to be better than 35.45s since the subjects were the best young 1214 years old basketball players from Serbia gathered in the training center (TC Basketball
Federation of Serbia) in Pozarevac within the project Ace to 2004 [8].
Naturally, these results can be compared only conditionally because of the differences in
chronological age.
Table 3. Comparative results of the tests "Kamikaze" with and without driving the ball, in the initial and final
measurements

Measured
Test (variable) Initial (AM) Final (AM)
Kamikaze with driving the ball 31.92 31.27
Kamikaze 29.94 29.92
The difference in times achieved in the two tests 2.02s 1.35s*
The results of the "Kamikaze" test (a measurement of an SMA movement of players without the ball)
in the initial and final measurements were almost identical, since the improvement of 0.02s cannot be
considered as significant even at the information level. However, from a professional coaching point of
view, very important information is found in the reduction of differences in the time achieved in the two
tests (in the final compared to the initial measurement). When testing basketball players, a very small
difference in the performance of these two tests could be a highly exact indicator of the correct
technique with the ball (which can be tentatively defined as a "sprint with the ball"). Reduction of
differences in the times achieved in the two tests (about 0.7s in the final measure) clearly indicates the

improvement in the techniques of driving the ball after ten days of programmed training. It is very
difficult, almost impossible, for trainers to evaluate the accuracy of techniques of driving the ball solely
on the basis of observations of the players. The reason is that the speed of movement of players in
the sprint (with or without the ball) depends on the frequency of steps and the stride length. When
driving the ball, basketball players often focus down the body (to protect the ball, which is probably a
consequence of negative transfer from the dribble), shortening their steps (i.e., "jumping", because the
activity being performed was running). Although that affects their speed of movement negatively,
shortening the length of steps usually leads to increased frequency. Therefore, the coach can only
compare the results of the player who performs the two tests ("Kamikaze" and "Kamikaze" with driving
the ball) exactly and with relative ease, not only by evaluating the technique, but also monitoring the
progress of players in driving the ball. On the other hand, the best ways to stimulate the player to
correct an error in the technique of performing technical and tactical elements and manipulating the
ball should be based on the measurements. This avoids subjective evaluation of the coach and
removes any possible doubt in the players. It also increases the possibility of motivating basketball
players towards the correction of improper techniques adopted, which is one of the unavoidable but
the most demanding tasks in coaching.

CONCLUSIONS
The work on the training camp "Kikinda'07", conducted according to the program designed on the
basis of information obtained by analysis of the play of the best players on the most important games
[5, 16, 18], proved to be effective. After ten days' work on campus (15 trainings of 90 min), the 15year-old basketball players showed a statistically significant improvement in 4 out of 8 tests for
measuring the SMA. Progress resulted in the majority (i.e. 5 of 8) of tests at the informational level,
Rubin.: Effects of training on specific-motor abilities of basketball players Serb J Sports Sci 3(4): 135-144

143

which is in accordance with the basic aspirations of the author of the training program to perform all
exercises with the ball in such a manner that the best possible objectives are achieved.
In all 5 tests, performed with the ball, the improvement in the final measurement was achieved.
The highest (and very important information-wise) improvement was achieved in both tests measuring
the SMA Ball manipulation: Dribbling with variations (23%) and Passing the ball around the body
(10%). Also, the results improved in all three tests that measured the SMA Movement with the ball
(Driving around the central circle (7%) Kamikaze shortened with driving (4%) and Kamikaze with
driving (2%).
No test for assessment of movement of players without the ball yielded statistically significant
difference between the two measurements. The tests used to measure the ability of "Kamikaze"
forward and back, although situational, are not so specific for basketball. On the basis of comparison
between the results of "Kamikaze" with driving the ball with those of the "Kamikaze" test, information
about the technique of driving the ball can be very easily obtained. Reduction of difference of
results between the two tests (sprint with and without the ball) in the final measurement (1.35s)
compared to the initial one (2.02s) by about 0.7s indicate improvement of ball driving technique under
the effects of the training treatment.

