Sports Exercise Science – Page 10

Interdisciplinary Approach of the Teaching of Olympic Principles to the Students

Dr. A M. Najeeb, National Institute of Technology associate professor and head of Physical Education, Calicut, India

### Introduction

Illustrious Celebrities on the dias, in the august gathering, ladies and gentlemen committed to the noble Olympic movement, Greetings from India. I am Dr. A.M. Najeeb, a physical education professor in one of the leading Technological universities owned by the government of India, the National Institute of Technology Calicut and one of the few Olympic educators of India. I am thrilled and honoured to be delivering a humble lecture titled, “Interdisciplinary Approach of the Teaching of Olympic Principles to the Students,” and acting as the ambassador of my country and my institution at the International Olympic Academy.

My lecture would consist of discussion on the universally approved interdisciplinary strategies and some corresponding experiences while teaching Olympic values and principles to the engineering students of my institution. I was initiated in to the Olympic Values Education Programme by the Indian National Olympic Committee during March 2010, where at the seminar I promised Mr. Tommy Sithole, the IOC Director for International Development and Cooperation, that I would spread the Olympic message among students. Since then from July 2010 to this day I have successfully inculcated in 1000 students the values and principles of olympism. As my students are from the engineering stream, interdisciplinary strategy was applied for effective transfer of knowledge.

“Teaching Values – An Olympic Education Toolkit” by Dr. Deanna L. Binder, of the University of Alberta, Canada, was the main reference book that I used for teaching Olympic values to my students. I am deeply indebted to Madam Binder and her excellent teaching techniques at New Delhi for having motivated people like me to take up Olympic values education to develop our students in to meaningful citizen. Madam Binder has said **“in a world where obesity is a major concern, and where children in deprived communities need hope and a sense of achievement, physical activity and sport have an important role to play.”**

Since its launching in April 2008, the Toolkit has brought about tremendous awakening among the youth. Let us now take a peek at the universally approved interdisciplinary strategies.

### What is the Interdisciplinary Approach to Teaching and Learning?

It requires planning that looks at the foundational objectives of a number of curriculum areas connecting them in an efficient way to help teachers (Jacobs) to teach the whole student and make links between disciplines. In short, it is a Strategy adopted by teachers for effective transfer of knowledge.

Purpose of the interdisciplinary strategy:

1. To dissolve the boundaries of areas of study and encourage learning across the curriculum.
2. To develop a plan integration of the natural areas to form thematic units.
3. To include a well-rounded education where critical thinking and transfer of knowledge is possible.
4. To enhance the student’s education and encourage lifelong learning.

Planning and teaching an interdisciplinary unit:

1. Choose a basic effective topic-concept.
2. Brainstorm for ideas that can be organized onto an interdisciplinary concept model. This model has the theme in the centre as nucleus and the subject areas are explored in relation to the theme.
3. Guiding questions that are general, transcend boundaries of disciplines and generate higher-level thought processes.

Activity plans used to develop activities:

Unit: Principle of Fair Play on playfields: Do students come to the play facilities?
– **Knowledge:** Identify the students on the respective playfields.
– **Comprehension:** Observe students’ behaviour on the fields.
– **Application:** Chart the visitors to the various playfields.
– **Analysis:** Compare the students’ behaviour on the various fields.
– **Synthesis:** Provide a Teacher/ coach/ Instructor on each field.
– **Evaluation:** Appraise its effect.

The above example of interdisciplinary activity shows the target group of professional students and the dependent variable of ethics (Olympic principle or value). The subject areas are science, language, psychology & ethics.

Salient features of the strategy:

1. **Adaptability by the teacher.** Individualizing instructions- Students’ choice of themes- Teachers’ choice of activities across academic levels.
2. **Assessment & Evaluation Considerations.** Level of performance criteria indifferent subject areas – Completion of various activities to interpret the students’ progress.

Let me also mention some of the other key strategies:

1. **Direct Instruction Strategy:** A highly teacher-directed and most commonly used strategy, effective for providing information or developing step-by-step skills. It also aids in introducing other teaching methods, or actively involving students in knowledge construction. Methodology involve: Structured Overview; Lecture; Explicit Teaching; Drill & Practice; Compare & Contrast and Demonstrations.
2. **Indirect Instruction Strategy:** In contrast, indirect instruction is mainly student-centered, although the two strategies complement each other. It calls for a high level of student involvement in observing, investigating, drawing inferences from data, or forming hypotheses. It takes advantage of students’ interest and curiosity, often encouraging them to generate alternatives or solve problems. The role of the teacher shifts from lecturer/director to that of facilitator, supporter, and resource person. The teacher provides the learning environment, opportunity for student involvement, and, when appropriate, provides feedback to students while they conduct the inquiry. One of the better methods to extract student-interest.
3. **Experiential Learning Strategy:** It is inductive, learner centered, and activity oriented. Personalized reflection about an experience and the formulation of plans to apply learning to other contexts are critical factors in effective experiential learning. The emphasis in experiential learning is on the process of learning and not on the product. Methodology cycle involve Experiencing (an activity occurs); Sharing or publishing (reactions and observations are shared); Analyzing or processing (patterns and dynamics are determined); Inferring or generalizing (principles are derived); and Applying (plans are made to use learning in new situations).
4. **Interactive Instruction Strategy:** It allows heavy discussion and sharing among participants leading to rational arguments. The interactive instruction strategy allows for a range of groupings and interactive methods. It is important for the teacher to outline the topic, the amount of discussion time, the composition and size of the groups, and reporting or sharing techniques. Interactive instruction requires the refinement of observation, listening, interpersonal, and intervention skills and abilities by both teacher and students. It is heavily dependent upon the expertise of the teacher and dynamics of the group.
5. **Instructional Skills Strategy:** It is most specific category of teaching behaviours. They are necessary for procedural purposes and for structuring appropriate learning experiences for students.

### Teaching Olympic Values to the Indian University Student

University education in India is reined by the Governments through rules, regulations and guidelines. In a highly populated country like India, the number of degree seekers flocking the universities is so high that the desired quality control is difficult to achieve. While the prerogative is to develop ideal citizens through university education, the infrastructure is lacking. There are universities without even a proper playground for its students, let alone the faculty to look after the students’ welfare, fitness and wellness. However, those responsible for their own curricula do include sports, physical education and their values in the respective curricula.

My institute, the National Institute of Technology Calicut pioneered in this line by introducing compulsory Physical Education curriculum for its undergraduate students with a one-credit course to support it. Olympic Values Education is one of the courses offered to the students.

### Physical Education, Sports and Olympic Values

“Our world is in need of peace, tolerance and brotherhood. By blending Sport with culture and education, the Olympic values can deliver these to us.” – Jacques Rogge, IOC President

Sport is not just a competition; but a state of mind. The Olympic movement considers it a challenge to educate the youth of the world and encourage them to practice sports. Sports help one to escape concerns, respect one another and learn to respect and abide by rules. Sports also aid in shaping the mind with the body and bringing with it joy, hope, pride, sense of identity and health. It is therefore the objective of the IOC to strive to encourage and promote life values & skills through Olympic Values Education Programme.

The President reasserts that Olympic movement of tomorrow is in the hands of the young people of today. If they learn to respect one another on the sports field, they will transfer this virtue to other elements of their daily lives. Peace, harmony and brotherhood will then naturally descend on the earth. The fact that IOC looks up to physical education teachers of the world to spread the Olympic message is heartening and a major recognition to the profession. The International Olympic Academy leaves no stone unturned in pursuing and making this a reality with exclusive sessions being arranged for physical educators of the world to prepare them for the specific task.

### Learning is a Multifaceted Activity

Learning is an active and not a passive activity. It involves writing, discussion, debates and creative activities like sports participation. Some learn best reading, some write and others achieve it listening or in creating things. Olympic Values Education Programme or OVEP uses multifaceted processes to educate students. Even though some learn well individually, OVEP mostly believes in collective thinking and doing to pass on knowledge. Interdisciplinary strategy is one of the effective methods for teaching Olympic values and principles.

### Values, Heritage, Sport and Culture

A Value or Principle is what is considered important in life; making it worth living. It helps people decide what is right or wrong in moral terms. Heritage is a form of legacy, tangible and intangible. Tangibles are monuments or works of art while intangibles are languages, films, music crafts, culture including Sport movements and techniques. Sport is defined by UNESCO (2004) as forms of physical activity like play and indigenous sport that contribute to physical fitness, mental wellbeing and social interaction. Culture is everything that allows people to situate themselves in relation to the world, society and also the heritage passed on to them.

### Fundamentals and Goals of the Olympic Movement

Olympism is a philosophy of life exalting and combining in a balanced whole the qualities of body, will and mind blending sport with culture and education. It aims at creating a way of life based on the joy of effort and educational values. Its goal is to place sport at the service towards harmonious development of man with a view to promote a peaceful society concerned with preservation of human dignity. The Olympic movement is the concerted, organised and permanent action carried out under the supreme authority of the IOC and all entities inspired by the values of olympism. The practice of sport is a human right and every individual must have the possibility of practicing the sport without any discrimination. Every sport should be organised and administered by independent sports organisations. There shall be no discrimination in sport based on race, religion, politics, gender or otherwise. Belonging to the Olympic movement will require compliance with the Olympic charter and recognition by the IOC. Therefore it is necessary to teach the Olympic message to young students who will control the future world and ensure sports participation without bias or discrimination.

### Educational Values/Principles of Olympism

There are five educational values/ principles recognised in Olympism. They have been extracted from the fundamental principles and worded in appropriate manner to be relevant for educational purposes. They importantly incorporate the three interdisciplinary domains of learning, namely Cognitive (Intellectual), Affective(Social/ emotional) and Kinesthetic (Physical). The learning of values is mainly behavioural leading to character development.

**JOY OF EFFOR:** Youngsters develop and practice physical, behavioural and intellectual skills by challenging themselves and each other in physical activities, movement, games and sport.

Interdisciplinary strategy adopted in the principle of JOY OF EFFORT would be to transcend across the disciplines of science, management, psychology and kinesiology. To succeed in any effort requires planning, application of science, mental readiness and the physical execution of the movement. The joy derived from the success of the effort is mental and psychological. The students can be assigned exercises in the class room or the playfield or both and may be allowed to plan and execute in groups and report back their joyous feelings on successful completion of the assigned project. For example, two groups in Field Hockey could be assigned the task of planning a move to score a goal in five minutes time. Planning could be done in the class room and the execution on the hockey field. They will report back to the teacher their joyous feelings both orally and in writing. The joy that results is intense because you overcome challenges.

**FAIR PLAY:** Though Fair play is a concept, it is applied worldwide today in many different ways. Learning fair play behaviour in sport can lead to the development and reinforcement of fair play behaviour in the community and in life.

