Challenging Conventional Paradigms in Applied Sports Biomechanics Research
This paper evaluates the effectiveness of, and highlights issues with, conventional paradigms in applied sports biomechanics research and comments on their capacity to optimise techniques of individual athletes. In empirical studies, group-based analyses often mask variability between athletes and only permit probabilistic ‘in general’ or ‘on average’ statements that may not be applicable to specific athletes. In individual-based analyses, performance parameters typically exhibit a small range and a flat response over iterative performance trials, making establishing associations between performance parameters and the performance criterion problematic. In theoretical studies, computer simulation modelling putatively enables athlete-specific optimum techniques to be identified, but given each athlete’s unique intrinsic dynamics, it is far from certain that these optimum techniques will be attainable, particularly under the often intense psychological pressures of competition, irrespective of the volume of practice undertaken. Sports biomechanists and coaching practitioners are advised to be more circumspect with regard to interpreting the results of applied sports biomechanics research and have greater awareness of their assumptions and limitations, as inappropriate interpretation of results may have adverse consequences for performance and injury.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this article.
Conflict of interest
Paul Glazier and Sina Mehdizadeh declare that they have no conflicts of interest relevant to the content of this article.
- 1.Bartlett R, Bussey M. Sports biomechanics: reducing injury risk and improving sports performance. London: Routledge; 2012.Google Scholar
- 6.Irwin G, Bezodis I, Kerwin D. Biomechanics for coaches. In: Jones RL, Kingston K, editors. An introduction to sports coaching: connecting theory and practice. London: Routledge; 2013. p. 145–60.Google Scholar
- 9.Hay JG, Vaughan CL, Woodworth GG. Technique and performance: identifying the limiting factors. In: Morecki A, Fidelus K, Kedzior K, Wit A, editors. Biomechanics VII-B. Baltimore: University Park Press; 1981. p. 511–20.Google Scholar
- 10.Nelson W. Application of biomechanical principles: optimization of sport technique. In: Butts NK, Gushiken TT, Zarins B, editors. The elite athlete. Champaign: Life Enhancement Publications; 1985. p. 81–92.Google Scholar
- 11.Glazier PS, Reid MM, Ball KA. Expertise in the performance of multi-articular sports actions. In: Baker J, Farrow D, editors. Routledge handbook of sport expertise. London: Routledge; 2015. p. 84–94.Google Scholar
- 14.Ranson C, King M, Shine K, Worthington P. ECB Elite Fast Bowling Group: fast bowling performance. On the Up. 2011;7:70–2.Google Scholar
- 17.Bouffard M. The perils of averaging data in adapted physical activity research. Adapt Phys Act Q. 1993;10:371–91.Google Scholar
- 20.Ae M, Muraki Y, Koyama H, Fujii N. A biomechanical method to establish a standard motion and identify critical motion by motion variability: with examples of high jump and sprint running. Bull Inst Health Sport Sci Univ Tsukuba. 2007;30:5–12.Google Scholar
- 21.Ae M. A biomechanical method for the evaluation of sports techniques by standard motion, motion variability and motion deviation. In: Kwon Y-H, Shim J, Shim JK, Shin I-S, editors. Proceedings of the 26th international conference on biomechanics in sports, July 14–18, 2008, International Society of Biomechanics in Sports, Seoul; 2008. pp. 33–7.Google Scholar
- 23.Cavanagh PR. The cutting edge in biomechanics. In: Safrit MJ, Eckert HM, editors. The academy papers: the cutting edge in physical education and exercise science research. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 1987. p. 115–9.Google Scholar
- 26.Gregor RJ. Locomotion: a commentary. In: Skinner JS, Corbin CB, Landers DM, Martin PE, Wells CL, editors. Future directions in exercise and sport science research. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 1989. p. 195–9.Google Scholar
- 28.Bates BT, James CR, Dufek JS. Single-subject analysis. In: Stergiou N, editor. Innovative analyses of human movement: analytical tools for human movement research. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 2004. p. 3–28.Google Scholar
- 32.Yeadon MR. What are the limitations of experimental and theoretical approaches in sports biomechanics? In: McNamee M, editor. Philosophy and the sciences of exercise, health and sport: critical perspectives on research methods. London: Routledge; 2005. p. 133–43.Google Scholar
- 34.Newell KM, McGinnis PM. Kinematic information feedback for skilled performance. Hum Learn. 1985;4:39–56.Google Scholar
- 35.Cavanagh PR, Hinrichs R. Biomechanics of sport: the state of the art. In: Brooks GA, editor. Perspectives on the academic discipline of physical education. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 1981. p. 137–57.Google Scholar
- 37.Yeadon MR, King MA. Computer simulation modelling in sport. In: Payton CJ, Burden A, editors. Biomechanical evaluation of movement in sport and exercise: the British Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences guide. London: Routledge; 2018. p. 221–54.Google Scholar
- 40.Marshall RN, Elliott BC. The analysis and development of technique in sport. In: Elliott B, editor. Training in sport: applying sport science. Chichester: Wiley; 1998. p. 117–44.Google Scholar
- 41.Sprigings EJ. Sport biomechanics: data collection, modelling, and implementation stages of development. Can J Sport Sci. 1988;13:3–7.Google Scholar
- 42.Irwin G. Biomechanics in sports medicine. In: Micheli LJ, editor. Encyclopedia of sports medicine. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2011. p. 163–76.Google Scholar
- 47.Felton P, King M. Optimising individual performance in cricket fast bowling. ISBS Proc Arch. 2017;35:57–60. https://commons.nmu.edu/isbs/vol35/iss1/23.
- 49.Vaughan CL. Computer simulation of human motion in sports biomechanics. In: Terjung RL, editor. Exercise and sport sciences reviews, vol. 12. Lexington: The Collamore Press; 1984. p. 373–416.Google Scholar
- 50.Kostrubiec V, Zanone P-G, Fuchs A, Kelso JAS. Beyond the blank slate: routes to learning new coordination patterns depend on the intrinsic dynamics of the learner—experimental evidence and theoretical model. Front Hum Neurosci. 2012;6:222. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2012.00222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 51.Muchisky M, Gershkoff-Stowe L, Cole E, Thelen E. The epigenetic landscape revisited: a dynamic interpretation. In: Rovee-Collier C, Lipsitt LP, editors. Advanced in infancy research, vol. 10. Norwood: Ablex Publishing; 1996. p. 121–59.Google Scholar