PRACTICAL APPLICATION
The importance of monitoring the effects of the applied work by testing was confirmed. The reason is
that it is the only opportunity for all participants (not just trainers) to receive timely and relevant
feedback information about the effectiveness of the training process. It is important that coaches have
the accurate information about the direction and, even more importantly, about the direction of the
players' movement characteristics which they want to affect by the implementation of previously
selected or designed exercise. Not less important is the positive impact of monitoring the results on
increasing the motivation of players.
The research confirmed that it was possible to achieve statistically significant progress in a
relatively short period of training, by the implementation of an adequate program. Such adequacy
should be based on the application of research information from the best players at the most important
competitions.
The results presented in this paper can be useful for trainers for comparison if they use the
same tests on the similar sample of respondents.
Moreover, if they want to monitor the effects of their own training, it is very important to obtain
information about the progress of players within a given time in previous research.

It is important to know that comparing the results of the test "Kamikaze" with driving the ball with
the results of the "Kamikaze" test can be relatively easy in order to obtain information about the
technique with the ball.
Therefore, we recommend that in their future similar research trainers or researchers should
use the test "Kamikaze" with driving the ball, because it provides more information than the test
"Kamikaze" shortened with driving.

REFERENCES

1. Ben Abdelkrim, N., El Fazaa, S., & El Ati, J. (2006). Time-motion analysis and physiological data of elite under-19year-old basketball players during competition. J Sports Med., 41(2): 69-75.
2. Bogdanis, G. C., Ziagos, V., Anastasiadi, M., & Maridaki, M. (2007). Effects of two different short-term training
programs on the physical and technical abilities of adolescent basketball players. J Sci Med Sport., 10(2): 79-88.
3. BlakoviX, M. (1979). Predictive value of the battery of basketball situation tests. Masters Thesis, Zagreb. Faculty
of Physical Education, University of Zagreb.
4. Delextrat, A., & Cohen, D. (2008). Physiological testing of basketball players: toward a standard evaluation of
anaerobic fitness. J Strength Cond Res., 22(4): 1066-1072.
5. JovanoviX, I. (1994). Basketball - theory and teaching methods. Ni: Publisher author. (in Serbian).
6. JovanoviX-GoluboviX D., & JovanoviX, I. (2003). Anthropological basis Basketball. Ni: Seagull graphics. (in
Serbian).
7. KaralejiX, M., & Jakovljevic, S. (2001). Fundamentals of Basketball, Belgrade: Faculty of Sport and Physical
Education. (in Serbian).
8. KaralejiX, M., & JakovljeviX, S. (2007). Factor structure of basketball abilities. In Jakovljevic, S. (Eds). International
scientific conference "Analytics and diagnosis of physical activity." (p. 117-125). Belgrade: Faculty of Sport and
Physical education. (in Serbian).
Rubin.: Effects of training on specific-motor abilities of basketball players Serb J Sports Sci 3(4): 135-144