Interdisciplinary strategy adopted in the principle of FAIR PLAY would be to transcend across the disciplines of science, ethics, psychology and kinesiology. The students need to be playing on the playground to inculcate fair play values. Two soccer groups could be deployed to teach fair play principles to all the other students of the institution. The spectator groups could be reporting the foul tactics adopted by the playing groups and the ensuing discussion would facilitate a post-mortem. Installing “Fair-play trophies” in soccer and other tournaments in the institute will enhance the learning process. The inculcated value should naturally transfer to the community.

**RESPECT FOR OTHERS:** When young people who live in a multicultural world learn to accept and respect diversity and practise personal behaviour, they promote peace and international understanding.

Interdisciplinary strategy adopted in the principle of RESPECT FOR OTHERS would be to transcend across the disciplines of science, ethics, psychology, human rights and kinesiology. Students need to be taught that charity begins at home. You start to respect elders in the home and transfer it to the neighbourhood, society, school, university and community. The orientation day in the institute would be the best opportunity to enlighten parents of the need for this vital principle. On the playfield this is a give and take principle. You get respect only when you give it to others. The principle is also based on human rights issue of the world. Every individual has the right to exist in his/her own right and all others are required to respect that. Respect should also cover diversities because unity achieved through diversities satisfy you more.

**PURSUIT OF EXCELLENCE:** A focus on excellence can help young people to make positive, healthy choices, and strive to become the best that they can be in whatever they do.

Interdisciplinary strategy adopted in the principle of PURSUIT OF EXCELLENCE would be to transcend across the disciplines of science, ethics, psychology, biomechanics and kinesiology. Every student would strive to perform his/her best to achieve excellence. Be it in the field of education, sports or extracurricular activities, the student would aim to pursue the path of excellence. The Olympic principles are best taught and learned through activities and this principle is more personal than any other. The tendency of youngsters to play vigorously and to move, walk, run, sing and dance need to be utilized and channelized in order achieve excellence.

**BALANCE BETWEEN BODY, WILL AND MIND:** Learning takes place in the whole body, not just in the mind, and physical literacy and learning through movement contributes to the development of moral and intellectual learning. This concept became the foundation of Pierre De Coubertin’s interest in a revival of the Olympic games.

Interdisciplinary strategy adopted in the principle of BALANCE BETWEEN BODY, WILL AND MIND would be to transcend across the disciplines of science (neuromuscular system), psychology and kinesiology. The perfection of coordination between muscles and the brain is of foremost importance. The mental strength or will power follows with the proverb “where there is a will, there is a way” as the backdrop. The mind is the ultimate ruler sending signals to the muscles, debating over the effectiveness of the strategy and the final move to execute the project with perfect synchronisation of the body, brain and mind. This principle stresses the superiority of the whole-body over parts of the body in implementing plans. The students finally realise that this value is transferable to their day to day routine affairs bringing meaning and satisfaction in life.

The IOC apart from the Games devotes much of its attention to education of the youth. The International Olympic Academy, I have learned, is the senior partner for accomplishing this goal. The Olympic Education actually portrays a major canvas consisting of

1. National and International Olympic Academies.
2. Academic Research, Courses, Seminars in Universities & Olympic Study Centres
3. Informational books, Textbooks, Videos, CDs, TV visuals on the Games.
4. Olympic day-festivals-competitions in education campuses.
5. Physical education and high performance training.
6. Olympic Values education for children, young people and supporters.
7. Education and youth programme of Olympic GOCs.
8. Olympic and sports youth camps.
9. Olympic museums, halls of fame, art & cultural exhibitions.
10. Marketing and promotion programmes of Olympic sponsors & supporters.

The teaching of the Olympic principles can be achieved through the pathways of 1) Education through Olympism—an integrated and cross curricular approach; 2) Teacher centred class rooms; 3) Olympic theme or week; 4) Excellence through sports and physical education for young and gifted athletes; and 5) Training teachers and group leaders.

### Philosophy of OVEP

The educational values and principles of the Olympic movement originated from European philosophy and traditions but resonate in the 200 nations belonging to the Olympic family. There are differences in the traditional and cultural settings of these nations and teaching of values and their acceptance is a major challenge in some nations. Hence the basic duty of the educators will be to identify the ways that Olympic principles can amalgamate with existing educational priorities and to adapt and use the various activities appropriate to the realities of local belief systems and situations.

The Olympic Symbol, the Flag, the Oaths, the flame, the peace symbols, The games’ posters, the logos and mascots, the arts and crafts are household entities of today’s generation. Hence the teaching of the principles and values is considered incomplete without awareness of the symbols. There are plenty to learn and inculcate from these visible entities. They represent culture and heritages of every nation and an understanding of these at close quarters instils peace, harmony and brotherhood. The symbols and ceremonies, sports and cultural events of the Olympic Games are inspiring, motivational and provide a relevant context for learning and teaching activities.

### Conclusion

As a physical educator and an Olympic educator, my first and foremost objective is to convince the powers that matter in the educational scene to include Olympic values education in the university curriculum in India. This is a must-learn subject that deal in inculcation of character and values that add to the richness of one’s life. The student not only becomes aware of exemplary character but also of meaningful existence in the society and community. The advantage of the values education is that it teaches through practise of sports that ensure wellness of body and mind. It encourages unity and brotherhood, respect for foreign culture and diverse values and the realisation that Sports has no boundary. The values are inculcated through team work and group projects leading to group dynamics and cohesiveness.

The Olympic values and principles in nutshell, is a superb knowledge-house, with no curricular boundaries, that enriches the university student preparing him/her to be the future nation builder inculcating in him/her the realisation that the future belongs to today’s youth who should be thinking beyond religion, caste, creed, sex and boundaries separating cultures. The IOC with the help of IOA will not leave any stone unturned in its quest to educate the world youth the ultimate values that mark the corner-stone of healthy, thinking, vibrant and peace loving societies.

### References

1. Binder L Deanna, Teaching Values – An Olympic Education Toolkit, A Project of the International Olympic Committee, Lausanne, Switzerland (2007)
2. Chelladurai P & Modella Alberto, Human Resource Management in Olympic Sports Organisation, Ohio, USA, Human Kinetics Publishers, (1997).
3. Lenskyj Helen Jefferson, Inside The Olympic Industry: Power Politics and Activism, State University of New York Press, (1997).
4. Cousinou Phil, The Olympic Odyssey: Rekindling The True Spirit of The Great Games, Quest Books, New York (1997).
5. Hayes Jacobs, H.(1994). Integrating the Curriculum. Salt Lake City, UT: The Video Journal of Education.
6. Najeeb,A.M.(2011). The Indispensability of Olympic Values in University Education. NAPESS online journal Vol:2/2.

U.S. Sports Academy2015-10-02T23:25:55-05:00June 30th, 2011|Sports Coaching, Sports Exercise Science, Sports Management|Comments Off

Medicine and the Olympic Games of Antiquity

Dr. Spyros Retsas

Mr President of the International Olympic Academies, Distinguished Directors, Ladies and Gentlemen; it is a distinct honor and a great pleasure indeed to return to the magic of Ancient Olympia on the occasion of the 11th International Session for Directors of the National Olympic Academies.

I am grateful to President Kouvelos for the invitation to speak on “Medicine and the Olympic Games of Antiquity.”

I shall discuss today athleticism and the profound influence sport exerted on the evolution of the healing arts of classical Greece.

I shall also argue that the unique ethical, philosophical and clinical profile of ancient Hellenic Medicine is not a random event in the history of civilisation but the direct consequence of a culture that indulges in nature, excels in competitive sport, cultivates reason and respects the individual.

Imagine now that you are visitor to the city of Athens in the year 380 B.C. the year of the 100th Olympiad about to take place on the very grounds that we stand today; the year when Xenophon of Aigai – of the Royal city of Macedon – will be crowned with the olive wreath for his victory in the pankration.

Imagine for a moment that on a crisp spring morning you are standing on the Acropolis. In the distance you can see Plato’s Academy, the famous gymnasium of Athens, where the youth of the day have begun their training in preparation for the forthcoming Olympic Games. You turn south and in the distance you see the glittering Aegean Sea, the witness of the battle of Salamis, when democracy triumphed over despotism; and a few streets away an orator is putting the final touches to his speech to be delivered shortly at Olympia. This is what he writes:

> _“…now the founders of our great festivals are justly praised for handing down to us a custom by which, having proclaimed a truce and resolved our pending quarrels, we come together in one place, where, as we make our prayers and sacrifices in common, we are reminded of the kinship which exists among us and are made to feel more kindly towards each other for the future, reviving our old friendships and establishing new ties…”_ – Isocrates (in Panegyricos)

Written in 380 B.C., the ideals of Isocrates’ (436-338 B.C.) speech are still reverberating at the opening ceremonies of contemporary Olympiads and are as appealing and elusive to humanity today, as they were two millennia ago, to the Hellenes congregating at Elis for the greatest celebration of their world. Isocrates’ _Panegyricos_, although in praise of Athens, captures also the political dimension of the Olympiad as a Pan-Hellenic institution in the conscience of Hellas.

Aware of the repercussions of an Olympic victory, Philip of Macedon competes in the equestrian events and erects the _Φιλίππειον_ to commemorate his victory; a valuable instrument of his political and dynastic ambitions for hegemony over the rest of Greece. The ruins of this building can still be seen by the modern visitor of ancient Olympia.

### The Sporting Ethos

Perhaps no other passage of Greek literature reflects the ethos of sportsmanship and the values of Ancient Greece than Homer’s account of Odysseus’ involvement in the Phaeacian games.

> “…One can see you are no sportsman, your mind is on profit…”

This is how Prince Euryalus talks to Odysseus who, exhausted from his sea voyage, declines the invitation to join the athletic games of the Phaeacians. Insulted, Odysseus leaps to his feet, picks up the biggest discus of all, a huge weight, and throws it overshooting all other marks. It is this spirit of sportsmanship and an aversion to profit – pecuniary or otherwise – that is the core of the Olympic ideal and so central to the culture of ancient Greece. Homer, of course, has good reasons to describe this episode in these colors; he is the Educator of Hellas.

A natural environment that permits outdoor activities throughout the year facilitates sportsmanship that becomes an essential element in the life of the Ancient Greek.

A society developing – in the words of Hippocrates – _in privileged climatic conditions_, learns to respect the individual, becomes increasingly detached from theosophy and superstition and cultivates reason; this passionately naturalist culture, enjoys a liberal religion of gods with human weaknesses and humor and cares largely for excellence on earth and little for afterlife.

Excellence develops with the athletic and intellectual pursuits of the youth in the gymnasia of the _polis_ and is ultimately glorified in Pan-Hellenic festivals, the most celebrated of which was held at Olympia. Medicine emerges in parallel and in the service of these activities.

### Philosophy and Sport

Originally the gymnasia were places where the young men would exercise in athletics naked (_γσμνοί_). This, in fact, is the derivation of the word for the modern gymnast exercising on bars. Gradually, as the symmetrical and harmonious training of body and mind became the educational concern of the state, the gymnasia became places of learning and intellectual pursuit.

The _Academy_ and _Lyceum_ in Athens where **Plato** (427-347 BC) and **Aristotle** (384-322 BC) taught were the two most famous gymnasia that influenced in a profound way the whole of the Greek civilisation.

**Aristotle** is known in our universities as a philosopher and naturalist, not as a doctor. He is however familiar with medicine through his father **Nicomachos**, the Royal Physician to **Philip of Macedon** and he is interested in the anatomy and function of living organisms in broad biological terms.

From Aristotle and the lesser known _Hippias of Elis_ we have the early catalogues of the names of Olympic victors. **Koroibos of Elis** was the first man to win the stadion race at the first Olympiad in 776 BC. His name has been associated with the beginning of the Olympic Games.

### Function of the Officials

Aristotle tells us about the tasks of _gymnastai_ and _paidotribai_, the officials in the gymnasia, who were responsible for the training of athletes.

Other officials, the _ἀλείπται_ or _anointers_, were responsible for anointing with oil the athletes who were about to exercise. This initially simple task developed gradually into methodical massaging and eventually into a speciality that was concerned with many aspects of hygiene and athletic routine.

Thus the _ἀλείπται_ gradually became known as _ἰατραλείπται_ (healer-anointers), or doctors of hygiene _ὑγιεινοί ἰατροί_. These interesting paramedics – we shall call them _athliatroi_ – greatly promoted dietetics and the art of caring for orthopaedic injuries and other commonplace traumata in the gymnasia.

Among the best known _athliatroi_ are **Herodicos of Selybria** and **Ikkos of Taras**, men of broad education otherwise known as sophists, who were particularly concerned with athletic hygiene. Ikkos himself may have won the pentathlon in 444 BC at Olympia. Professional rivalries between _athliatroi_ and the more orthodox therapists of the Hippocratic and Galenic tradition were inevitable.

### Hippocrates

The Hippocratic corpus consists of 72 treatises; there are copious references within the Corpus to the words _gymnastics_, _exercise_, _diets_, _athletes_ etc. However no references were found to _Olympia_, _Olympiad_ or _Olympionices_ (Olympic victor).

**Hippocrates** (460 BC) distinguishes between gymnastics and medicine in the treatise, _On the places of man_ (ΠΔΡΙ ΣΟΠΩΝ ΣΩΝ ΚΑΣΑ ΑΝΘΡΩΠΟΝ) (***Γσμναζηική δὲ καὶ ἱηηρική ὑπενανηία πέθσκεν…***); “Gymnastics and medicine,” we read, “are by their nature opposite, for gymnastics have no need to cause changes [in the human body] but medicine has. For changes are not needed in the state of a healthy individual, but this is necessary in the patient.”

In the treatise _On joints_ (ΠΔΡΙ ΑΡΘΡΩΝ), Hippocrates makes a clear distinction between properly trained doctors, “iatroi”, and those “lesser experts,” as he puts it, who frequent the wrestling rings (***ηὸ ηοιοῦηο δὲ ποιῆζαι μεηρίως ἐπιηήδειος ἄν ηις εἴη ηῶν ἀμθί παλαίζηρῃ εἰθηζμένων***). Elsewhere in the same treatise he advises on a method of reducing a shoulder dislocation, “a method simple and useful in the palaistra” (***Αὗηαι δὲ αἱ ἐμβολαί πᾶζαι καηά παλαίζηρην εὔτρηζηοί εἰζιν.***)

### Special Diets

There are stories about Olympic athletes who achieved high performances and ultimately their victories on special diets. One athlete is known to have had a diet of dried figs and another gave up cheese for large quantities of meat. We do not know the reasons for this choice. In the treatise _On Ancient Medicine_ (ΠΔΡΙ ΑΡΥΑΙΗ ΙΗΣΡΙΚΗ) Hippocrates discusses extensively the impact of various foods on well being and we find an elaborate reference to the intolerance of cheese which can be “a wicked food” (***πονηρόν βρῶμα***) for some people, whereas others tolerate it well and for them can be an excellent nutrient.

### Galen

Some six centuries later, the celebrated Physician **Galen of Pergamum** (129 – 200 AD) and a scholiast of Hippocrates, is concerned with similar issues. The Olympic Games continued uninterrupted to his time and gymnastics, hygiene and athletics were still very much part of everyday life of the Hellenic and Roman world.

In a treatise with the title, “Is health a matter of medicine or gymnastics?” (ΓΑΛΗΝΟΤ ΠΡΟ ΘΡΑ ΤΒΟΤΛΟΝ ΒΙΒΛΙΟΝ, ΠΟΣΔΡΟΝ ΙΑΣΡΙΚΗ Η ΓΤΜΝΑ ΣΙΚΗ Δ ΣΙ ΣΟ ΤΓΙΔΙΝΟΝ) addressed to his friend Thrasyboulos, Galen cannot hide his distaste towards the athletes’ trainers. “The most unfortunate of the athletes,” he writes, “who never won a victory, suddenly decide to call themselves gymnastai. Even worse some of them attempt to write and argue about massage and wellbeing or health or exercises”. In another treatise, _Protrepticos_, an “Exhortation on the art,” (ΓΑΛΗΝΟΤ ΠΡΟΣΡΕΠΣΙΚΟ ΛΟΓΟ ΕΠΙ ΣΑ ΣΕΧΝΑ) he addresses the question, does the athlete’s life benefit himself or the state? He makes a case against the athletes and quotes **Euripides** who, in his usual tragic mood, calls the athletes “The worst evil of Greece”. In the same work Galen derides **Milon of Kroton**, a celebrated Olympic victor who allegedly won the olive wreath seven times.

This extraordinary athlete had an extraordinary end. He tried to cut open with his hands a tree trunk. The tree closed up and trapped his hands. He could not free himself and in the evening he was torn to pieces by wild beasts. “A silly man,” says Galen. “but what else can one expect from an athlete?” (Ἐδήλωζε δὲ καὶ ἡ ηελεσηή ηἀνδρός, ὅπως ἦν ἀνόηηος)

Galen is not an impartial witness. He is attacking the athletes probably because he despises their trainers, who interfere in medical matters. He is also unfair to Milon who, apart from his astonishing athletic achievements, was an educated man and a disciple of Pythagoras.

Galen refers to the Olympiad in his book on “Periods.” “Some early physicians,” he writes, “mention that paroxysms of certain diseases happen periodically, but they do not explain what the name period means.” He goes on to give a definition of the Olympic period relevant to medicine in chronological terms.

In another treatise, “On the composition of medicines” (ΠΔΡΙ ΤΝΘΔ ΔΩ ΦΑΡΜΑΚΩΝ ΣΩΝ ΚΑΣΑ ΣΟΠΟΤ ΒΙΒΛΙΟΝ Γ), he refers to “the brown medicament of the Olympionice, (Φαιὸν τὸ τοῦ Ὀλσμπιονίκοσ ἐπιγραφόμενον) that promptly relieves great pains and chemoses.” The prescription is obviously not his, because he eagerly states his modification by two additions to the previously described components. It was possible to resurrect Galen’s ointment at the Chelsea School of Pharmacy with the kind help of Dr Jolliffe and Mr Burt. The ointment contains cadmium? (***Καδμείας κεκασμένης καὶ πεπλσμένης δρατμὰς ή***), opium, antimony, zinc oxide, frankincense, aloe indica, saffron, myrrh and a raw egg.

Galen’s medicament had to be really good if it were to be of any use, for injuries in the Olympic Games, particularly in the body contact events, were serious. There were no silver or bronze medallists in those days. Only one of the contestants in each event could win, the rest were losers. The competition for the olive wreath among the athletes was fierce, and casualties frequent and occasionally fatal.

### Deaths and Injuries

We know of at least two boxers who were responsible for the death of their opponents-**Diognetos of Crete**, and **Cleomedes of Astypalaia** who subsequently went mad. The judges denied the latter his victory, not because he killed his opponent but because he broke the rules of the contest. Fatalities were recognised risks in sporting competitions and athletes who accidentally caused the death of their opponent during an Olympic contest were normally immune from prosecution.

Boxers tried to protect themselves during training by wearing ear-protectors called ἀμφωτίδες or ἐπωτίδες. However, these circular pieces of thick leather or metal, fastened around the head and jaw, were not allowed during the actual contest when the most punishing injuries were taking place. Fractured noses, cut eyes and torn ears were common. Derisory epithets of boxers such as “Cauliflower Ears” (Ωτοθλαδίας) have survived in the literature.

Yet, all was not ugly in boxing in those days. We hear of a certain **Melankomas** who was “as healthy and unmarked as a runner” because of his unique style and tactics. His biographer **Dio Chrysostomon** tells us that Melankomas, a favourite of the crowds, used to exhaust his opponents by continually changing position without ever receiving or striking a blow. His movements were simple, light and graceful. He won numerous competitions in various Pan-Hellenic festivals and may have won an Olympic victory during the 206th Olympiad (45 AD).

### The Pankration

Athletes suffered even more devastating injuries during the Pankration, an event combining wrestling and boxing. **Plato** comments on it “as a contest combining imperfect wrestling with imperfect boxing”. The only things that were forbidden during this contest were “biting and gouging”. We hear of **Arrichion of Phigaeleia**, a Pankatiast (the word means all-powerful), who won his victory posthumously. He was captured by his opponent in a terrible hold that was strangling him. In a desperate attempt to free himself, Arrichion seized the foot of his opponent and crashed it, dislocating the ankle. The other man, unable to bear the pain, raised his hand in the signal of a withdrawal, while Arrichion breathed his last at the same moment; he won the victory not because he died, but because his opponent gave up.

Injuries from spectacular falls during the popular horse and chariot races must have added to medical emergencies.

The soil of Olympia may have claimed several victims with tetanus. This disease was well recognised at the time of Hippocrates and is thoroughly described in the Corpus, but we have no written accounts of tetanus episodes relating to Olympic athletes.

Another possible cause of injuries may have been accidents from the throwing of javelins and the discus. Tradition has it that **Oxylos**, the founder of Elis, the Greek province where Olympia is, left his country because he accidentally killed his brother **Thermios** while throwing the discus.

### Sanitation and Medical Services During the Games

Heat, dust, a limited supply of water, rudimentary sanitation and those Mediterranean insects that are determined to spoil the enjoyment of ancient and modern visitors to Olympia, must have added to morbidity among the thousands of participants in the games. The overwhelming majority of visitors slept in the open air or in tents, and for food and drink depended on itinerant caterers.