144

9. KociX, M. (2008). Influence of programmed training process on the development of situational-motor and motor
abilities of young basketball players. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Ni: Faculty of Sports and Physical Education.
(in Serbian).
10. Kuznjecov, V., Petrovskij, B., & ustin V. (1980). Universal modeling issues in sports. Modern training (Beograd), 2:
1-17. (in Serbian).
11. Matthew, D., & Delextrat, A. (2009). Heart rate, blood lactate concentration, and time-motion analysis of female
basketball players during the competition. J Sports Sci., 27(8): 813-821.
12. Mikolajec, K., Goralczyk, R., Poprzecki, S., Zajac, A., Szyngiera, W., & Waskiewicz., Z. (2003). The effects of
specific conditioning on speed abilities in young female basketball players. J Hum Kinetics., 10: 39-47.
13. OstojiX, S. M., MaziX, S., & DikiX, N. (2006). Profiling in basketball: physical and physiological characteristics of elite
players. J Strength Cond Res., 20(4): 740-744.
14. Prus, G., & Szopa, J. (1999). Adaptability of selected motor abilities in boys between 12 and 15 years of age: the
results of the Training detraining retraining experiment. J Hum Kinetics., 2: 3-19.
15. Rubin, P. (1995). Technical - tactical activity of basketball players immediately before and after arriving in the ball
possession. Unpublished Masters Thesis, Novi Sad: Faculty of Physical Culture. (in Serbian).
16. Rubin, P. (1996). The necessity of the relation between training with the structure of a basketball game. Yearbook
exercises and training, Belgrade: Faculty of Physical Culture, (p. 294 -298). (in Serbian).
17. Rubin, P. (1997). Effectiveness of different training programmed of basketball players. Unpublished dissertation,
Novi Sad: Faculty of Physical Culture (in Serbian).
18. Rubin, P. (2009). Importance of strategic information for planning in basketball. 5 th congress and 6th International
scientific conferences - Tivat. Montenegrin Sport Academy, Podgorica, (p. 23 -24). (in Serbian).
19. Vamvakoudis, E., Vrabas, I. S., Galazoulas, C., Stefanidis, P., Metaxas, T. I., Mandroukas, K. (2007). Effects of
basketball training on maximal oxygen uptake, muscle strength, and joint mobility in young basketball players. J
Strength Cond Res., 21(3): 930-936.
20. TrniniX, S. (2006). Selection, preparation and maintenance of basketball players and the team. Zagreb: Victor Marko Ltd, Split: University of Split.
Address for correspondence:
Pavle Rubin, PhD.
Sports Academy Belgrade
Technology and Methodology of Basketball Dept
Deligradska 27
11000 Belgrade, SERBIA
Phone: +381 11 3611 455 (office)
Phone: +381 21 402 865 (home)
E-mail: rubini@neobee.net

R
e
gi
st
er

L
o
g
i
n

HOME

ARCH
IVE

ABOU
T US

EDIT
ORIA
L
BOAR
D

REVI
EWER
S

FOR
AUTH
ORS

CONT
ACT

Search
Archive > Year 2009, Number 4

Effects of ten-day programmed training on specificmotor abilities of 15-year-old basketball players

General info
Read full article

Authors
Rubin Pavle, Sports Academy

Abstract
The research took place in the basketball camp Kikinda 07. The sample consisted of 20 basketball players, 15
years of age ( 6 months), from Kikinda's basketball clubs. For initial (9th August) and final (19th August 2007)
measurements, 8 tests to measure specific motor abilities (SMA) were applied. The aim was to prove 10-day
training's effectiveness (15 trainings at 90 min.) on specific motor abilities of cadets. Basketball cadets were
trained under the program designed by the author of this research. The differences between the two
measurements were proven using multivariate analysis of variance. The statistically significant difference appeared
between two measurements at the levels of 0.00. In the final measurement, univariate analysis of variance showed
significantly better results after training in 4 tests (variable): Kamikaze shortened with driving (at the level of
0.05); Driving the ball around the central circle (at the level of 0.00) for measuring SMA movement of the player
with the ball; and for SMA ball manipulation: Dribbling with variations and passing the ball around the body (at the
level of 0.00). In all 5 tests performed with the ball, result improvement in the final measurement was achieved.
The highest and informationally very important result improvement was achieved in both tests which measured
SMA Ball manipulation: Dribbling with variations (23%) and passing the ball around the body (10%).

Keywords
basketball, cadets, programmed training, effects

Download full article

References
1.

Ben Abdelkrim, N., El Fazaa, S., & El Ati, J. (2006). Time-motion analysis and physiological data of elite
under-19-year-old basketball players during competition. J Sports Med., 41(2): 69-75.

2.

Bogdanis, G. C., Ziagos, V., Anastasiadi, M., & Maridaki, M. (2007). Effects of two different short-term
training programs on the physical and technical abilities of adolescent basketball players. J Sci Med Sport., 10(2):
79-88.