**Pausanias**, a traveller and writer of the second century AD, gives us an idea of the problem with insects. “They say,” he writes, “that when Heracles was sacrificing at Olympia he was badly pestered by flies, so he invented or was taught by someone the sacrifice to Ζεύς Απομύιος [Zeus the averter of flies]. The Eleans are said to sacrifice to Zeus Apomyios in the same way to drive away the flies from Olympia.”

Zeus cannot have been very effective, however willing to help. The gastrointestinal nuisances, that even in our days can turn the vacations of the most sophisticated of travellers into a disaster, must have been common among the spectators and on occasions may have stolen the Olympic crown from the better man. Nevertheless we have no information about any major epidemics.

We know that among the officials at Olympia a doctor was included during the games. It is unlikely, however, that comprehensive medical services were available to cope with all emergencies; the place must have been a paradise for wandering quacks and healers who were prepared to offer their skills to a massive clientele, returning every four years for the most popular spectacle of the ancient Hellenic world. Under the punishing sun of Olympia the most common medical emergency was probably sunstroke. Philostratos wrote that athletes had to be strong enough “to endure and to be burnt”, implying that they should be able to withstand the great heat at Olympia.

**Thales of Miletos**, one of the wise men of ancient Greece, is believed to have died at Olympia from sunstroke.

### An Honorable End

Intense emotion and heat must have contributed to the death of the famous boxer **Diagoras of Rhodes**. There is a moving story of how this popular athlete, three times Olympic victor, met his end.

He watched his two sons win the Boxing and Pankration events during the 83rd Olympiad. His victorious sons received their crowns and in a magnanimous gesture approached their father, placed the olive wreaths on his head, and carried him triumphantly on their shoulders around the stadium. No mortal could stand the overwhelming emotion of such glory and pride. Diagoras bent his head and died happily on the shoulders of his Olympian sons. This was in 448 BC.

By 261 AD, the last official record of the Olympic Games, times were different.

Soon there would be no place for athletics in the new ethos and social order that an austere monotheism was about to establish. An earthquake destroyed most of the buildings of ancient Olympia around 300 AD, and several decades later the edict of Emperor Theodosios banned all pagan cults and effectively put an end to the festivals at Elis.

The salvationist spirit of the new order was now marching on and the beautiful statues of Olympic gods and victors were soon to be replaced by the ascetic icons of Byzantium. The Olympic Games, and with them medicine, went into a long period of hibernation from which they were revived only in recent times.

### References and Further Reading

ΓΑΛΗΝΟΤ ΑΠΑΝΣΑ: Gottlob Carolus K, ed. Ιn KUHN MEDICI. Lipsiae, 1821-1829 All Volumes as cited in text.

Green RB, A translation of Galen’s Hygiene (De Sanite Tuenda). Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas, 1951

Finley MI, Pleket HW. The Olympic games – the first thousand years. Book Club Associates. London. 1976.

The Olympic games through the ages. Ekdotike Athenon SA Athens. 1976.

Sarton G. Galen of Pergamon. University of Kansas Press, 1954.

Gardiner EN. Athletics of the ancient world. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1955.

ΙΠΠΟΚΡΑΣΗ΢ ΑΠΑΝΤΑ ΤΑ ΕΡΓΑ. Ποσρναρόποσλος Γ.Κ. Εκδ. Μαρηίνος Α. ΑΘΗΝΑΙ 1971. Με αναθορές ζηο κείμενο.

Ι΢ΣΟΡΙΑ ΣΟΤ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΟΤ ΕΘΝΟΤ. Κλαζζικός Ελληνιζμός Σόμοι Γ1 & Γ2 ΕΚΔΟΣΙΚΗ ΑΘΗΝΩΝ. ΑΘΗΝΑΙ 1972.

Homer The Odyssey Translated by E.V. Rieu

### Acknowledgements

I am grateful to Ekdotike Athenon SA for permission to quote passages from their book “The Olympic games through the ages,” particularly the translation of Isocrates’ _Panegyricos_. Also to Chatto and Windus Ltd for quotations from “The Olympic games – the first thousand years,” by M.I. Finley and H. W. Pleket.

My special thanks are due to the Department of Medical Illustration at Westminster Hospital for the preparation of the slides for this presentation and pictures from exhibits at the British Museum, included in earlier publications of this article.

Dr. Jolliffe and Mr. Burt of the Chelsea School of Pharmacy offered valuable help in resurrecting Galen’s “ointment of the Olympic victor.”

There have been several earlier versions of this article which was first published in the journal, _History of Medicine_, Vol. 9, No. 1, 1981 and subsequently in _The Greek Review_ (copyright 1982 – world rights reserved). Also in the Journal, UPDATE, June 1, 1983.

“Medicine and the Olympic Games of Antiquity” was the keynote address at the Opening Ceremony of the _1st International Medical Olympiad_ held in 1996 at the Asclepieion of Kos under the High Patronage of the President of The Hellenic Republic. This Olympiad was organized by Professor Spyros Marketos Editor of the Proceedings.

A version of this lecture was delivered at the Annual General Meeting of the Hunterian Society in London in 1997. The text is included in the Hunterian Society Transactions, Session 1996-1997; Volume LV: 117-125.

U.S. Sports Academy2018-01-24T07:56:00-06:00June 28th, 2011|Sports Coaching, Sports Exercise Science, Sports Studies and Sports Psychology|Comments Off

The Importance of Driving Distance and Driving Accuracy on the PGA and Champions Tours

Frederick Wiseman, Mohamed Habibullah, John Friar

### Abstract

The question of whether driving distance or driving accuracy is more important to a golfer’s overall level of performance is a question that has long been debated. No conclusive answer has been found despite the efforts of numerous researchers who have investigated the relative importance of these two shot-making measures along with other shot-making measures such as greens-in-regulation and putting average. There are various reasons why this particular question has gone unanswered for so many years and many of these reasons are methodological in nature. However, the results in this paper, using data from the 2006-2009 seasons of the PGA and Champions Tours and a new methodological approach, indicate that the relative importance of driving distance and driving accuracy depends upon both the type of hole (Par 4 hole versus Par 5 hole) and the age of the golfer. For younger PGA Tour members, driving accuracy was more important than driving distance on Par 4 holes, but the opposite was true on Par 5 holes. For older Champions’ Tour members, driving distance was more important than driving accuracy on both Par 4 and Par 5 holes. Additional analyses revealed that the quality of the drive, in terms of both its distance and accuracy, was relatively more important to a golfer’s performance on the Champions Tour than it was on the PGA Tour.

**Key Words:** Golf, Driving Distance, Driving Accuracy, importance, performance

### Introduction

Which is more important to a golfer’s success – how far they drive the ball or how accurate they are with their drive? Past attempts to answer this age-old question have been unsuccessful for a variety of reasons, including the utilization of flawed methodological procedures as well as the failure of researchers to consider that the relative importance of driving distance and driving accuracy might actually depend upon the combination of a number of different factors. The literature contains numerous studies that look at the extent to which driving distance and driving accuracy, along with other shot-making skills measures such as greens-in-regulation, putting average, and sand saves, were correlated to a golfer’s overall level of performance. Consistently, in these analyses, greens-in-regulation and putting average were found to be more highly correlated with scoring average and total earnings than either driving distance or driving accuracy (3,5,10). Further, in many instances, neither driving distance nor driving accuracy was statistically significant. These past analyses were typically based upon the performance of PGA Tour members, although the performances of members of other professional golf tours and amateur golfers have also been analyzed (2,6,7,8,11).

There are a number of methodological issues that need to be examined when attempting to evaluate the relative importance of driving distance and driving accuracy, especially when these two measures are considered in conjunction with other predictor measures. Failure to do so can result in faulty conclusions being made. In this paper, the distance versus accuracy question is examined by conducting separate analyses for members of the PGA Tour and the Champions Tour.

### Methods

#### Populations

The populations of interest in the study are members of the PGA Tour and the Champions’ Tour for the last four tour seasons, 2006-2009. The latter tour is for golfers who are at least 50 years of age. Data used for both tours in this analysis came from the PGA Tour website (www.pgatour.com).

#### Dependent Variables

scoring average has frequently been used as an overall performance measure in analyses that examined the effects of various shot-making skills. However, in the present study, which compares the relative importance of driving distance and driving accuracy, scoring average should not be used as the dependent variable measure. The reason for this is that scoring average is based on all 18 holes in a round, and golfers will typically use a driver only on Par 4 and Par 5 holes and not on Par 3 holes. The fact that there may be as many as five or six Par 3 holes in a round makes scoring average an inappropriate performance measure for the purpose of this study.

The total earnings of a professional golfer on a particular tour are another measure that has been used for the dependent variable. Like scoring average, total earnings have problems associated with its use in the present study. The first problem is that tournaments on the various professional golf tours do not offer the same amount of prize money. As a result, total earnings is more heavily weighted to how well a golfer performs in tournaments that have the largest purses than to how well a golfer performs in all of the tournaments in which they play. A second problem is that total earnings do not take into account the number of tournaments played in a season. Accordingly, low total earnings may be due either to poor performances or to a small number of tournaments having been played.

Due to the problems associated with both scoring average and total earnings, it was decided to use two different dependent variable measures for determining the relative importance of driving distance and driving accuracy. These two measures are (i) scoring average obtained only on Par 4 holes and (ii) scoring average obtained only on Par 5 holes. By having these two distinct measures, it is possible to determine whether the relative importance of driving distance and driving accuracy varies by type of hole. Further, the use of these two measures also eliminates the previously discussed problems associated with both scoring average based on 18 holes and with total earnings.

#### Independent Variables

Besides driving distance and driving accuracy, there are other variables or shot-making skills that have been commonly used in analyses that sought to determine the key factors that are related to a golfer’s overall performance. Three of the most frequently used measures will be used in this study. They are:

– **Greens-in-regulation:** The percentage of times that a golfer is able to land his or her ball on the green in two strokes on a Par 4 hole and in three or fewer strokes on a Par 5 hole.

– **Putting average:** The average number of putts per greens-in-regulation.

– **Sand saves:** The percentage of times a golfer takes two or fewer shots to put their ball in the hole from a greenside sand bunker.

Analysis
Descriptive statistics will be obtained and regression analyses were conducted in order to determine the relative importance of driving distance and driving accuracy. However, it should be noted that a potential problem exists when using highly correlated predictor variables in a regression analysis. This is the problem of multicollinearity and this problem is one that is often present in studies that seek to determine the relative importance of various shot-making skills. For example, Heiny (5) did not explicitly consider the effects of multicollinearity when he concluded, using data from the 1992-2003 PGA Tour seasons, that the two driving measures were of far less importance to a golfer’s overall level of performance than either greens-in-regulation or putting average. The problem of multicollinearity arose since driving distance and driving accuracy were both highly correlated with greens-in-regulation and because these three measures were all used in the regression model. Due to multicollinearity, the relative importance of the two driving measures could not be accurately determined. Since the focus of this study is on driving distance and driving accuracy, primary attention will be placed on these two measures.

### Results

#### Descriptive Statistics

Descriptive statistics for driving distance and driving accuracy for members of each tour during the 2006 to 2009 seasons are given in Table 1. The scoring average on both Par 4 and Par 5 holes for each of the tours remained fairly constant over this period of time. On the shorter Par 4 holes, the average score on both tours was virtually identical and slightly over par. On the Par 5 holes, the average score was under par on both tours, but Champions’ Tour golfers had a slightly higher stroke average compared to their PGA Tour counterparts.

**Table 1**
Means and Standard Deviations for Scoring Average, Average Driving Distance and Driving Accuracy Percentage for Golfers on the PGA and Champions Tours: 2006-2009

	2006		2007		2008		2009
Tour/variable	Mean	SD	Mean	SD	Mean	SD	Mean	SD
PGA Tour
Scoring average on Par 4 holes	4.06	0.04	4.07	0.04	4.07	0.03	4.06	0.04
Scoring average on Par 5 holes	4.68	0.07	4.69	0.06	4.70	0.07	4.69	0.07
Average driving distance (yards)	289.5	8.7	289.1	8.6	287.6	8.6	288.1	8.6
Driving accuracy (%)	63.4	5.4	63.5	5.2	63.4	5.5	62.3	5.5
(n)	(196)		(196)		(197)		(202)
Champions Tour
Scoring average on Par 4 holes	4.06	0.06	4.05	0.06	4.05	0.07	4.06	0.07
Scoring average on Par 5 holes	4.73	0.10	4.71	0.09	4.73	0.08	4.72	0.11
Average driving distance (yards)	270.2	9.4	273.7	9.3	272.6	8.9	277.0	10.5
Driving accuracy (%)	71.4	5.0	69.2	5.3	69.1	5.8	68.6	5.4
(n)	(80)		(77)		(75)		(81)

During the four year period, the average driving distance on the PGA Tour was between 287.6 yards and 289.5 yards. The big jump in terms of average driving distance on the PGA Tour came between 1995 and 2003 when a spring-like effect in drivers was permitted. This development, together with a new a multi-layered ball, allowed golfers to launch balls higher and with less spin, thus creating optimum launch conditions and longer driving distances. This has resulted in the average driving distance leveling off in recent years on the PGA Tour. However, on the Champions’ Tour, the distance of the average drive increased from 270.2 yards in 2006 to 277.0 yards in 2009. This recent increase was due, in part, to a number of older tour members retiring and being replaced by longer-hitting younger golfers. In 2009, the differential between the PGA Tour and the Champions’ Tour in terms of the length of the average drive was just 11.1 yards compared to 19.3 yards in 2006.

The driving accuracy percentages were in a narrower range on the PGA Tour compared to the Champions’ Tour. In addition, the Champions’ Tour accuracy percentages exhibited a steady decline over the four year period and, on each tour, the percentage was at its lowest level in 2009. In terms of the variability of the two scoring averages as measured by the standard deviation, there was considerably more variability in the average scores on both the Par 4 and Par 5 holes for members of the Champions’ Tour than for members of the PGA Tour. The variability was also greater on the Champions’ Tour with respect to both driving distance and driving accuracy, but the variability differentials were not as large as they were for the two scoring average measures.

A moderately strong negative correlation existed between Driving Distance and Driving Accuracy for golfers on both tours during the 2006-2009 seasons. These correlations, which were all significant at the .01 level, are given in Table 2. The nature of the relationship found in this study was similar to that obtained by Wiseman et al (12) for members of the PGA Tour during the 1990-2004 seasons. The results also indicate that during the last two years, there was a weakening of the relationship for members of the Champions’ Tour.

**Table 2**
Correlation between Driving Distance and Driving Accuracy on the PGA and Champions Tours: 2006-2009

Tour	2006	2007	2008	2009
PGA Tour	-.59	-.64*	-.61*	-.57*
Champions Tour	-.53	-.52	-.47	-.37

∗ Correlation is significantly different from zero (p < .01) in that year.

For each tour, a golfer’s average driving distance and driving accuracy percentages were correlated with their scoring average on Par 4 and Par 5 holes. The obtained correlations are presented in Table 3. Most signs are negative, as expected, since long drives and a high driving accuracy percentage are associated with good performance and low scores. However, there were distinct differences in the correlations depending upon the tour and the type of hole.

**Table 3**
Driving Distance and Driving Accuracy Correlations with Scoring Average on Par 4 and Par 5 Holes for the PGA and Champions Tours: 2006-2009

	2006		2007		2008		2009
Tour/type of hole	Distance	Accuracy	Distance	Accuracy	Distance	Accuracy	Distance	Accuracy
PGA
Par 4	-.06	-.36*	-.00	-.32*	-.06	-.33*	-.12	-.37*
Par 5	-.37*	.03	-.36*	-.17**	-.39*	.14	-.43	.12
Champions
Par 4	-.49*	-.14	-.49*	-.12	-.38*	-.29*	-.40*	-.30*
Par 5	-.62*	.13	-.60*	.02	-.46*	.01	-.54*	-.08

∗ Correlation was significantly different from zero for that year (p < .01).
∗∗ Correlation was significantly different from zero for that year (p < .05).

On Par 4 holes, the correlation between driving distance and scoring average for golfers on the Champions’ Tour was much stronger than for golfers on the PGA Tour. These correlations were between r = -.38 and r = -.49 for Champions’ Tour members, but only between r = -.00 and r = -.12 for PGA Tour members. These latter correlations indicated that there was virtually no relationship between driving distance and scoring average on Par 4 holes for PGA Tour golfers. The opposite was true for driving accuracy. The correlation between driving accuracy and scoring average on the PGA Tour was stronger than on the Champions’ Tour. Correlations for driving accuracy and scoring average were between r = -.32 and r = -.37 for golfers on the PGA Tour and between r = -.12 and r = -.30 for golfers on the Champions’ Tour. In the last two years, the relationship between driving accuracy and scoring average on the Champions’ Tour has strengthened. The above results suggest that on Par 4 holes, driving distance was far more important than driving accuracy for Champions’ Tour golfers, while driving accuracy was far more important than driving distance for PGA Tour golfers.

With Par 5 holes, driving distance was more highly correlated with scoring average than was driving accuracy on both tours. The correlations were stronger, however, on the Champions’ Tour and were between r = -.46 and r = -.62. On the PGA Tour, the correlations were between r = -.36 and r = -.43. For driving accuracy, the correlations were weak on both tours. These results suggest that on Par 5 holes, driving distance was more important than driving accuracy for players on both the PGA Tour and the Champions’ Tour.

#### Regression Analyses

Regression analyses were conducted to determine the extent to which driving distance and driving accuracy taken together could explain the variability in scoring average on Par 4 and Par 5 holes. A large R2 value would indicate the drive was a key factor in terms of explaining overall performance, while a small R2 value would indicate the opposite. Results are shown in Table 4.

**Table 4**
Estimated Linear Regression Equation Coefficients and R2 Values when Driving Distance and Driving Accuracy were used to Predict Scoring Average

Tour / type of hole / year	Estimated Linear Regression Coefficients
	b₀ Constant	b₁ Driving distance	b₂ Driving accuracy	R²
PGA
Par 4
2009	5.076	-.0024*	-.0050*	.30
2008	4.469	-.0008**	-.0026*	.14
2007	4.716	-.0014*	-.0037*	.18
2006	4.826	-.0017*	-.0041*	.24
Par 5
2009	6.176	-.0046*	-.0026**	.21
2008	5.932	-.0038*	-.0019	.16
2007	5.665	-.0031*	-.0011	.14
2006	6.081	-.0041*	-.0035*	.19
Champions
Par 4
2009	5.710	-.0042*	-.0071*	.39
2008	5.904	-.0050*	-.0071	.42
2007	5.925	-.0052*	-.0063*	.44
2006	5.998	-.0053*	-.0070*	.45
Par 5
2009	7.172	-.0072*	-.0068*	.38
2008	6.493	-.0055*	-.0038**	.26
2007	7.372	-.0080*	-.0069*	.47
2006	7.238	-0.0080*	-.0054**	.44

∗ Estimated regression coefficient is significantly different from zero (p < .01).
∗∗ Estimated regression coefficient is significantly different from zero (p < .05).

On the Champions’ Tour, the value of R2 ranged between .38 and .47 during the 2006-2009 seasons for each type of hole, except for Par 5 holes in 2008 when R2 = .26. The regression coefficients for driving distance and driving average were all significant at the .01 level, except in 2006 and 2008 when the coefficient associated with driving accuracy was significant at the .05 level. Results on the PGA Tour differed as far less of the variability in scoring average could be explained by the drive alone. R2 values ranged between .14 and .24 in the four years and on each type of hole, except on Par 4 holes in 2009 when R2 = .30. The regression coefficient for driving distance was significant at the .01 level in each year, except in 2008 where the significance level was .05. The regression coefficient for driving accuracy on Par 4 holes was significant at the .01 level in each year, but on Par 5 holes, there were two years in which the coefficient was not statistically significant.

Additional regression analyses were conducted to determine the extent to which three other variables (greens-in-regulation, putting average and sand saves) could explain the variability in scoring average that could not be explained by either driving distance or driving accuracy. The R2 values presented in Table 5 indicate that the five measures used together could explain more of the variability in scoring average on the Champions’ Tour than on the PGA Tour. R2 values ranged from .69 to .89 on the Champions’ Tour and from .41 to .75 on the PGA Tour.

**Table 5**
R² values when Five Skills Measures were used to Predict Scoring Average on Par 4 and Par 5 Holes for the PGA and Champions Tours: 2006-2009*

Tour / type of hole	2006	2007	2008	2009
PGA
Par 4
Par 5
Champions
Par 4
Par 5

∗ The five measures were Driving Distance, Driving Accuracy, Greens-in-Regulation, Putting Average, and Sand Saves.

**Table 6**
Proportion of Total Explained Variability in Scoring Average Directly Attributable to Driving Distance and Driving Accuracy on Par 4 and Par 5 Holes for the PGA and Champions Tours: 2006-2009

Tour / type of hole	2006	2007	2008	2009
PGA
Par 4	(.24/.67) = .36*	(.18/.66) = .27	(.14/.61) = .23	(.30/.75) = .40
Par 5	(.19/.53) = .36	(.14/.41) = .32	(.16/.48) = .33	(.21/.56) = .38
Champions
Par 4	(.45/.88) = .51	(.44/.88) = .50	(.42/.89) = .47	(.39/.78) = .50
Par 5	(.44/.78) = .56	(.47/.80) = .59	(.26/.69) = .38	(.38/.78) = .51

∗ Values obtained by dividing R2 values given in Table 4 by the corresponding R2 values given in Table 5.