3.

Blakovi, M. (1979). Predictive value of the battery of basketball situation tests. Masters Thesis, Zagreb.
Faculty of Physical Education, University of Zagreb.

4.

Delextrat, A., & Cohen, D. (2008). Physiological testing of basketball players: toward a standard
evaluation of anaerobic fitness. J Strength Cond Res., 22(4): 1066-1072.

5.

Jovanovi, I. (1994). Basketball - theory and teaching methods. Ni: Publisher author. (in Serbian).

6.

Jovanovi-Golubovi D., & Jovanovi, I. (2003). Anthropological basis Basketball. Ni: Seagull graphics. (in
Serbian).

7.

Karaleji, M., & Jakovljevic, S. (2001). Fundamentals of Basketball, Belgrade: Faculty of Sport and Physical
Education. (in Serbian).

8.

Karaleji, M., & Jakovljevi, S. (2007). Factor structure of basketball abilities. In Jakovljevic, S. (Eds).
International scientific conference "Analytics and diagnosis of physical activity." (p. 117-125). Belgrade: Faculty of
Sport and Physical education. (in Serbian).

9.

Koci, M. (2008). Influence of programmed training process on the development of situational-motor and
motor abilities of young basketball players. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Ni: Faculty of Sports and Physical
Education. (in Serbian).

10.

Kuznjecov, V., Petrovskij, B., & ustin V. (1980). Universal modeling issues in sports. Modern training
(Beograd), 2: 1-17. (in Serbian).

11.

Matthew, D., & Delextrat, A. (2009). Heart rate, blood lactate concentration, and time-motion analysis of
female basketball players during the competition. J Sports Sci., 27(8): 813-821.

12.

Mikolajec, K., Goralczyk, R., Poprzecki, S., Zajac, A., Szyngiera, W., & Waskiewicz., Z. (2003). The effects
of specific conditioning on speed abilities in young female basketball players. J Hum Kinetics., 10: 39-47.

13.

Ostoji, S. M., Mazi, S., & Diki, N. (2006). Profiling in basketball: physical and physiological
characteristics of elite players. J Strength Cond Res., 20(4): 740-744.

14.

Prus, G., & Szopa, J. (1999). Adaptability of selected motor abilities in boys between 12 and 15 years of
age: the results of the Training detraining retraining experiment. J Hum Kinetics., 2: 3-19.

15.

Rubin, P. (1995). Technical - tactical activity of basketball players immediately before and after arriving in
the ball possession. Unpublished Masters Thesis, Novi Sad: Faculty of Physical Culture. (in Serbian).

16.

Rubin, P. (1996). The necessity of the relation between training with the structure of a basketball game.
Yearbook exercises and training, Belgrade: Faculty of Physical Culture, (p. 294 -298). (in Serbian).

17.

Rubin, P. (1997). Effectiveness of different training programmed of basketball players. Unpublished

dissertation, Novi Sad: Faculty of Physical Culture (in Serbian).

18.

Rubin, P. (2009). Importance of strategic information for planning in basketball. 5th congress and 6th
International scientific conferences - Tivat. Montenegrin Sport Academy, Podgorica, (p. 23 -24). (in Serbian).

19.

Vamvakoudis, E., Vrabas, I. S., Galazoulas, C., Stefanidis, P., Metaxas, T. I., Mandroukas, K. (2007).
Effects of basketball training on maximal oxygen uptake, muscle strength, and joint mobility in young basketball
players. J Strength Cond Res., 21(3): 930-936.

20.

Trnini, S. (2006). Selection, preparation and maintenance of basketball players and the team. Zagreb:
Victor - Marko Ltd, Split: University of Split.
2016 Sports Academy Belgrade. All rights reserved. Powered by Magma
Publication of this journal is financially supported by the Ministry of Science, Technology and Development Republic of Serbia.