The ratios of the corresponding R2 values in Tables 4 and 5 are given in Table 6. These ratios indicate the relative importance of the drive compared to the other three predictor measures. The higher the ratio, the greater the variability in scoring average that could be explained by using the two driving measures compared to the three other predictor measures. As shown in the table, the ratios are higher in each case for the Champions’ Tour than for the PGA Tour. This indicates that the drive, compared to the other three measures that were used, was relatively more important for golfers on the Champions’ Tour than for golfers on the PGA Tour.

### Discussion

This study examined the relative importance of driving distance and driving accuracy on two professional golf tours from 2006-2009. Based upon independent analyses on Par 4 and Par 5 holes for each tour, the findings indicated that the relative importance of driving distance and driving accuracy varied by both tour and type of hole.
Other researchers have recently investigated the physical (1,9) and mental (4) effects of aging on the ability of professional golfers to compete at a high level. These studies described the nature of declines that take place with aging as well as compensating offsets, for example, shorter, but more accurate drives. In the present study, one possible explanation for the changing relative importance of driving distance relates to the physical changes that occur as people age. Individuals lose strength and agility over time, which in golf is frequently demonstrated by both shorter and more accurate drives. However, for Champions’ Tour golfers this improvement in driving accuracy is not enough to offset the loss in driving distance which, in turn, results in higher scoring averages. On long Par 4 holes, a short drive for these players means fewer birdie opportunities because it is more difficult to reach the green in regulation. For PGA Tour golfers, a relatively short drive on a lengthy Par 4 hole is not necessarily an impediment to reaching the green in regulation, even if the tee shot does not come to rest on the fairway.
This study also demonstrated that the drive was relatively more important to a golfer’s overall performance than was previously thought based upon a number of similar studies. This increased level of relative importance could be attributed, in part, to the fact that in the present analysis, separate scoring averages on Par 4 and Par 5 holes were used rather than a single scoring average based upon all 18 holes. Additionally, by conducting the analysis in two phases, it was shown that approximately half of the total explained variability in scoring average on both Par 4 and Par 5 holes on the Champions’ Tour, and approximately one-third of the total explained variability in scoring average on the PGA Tour, could be directly attributed to the drive alone. These results highlight the need for careful attention to the performance measures that are used in future studies.

### Conclusion

This paper investigated whether driving distance or driving accuracy was more important to a golfer’s performance. The results indicated that the answer to the question depended not only on the type of hole (Par 4 or Par 5), but also on the age of the golfer. For the 50 years of age and over golfer playing on the Champions’ Tour, driving distance was clearly a more important factor regardless of the type of hole. However, for the under 50 years of age golfer on the PGA Tour, driving accuracy was more important on Par 4 holes, while driving distance was more important on Par 5 holes. In addition, the investigation revealed that the quality of the drive in terms of the combined effects of both driving distance and driving accuracy was more important to a golfer’s success on the Champions’ Tour than it was on the PGA Tour.

### Applications in Sport

This study is relevant to all golf teaching professionals because instructors debate the amount of time golfers should spend in practicing their driving techniques. Traditionally, golfers have been told to spend less time on driving and more on other facets of the game. This study has shown that except for young professional golfers, the drive is very important in trying to achieve lower scores.

### References

1. Baker, J., Deakin, J., Horton, S. and Pearce, W. (2007). Maintenance of Skilled Performance with Age: A Descriptive Examination of Professional Golfers. Journal of Aging and Physical Ability, 15, 299-316.

2. Callan, S. & Thomas, J. (2006). Performance in Amateur Golf: An Examination of NCAA Division I Golfers. The Sport Journal, 9, 3. Available online at: <http://www.thesportjournal.org/article/gender-skill-and-performance-amateur-golf-examination-ncaa-division-i-golfers/>.

3. Engelhardt, G.M. (1995). It’s not how you drive, it’s how you arrive: the myth. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 80, 1135-1138.

4. Fried, Harold O. & Loren W. Tauer. (2009). The impact of age on the ability to perform under pressure: golfers on the PGA tour. Journal of Productivity Analysis. Available online at: <http://www.springerlink.com/content/337g8rv212w45423/?p=7d7abc1e32d744f3906e83014cf31f51&pi=4>.

5. Heiny, E. (2008). Today’s PGA Tour Pro: Long but Not so Straight. Chance, 21, 1, 10-21.

6. Moy, R.L. & Liaw, T. (1998). Determinants of golf tournament earnings. The American Economist, 42, 65-70.

7. Rishe, P. (2001). Differing Rates of Return to Performance. Journal of Sports Economics, 2, 285-296.

8. Shmanske, S. (2000). Gender, Skill and Earnings in Professional Golf. Journal of Sports Economics, 1, 385-200.

9. Tirunch, G. (2010). Age and Winning Professional Golf Tournaments. Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, 6, 1. Available online at: <http://www.bepress.com/jqas/vol6/iss1/5/>.

10. Wiseman, F. & Chatterjee, S. (2006). Comprehensive Analysis of Golf Performance on the PGA Tour: 1990-2004. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 102, 109-117.

11. Wiseman, F., Chatterjee, S., Wiseman, D., & Chatterjee, N. (1994). An Analysis of 1992 Performance Statistics for Players on the US PGA Tour, Senior PGA and LPGA Tours, in A. Cochran & M.R. Farrally (Eds.) Science and Golf II. Proceedings of the World Scientific Congress of Golf. London: E & FN Spon. Pp. 199-204.

12. Wiseman, F., Habibullah, M., & Yilmaz, M. (2007). A New Method for Ranking Total Driving Performance on the PGA Tour. The Sport Journal, 10, 1. Available online at: <http://www.thesportjournal.org/article/new-method-ranking-total-driving-performance-pga-tour>.

### Corresponding Author

**Frederick Wiseman, Ph.D**
202 Hayden Hall
College of Business Administration
Northeastern University
Boston, MA 02115
<f.wiseman@neu.edu>
(617) 373-4562

### Author Bios

#### Frederick Wiseman
Frederick Wiseman is Professor of Statistics at the Northeastern University College of Business Administration

#### Mohamed Habibullah
Mohamed Habibullah is a Lecturer in Statistics at the Northeastern University College of Business Administration

#### John Friar
John Friar is Executive Professor in Entrepreneurship and Innovation at the Northeastern University College of Business Administration

U.S. Sports Academy2013-11-25T16:31:21-06:00March 16th, 2011|Contemporary Sports Issues, Sports Exercise Science, Sports Management, Sports Studies and Sports Psychology|Comments Off

Effect of dynamic versus static stretching in the warm-up on hamstring flexibility

Gayle Silveira, Mark Sayers, Gordon Waddington – Department of Health, Design and Science, University of Canberra

### Abstract

Recent studies have questioned the benefits of static stretching in the sports warm-up. The purpose of our research was to examine the acute effect of static and dynamic stretching in the warm-up, on hamstring flexibility using an intervention study design. Hamstring flexibility was measured using modifications of the Straight Leg Raise test to measure hip flexion range of motion in degrees. The reliability of the test setup was determined in a separate study (n=33), the results of which were also utilised to establish the relationship between static and dynamic SLR tests. There was a significant difference between flexibility measured by the Static-passive and the Dynamic-supine SLR test (p < .05); hence, these were utilised to assess static and dynamic flexibility, respectively, in the intervention study.

Twelve participants were randomly assigned to three interventions of 225 secs. stretch treatment on separate days: No stretching (Treatment 1), Static stretching (Treatment 2) and Dynamic stretching (Treatment 3) in a cross-over study design. When static stretching was included in the warm-up, there were statistically significant differences in pre and post static flexibility (t (11) = 4.19, p < .05). However, there was no significant difference in pre and post dynamic flexibility (t (11) = 0.72, p >.05). Following dynamic stretching there was a statistically significant improvement in both static (t (11) = 2.62, p <. 05) and dynamic (t (11) = 5.69, p < .05) flexibility. Non-parametric tests carried out on the data to corroborate the aforementioned findings.

Static stretching did not improve dynamic hamstring flexibility; however, dynamic stretching improved both dynamic and static flexibility. This has implications for the specificity of stretching in sport.

**Key words:* Range of Motion, hamstring, joint flexibility, Lower extremity, resting tension, stretching

### Abbreviations

ROM: range of motion
SPH: static passive hamstring flexibility test
DSUH: dynamic supine hamstring flexibility test
DSHWB: dynamic standing hamstring flexibility test with knee brace
DSHNB: dynamic standing hamstring flexibility test without knee brace (no brace)
SAID: Specific adaptation to imposed demands

### Introduction

Dynamic stretching consists of simulating movements that are representative of those frequently used in a particular sport (22). Examples of dynamic stretching include the toe walk, heel-walk, hand-toe hamstring stretch, military-walk, sumo groin stretch, and quadriceps kicks (31). In 1996, Alter (2) described a principle put forward by Wallis and Logan in 1964 for strength, endurance and flexibility training, called specific adaptation to imposed demands (SAID). “One should stretch at not less than 75 percent of maximum velocity through the exact plane of motion, through the exact range of motion, and at the precise joint angles used while performing skills in a specific activity” (2). The aforementioned principle lends support to the concept of dynamic flexibility training. There is a lack of studies that examine the effect of dynamic stretching on static as well as dynamic flexibility in the period preceding competition i.e. in the warm-up phase.

Numerous studies in recent literature examine the effects of static stretching on various performance variables (29, 37). In their 2006 study, Behm et al. (6) found decrements in knee extension, knee flexion, drop-jump contact time and counter movement jump height following an acute bout of static stretching. The analysis of the relationship between static stretching and performance focuses mainly on the variables of strength and power (30). Their study demonstrates that static stretching lowers the maximal strength of the knee flexors and extensors and may even hamper performance of activities involving maximal force output. If increased musculotendinous stiffness enables more efficient transmission of force, stretching just prior to activity might also decrease force output in skills such as jumping to attain maximum height and forceful throwing (12). Even a moderate duration of static stretching could result in quadriceps isometric force and activation decrements (33). Furthermore, it is theorised that this impairment of isometric force production could last for a period of up to 120 minutes.

The purpose of our research was to examine the acute effect of static and dynamic stretching in the warm-up, on hamstring flexibility using an intervention study design. The reliability of the experimental setup was established in a separate study (n=33) that was used to determine the relationship between the tests that measured static and dynamic hamstring flexibility. Analyses of variance and correlation analyses were computed on the collated data. An intervention design was used to determine how an acute bout of static or dynamic stretching affected hamstring flexibility as measured by a modified SLR test. Parametric (t-test) and non-parametric tests (Wilcoxon Matched-Pairs Ranks) were carried out to analyse the raw data.

### Method

#### Participants

Sixteen university students (n = 16) were recruited for the intervention study to examine the effects of dynamic and static stretching on hamstring flexibility. The final sample consisted of 12 students of which five females and seven males served as participants. Two potential participants did not complete all testing sessions and two participants’ data was excluded from the study due to measurement error. The average age of the participants was 24.8 ± 6.8 yrs. (mean ± SD). The average height and weight was 174.5 ± 4.5 cm. and 73.0 ± 15.7 kg. respectively (mean ± SD).

Participants were drawn from a variety of sporting backgrounds which predominantly involved the lower body (42). Most were actively training for a sport. All trained lightly a minimum of three times a week. A condition of entry to the study was that the subjects did not concurrently use any stretch or flexibility training in their regular training program (41). Screening questionnaires were provided to identify subjects with neurological or musculoskeletal abnormalities of the spine and lower limbs. Subjects were examined to determine hip, knee and ankle ROM and a brief examination of the lumbar spine was performed. The final participants were free of any bony or soft tissue injury to the spine and lower limbs. The participants were asked to carry out routine activities and not to exercise strenuously (10). They were also advised not to stretch the hamstrings and avoid initiating or changing any exercise program during the study (35).

All participants provided their written informed consent to participate in the study. Hamstring flexibility was measured in the dominant leg (19), identified by kicking a football towards a wall five times (11). This study received approval from the human ethics committee of the University of Canberra.

#### Materials and Procedure

Reflective markers attached to specific bony prominences utilised for biomechanical analysis (Figure 1). The functional orthopaedic knee brace, Knee Ranger II Universal (dj Orthopaedics, LLC, California, USA) helped to maintain 15º of knee flexion during pre and post-testing. Participants wore the knee brace only during testing and not whilst performing the intervention stretches. The Velcro strapping on the brace eased the removal and fastening process considerably. A warm-up consisting of five minutes of cycling on a stationary cycle ergometer (Exertech, Australia) at 60-70 W (6, 42) was employed. Testing was carried out at around the same time of the day for each participant involved in the intervention study (41). There was no stretching incorporated in the warm-up.

#### Modified SLR test for measuring hamstring flexibility

Previous studies examining stretch and contraction specific changes in ROM utilise the hamstring muscle group most frequently in humans and the SLR test is the most commonly used test (17). The contralateral or non-testing leg was partially flexed at the hip and knee, with a pillow rolled underneath the knee to stabilise the pelvis (11). A Velcro strap fastened around the pelvis and secured beneath the exercise bench to minimise pelvic rotation. In 1982, Bohannon (7) suggested that the pelvis and the contralateral thigh should be maintained in neutral position to decrease contribution to SLR-ROM. During testing, the participant was advised not to lift the upper body off the bench, and the arms were folded across the chest or placed beneath the head. This minimised the contribution from the trunk towards the effort of hip flexion.

The experimental setup included a camcorder placed perpendicular to the plane of motion. The camcorder was mounted on a tripod and placed at a distance of 10 metres from the test area (Figure 1). A PAL digital video camera (Canon MVX3i, Canon Inc., Japan) operating at 50Hz was used to video the participants performing the various flexibility tests. Dartfish ProSuite (Dartfish Connect 4.0, Dartfish Ltd., Fribourg, Switzerland) was used to capture the video data from the camera to a computer for two-dimensional analysis.

#### Measuring Flexibility

After the warm-up period, participants (n=12) undertook static passive (SPH) and dynamic supine hamstring flexibility (DSUH) tests to measure static and dynamic flexibility respectively. The reliability of this experimental setup and correlation between modifications of the SLR test was established in an earlier study involving 33 subjects.

##### Static Passive Hamstring Flexibility test

This test was performed in the supine position on an exercise bench. The functional knee brace was worn for testing. Passive stretching utilises an external agent to assist with the stretch. The participant used a Velcro strap around the ankle to assist with pulling the limb into hip flexion (Figure 1). The dominant leg was flexed to the terminal ROM or until a mild discomfort/tightness was felt in the back of thigh (5). This position was maintained for five seconds following which the limb was slowly lowered to the resting position.

##### Dynamic Supine Hamstring Flexibility test

The test was performed in the supine position on an exercise bench. Dynamic flexibility measures the ability to move a joint quickly through a non-restricted ROM. The participants were instructed to move the dominant limb into hip flexion using maximal effort and as quickly as possible or until a mild discomfort was felt in the back of the thigh. Dartfish analysis of the video frame that captured the terminal phase of movement was used to determine the angle of hip flexion.

Supine stretching is thought to better isolate the hamstrings, allowing for improved relaxation and is generally believed to be safer and more comfortable for people with a history of low back pain (15). Hence, the SPH test was used to measure static hamstring flexibility and the DSUH test was used to measure dynamic flexibility. Reliability testing demonstrated that there is a significant difference between flexibility measured by the SPH and DSUH hamstring flexibility tests (p<.001). There was also a significant difference between DSHWB (with knee brace) and DSHNB (without knee brace) tests (p = .003) and this result supported the use of the knee brace (dj Orthopaedics, LLC, California, USA) to maintain a fixed knee angle during flexibility testing.

An average hip flexion ROM was calculated for both and served as the final measure of hamstring flexibility (4). Post-testing was commenced immediately after the completion of the stretching intervention assigned for the day. In 2002, Klee et al. (26) suggested that participants should be retested as quickly as possible after the intervention stretches because resting tension started to increase after a three minute rest pause.

#### Stretching Program

##### Warm-up only/ No stretching: Treatment 1

No stretches were included in the warm-up, serving as a control. Participants cycled for 75 seconds on a stationary ergometer (Exertech, Australia) at 60-70 W with a 10 seconds rest pause between each of the five 75-second cycle periods. Total duration of cycling was 225 secs.

##### Static stretching: Treatment 2

Participants performed stretches for a total duration of 225 seconds (52). They performed three types of static stretches with a stretch time of 75 seconds for each (Table 1). This time equated to five stretches held for 15 seconds each (9, 29, 30, 34, 47,). A rest pause of ten seconds was allowed between stretches. Each static stretch was performed to the terminal range, defined as the point where the subject felt a mild discomfort or tightness in the back of the thigh (5). The static and dynamic stretching routines were appropriately timed so that the amount of time spent stretching was the same for each group, enabling comparison between the two groups (41).

##### Standing toe-touch

This stretch routine involved bending forward to touch toes whilst making sure that the knees remained fully extended. Participants held the stretched position for 15 seconds until a slight sense of discomfort or tightness felt in the back of the thigh. Ten seconds rest pauses were allowed after each stretch and when switching to a different stretch type.

##### Forward swing static stretch

The heel of the extremity to be stretched was supported on a treatment table to perform this particular stretch (35). The knee remained fully extended and the foot was positioned in relaxed plantar flexion. The pelvis was tilted anteriorly whilst bending forward at the waist avoiding flexion of the spine (15, 35), until the terminal range was reached or discomfort felt in the back of the thigh. This stretch position was held for 15 seconds and repeated five times on the dominant extremity.

##### Passive supine-sling stretch

This stretch was performed in the supine position whilst lying on an exercise treatment bench. A Velcro sling was passed around the ankle to flex the hip and consequently stretch the hamstring group of muscle. The stretch was held for 15 seconds to the terminal range of discomfort or tightness felt in the back of the thigh.

##### Dynamic stretching treatment

Five sets of seven to eight dynamic stretches equalled the amount of time spent (Table 1) on the aforementioned static stretching regimens. The aim was to allot the same amount of stretching time to the static and dynamic stretching interventions enabling comparison among the groups. The 15 seconds hold period for each static stretch equated to around seven to eight dynamic stretches. Five sets of dynamic stretches amounted to 225 seconds of total stretching time. There was a pause of 10 seconds between each set and another 10 seconds when changing over from one type of stretch to another.

Stretches were begun at low velocity and momentum was gradually built up to achieve at least 75% of maximum height and speed while performing the dynamic stretches. The SAID principle of specific adaptation to imposed demands formed the basis of the dynamic stretching routine. Participants stretched at 75% of the maximum velocity through a particular ROM whilst performing a sport-specific movement.

##### Dynamic leg swings

The dominant leg was flexed at the hip in a forward kicking action. The aforementioned SAID principle was applied during performance of all stretches (controlled stretching). Five sets of seven or eight forward leg swings or kicks (9) were carried out to a timed 225 seconds of stretching.

##### Crossed-body leg swings

Dominant leg swung across the midline of the body towards the opposite shoulder. This stretched the biceps femoris which is the lateral muscle of the hamstring group (40).

##### Standing bicycle-kicks

The dominant limb was put through a circumduction-like movement in a rhythmic cyclical manner incorporating the SAID principle (controlled stretching). Total time spent on this stretch was also 225 seconds.

#### Biomechanical analyses

The hip ROM in the dominant leg was used as an indirect measure of hamstring flexibility (44) and served as the only investigated parameter (Fully extended hip = 0°). Dartfish ProSuite (Dartfish Connect 4.0, Dartfish Ltd., Fribourg, Switzerland) is a complete video analysis software package, which includes all necessary functionality to analyse technical performance during and after training. Dartfish motion analysis software was used to quantify the degree of hip flexion. This system enables access to every video frame so that the terminal ROM of hip flexion can be accurately identified. Once the appropriate frame was identified, Dartfish was used to measure hip flexion accurately to the nearest degree. Intra-tester and operator reliability were tested by a repeat analysis of 15 participant performances.

#### Statistical Analysis

The principal dependent variable of interest was the change in hamstring flexibility measured by hip flexion ROM between pre and post-stretch measurements. The paired sample t-test compared the effect of the two treatments on static and dynamic hamstring flexibility. Non- parametric tests conducted on the collected data corroborate the aforementioned findings. Furthermore, Tukey’s Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) test explored the degree of change in static and dynamic flexibility. The data was analysed with the statistical package SPSS for Windows (version 12.1.0; SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL).

### Results & Disscussion

Various modifications of the SLR test were used to measure and compare hamstring flexibility in an earlier study that also tested for reliability (n=33). Static passive hamstring flexibility (SPH), dynamic supine hamstring flexibility (DSUH), dynamic standing hamstring flexibility with knee brace worn (DSHWB), and dynamic standing hamstring flexibility without knee brace (DSHNB). Subjects were tested on two separate occasions one week apart. Each subject had three trials for each tests for the two separate testing times resulting in a total of 30 scores. Test-retest was appropriate as subjects were tested at two points in time a week apart and a Cronbach alpha was used to test for internal consistency and reliability for the three trials of each week’s testing. The tests used in this study evidenced a very high degree of internal consistency for each trial by Occasion 1 and Occasion 2 as well as a high coefficient of reliability or stability as measured by the test-retest procedure (Table 3, Table 4).

Participants were randomly assigned to one of three interventions for each of three testing occasions:

1. No stretching (Treatment 1)
2. Static stretching (Treatment 2)
3. Dynamic stretching (Treatment 3)

A Paired-samples T-test was used to test for differences in static and dynamic flexibility from pre/post-test after each stretch intervention (Table 5).

Intervention Treatment 1, where the subjects did no stretching served as the control. Static and dynamic stretching (Treatment 2, Treatment 3) were the experimental treatments. Following Treatment 1 we expected measures of hamstring flexibility to remain unchanged from pre to post-test. However, our analysis revealed significant differences between pre and post score for static flexibility (t (11) = 2.76, p < .05). There was no significant difference between pre and post hip ROM measured by the dynamic flexibility test (t (11) = 0.315, p >.05). The mean value of difference between pre and post score for static flexibility (mean = 2.13, SD = 2.68) indicates that there is a substantial change.

When static stretching was included in the warm-up, there were statistically significant differences in pre and post static flexibility measurements (t (11) = 4.19, p < .05). However, there was no significant difference in pre and post dynamic flexibility measurements (t (11) = 0.72, p >.05). When dynamic stretches were included in the warm-up instead of static stretches, it was expected that there would be changes, at least, in dynamic flexibility of the hamstrings. The analysis shows that there were statistically significant differences in both static (t (11) = 2.62, p <. 05) and dynamic (t (11) = 5.69, p < .05) flexibility. This suggests that participants improved both their static and dynamic hamstring flexibility after dynamic stretching was included in the warm-up.

Non-parametric tests were carried out on the collected data to corroborate the aforementioned findings. Wilcoxon Matched-Pairs Ranks test was performed. The results were similar to those obtained following the Paired samples t-test. Following Treatment 1 (No stretching) there were resultant differences in the static hamstring flexibility (Wilcoxon, Z = -2.41, p < .05). Static stretching only influenced static flexibility (Wilcoxon, Z = -2.67, p < .05) of the hamstrings, while dynamic stretching produced changes in both static (Wilcoxon, Z = -2.39, p < .05) and dynamic flexibility (Wilcoxon, Z = -2.98, p < .05).

Furthermore, the differences in the degree of change in static and dynamic flexibility following dynamic stretching were explored using Tukey’s Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) test. The difference between the degree of improvement in static and dynamic hamstring flexibility following dynamic stretching were not statistically significant (Table 6). To corroborate these findings a Wilcoxon Matched-Pairs Ranks test was performed on pre-post differences of static and dynamic flexibility following dynamic stretching. The analysis failed to identify a significant difference in the changes demonstrated in both static and dynamic flexibility (Wilcoxon, Z = -0.178, p > .05).

The availability of state of the art software and improved video analysis techniques has changed the way flexibility is measured. The methods commonly being used have focussed on the measurement of static flexibility. With the growing trend towards using dynamic stretching and sport-specific drills in the warm-up, there is a need for measuring devices to adapt to these changes. We have provided a simple, reliable setup to measure flexibility. The inadequately defined relationship between flexibility and muscular performance or an athlete’s susceptibility to injury may be attributable to the lack of valid and reliable measures of flexibility (20). The drawback of flexibility assessment tools is the need for testing to be carried out within the confines of a laboratory. Although this study was carried out in a laboratory, the set-up could be used outdoors with the participant performing functional dynamic sporting movements.

Dynamic flexibility has been defined as a measure of the resistance throughout the ROM of a joint or a measure of joint stiffness (3). Dynamic flexibility is important in sport because it measures the ability of an extremity to move through a non-restricted ROM (36). The main findings suggest that static stretching improves static flexibility (p < .05) but may have no impact on dynamic flexibility (p > .05). Increasing ROM achieved through static stretching does not necessarily translate to improvements in dynamic flexibility. In 2004, Behm et al. (6) supported the concept that static stretching improved flexibility and ROM, however, it was believed that the relevance and specificity of the gains remained questionable.

In 1988, Alter (1) argued in support of the specificity of stretching: “ROM is a combination of active and passive ranges of motion and if passive stretching exercises are used to develop flexibility, then one should expect changes largely in passive flexibility” (p.179). Even a moderate duration of static stretching could result in quadriceps isometric force and activation decrements lasting for up to 120 minutes (33). The increase in static flexibility may not have translated into expected improvements in dynamic flexibility because of dampened hamstring activation following an acute bout of static stretching.

Static flexibility improved when no stretches were included in the warm-up as well as when the participants underwent a static stretching routine. Similar results were obtained in a other studies (44, 53). The 2003 study by Zakas et al. (53) indicates that flexibility improves significantly even when stretching is not included in the warm-up, however, any comparisons should be made with caution because of differences in methodology. The stationary cycling group in the study in 1997 by Wiemann and Knut (44) cycled for 15 minutes and demonstrated a significant improvement in hip ROM thereafter. They explain that this occurrence may be due to the decreased resting tension and a reduced stretch resistance following stationary cycling. However, other studies have shown that warming up before stretching does not complement the effectiveness of stretching (14, 45).

Following the inclusion of dynamic stretches in the warm-up, dynamic flexibility as well as static flexibility scores improved from pre-test to post-test. However, Tukey’s HSD test did not reveal significant differences between the degree of improvement of static and dynamic flexibility. Muscles have two types of receptors: the primary or annulospiral endings which measure changes in both muscle length and velocity, and the secondary or flower spray endings that measured changes in muscle length alone (2). Thus, Alter (2) reasons that dynamic stretching may be used to condition primary endings for a desired response, and sport-specific drills could be used in warm-up. Dynamic stretching may have caused activation of the primary annulospiral endings resulting in an increase in both static and dynamic flexibility. The dynamic stretching routine may have had a warming up effect, causing an increase in static flexibility.

There may be a need to consider the appropriate time for static stretching in the daily training schedule. There have been suggestions that static stretching may be useful in the cooling down period after a workout (18, 27, 31-32). Evidence remains in support of static stretching for long-term gains in flexibility (31, 39).

### Conclusion

The intervention study comparing the effects of static and dynamic stretching routines in the warm-up on hamstring flexibility demonstrated that dynamic stretching enhanced static as well as dynamic flexibility. Static stretching on the other hand did not have an impact on dynamic flexibility. This has implications for the use of static stretching in the warm-up for dynamic sport. The role of static stretching for injury prevention in dynamic sport is also being questioned.

### Application in Sport

The simplicity of the experimental set-up is the highlight of this research. Coaches can use our method of video analysis to monitor the effectiveness of stretching routines. A single person can carry out testing with ease and accuracy.

Dynamic stretching is synonymous with functional, sport-specific stretching and this research has demonstrated that dynamic stretching improves both static and dynamic hamstring flexibility. Static stretching has no impact on dynamic flexibility and should not be used in the warm-up; however, static stretches may be useful in the cooling down period of training for long term gains in flexibility.

Although our research has demonstrated the effectiveness of dynamic stretching in the warm-up, it is important to follow the training guidelines set aside in 2001 by Mann and Whedon (31) whilst implementing a stretching routine. Dynamic stretching may be most effective if performed according to the training principles discussed earlier, always making sure the needs and the capacities of the individual athlete receive precedence over general training goals.

### Acknowledgements

I would like to acknowledge my supervisors Dr. Mark Sayers and Dr. Gordon Waddington for their invaluable guidance. Their understanding and patience helped me overcome numerous hurdles en route to the completion of this thesis. I would also like to thank the sports studies staff for their help and advice.

I am thankful to the students of the University of Canberra (Sports Studies) for volunteering to participate in this research project. It was wonderful working with such cheerful and enthusiastic young people. Their willingness to participate and report at similar times for each testing session is much appreciated.

### References

1. Alter, M. J. (1988). Science of Stretching. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
2. Alter, M. J. (1996). Science of Flexibility (2nd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
3. Anderson, B., & Burke, E. R. (1991). Scientific, medical, and practical aspects of stretching. Clinical Sports Medicine, 10(1), 63-86.
4. Baltaci, G., Un, N., Tunay, V., Besler, A., & Gerceker, S. (2003). Comparison of three different sit and reach tests for measurement of hamstring flexibility in female university students. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 37(1), 59-61.
5. Bandy, W. D., Irion, J. M., & Briggler, M. (1997). The effect of time and frequency of static stretching on flexibility of the hamstring muscles. Physical Therapy, 77(10), 1090-1096.
6. Behm, D. G., Bradbury, E. E., Haynes, A. T., Hodder, J. N., Allison, M., Paddock, L., et al. (2006). Flexibility is not related to stretch induced deficits in force or power. Journal of Sports Science & Medicine, 5, 33-42.
7. Bohannon, R. W. (1982). Cinematographic analysis of the passive straight-leg-raising test for hamstring muscle length. Physical Therapy, 62(9), 1269-1274.
8. Bohannon, R. W., Gajdosik, R., & LeVeau, B. F. (1985). Contribution of pelvic and lower limb motion to increases in the angle of passive straight leg raising. Physical Therapy, 65(4), 474-476.
9. Boyle, P. M. (2004). The effect of static and dynamic stretching on muscle force production. Journal of Sports Sciences, 22(3), 273-275.
10. Burke, D. G., Holt, L. E., Rasmussen, R., MacKinnon, N. C., Vossen, J. F., & Pelham, T. W. (2001). Effects of hot or cold water immersion and modified proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation flexibility exercise on hamstring length. Journal of Athletic Training, 36(1), 16-19.
11. Chan, S. P., Hong, Y., & Robinson, E. D. (2001). Flexibility and passive resistance of the hamstrings of young adults using two different static stretching protocols. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 11(2), 81-86.
12. Cornwell, A., Nelson, A. G., Heise, G. D., & Sidaway, B. (2001). Acute effects of passive muscle stretching on vertical jump performance. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 40(4), 307-324.
13. Cornwell, A., Nelson, A. G., & Sidaway, B. (2002). Acute effects of stretching on the neuromechanical properties of the triceps surae muscle complex. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 86(5), 428-434.
14. de Weijer, V. C., Gorniak, G. C., & Shamus, E. (2003). The effect of static stretch and warm-up exercise on hamstring length over the course of 24 hours. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy, 33(12), 727-733.
15. Decoster, L. C., Scanlon, R. L., Horn, K. D., & Cleland, J. (2004). Standing and supine hamstring stretching are equally effective. Journal of Athletic Training, 39(4), 330-334.
16. Elia, D. S., Bohannon, R. W., Cameron, D., & Albro, R. C. (1996). Dynamic pelvic stabilization during hip flexion: A comparison study. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy, 24(1), 30-36.
17. Etnyre, B. R., & Lee, E. J. (1998). Chronic and acute flexibility of men and women using three different stretching techniques. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 59(3), 222-228.
18. Gill, T., Wilkinson, A., Edwards, E., & Grimmer, K. (2002). The effect of either a pre or post exercise stretch on straight leg raise range of motion (SLR-ROM) in females. Journal of Science & Medicine in Sport, 5(4), 281-290.
19. Gribble, P. A., Guskiewicz, K. M., Prentice, W. E., & Shields, E. W. (1999). Effects of static and hold-relax stretching on hamstring range of motion using the FlexAbility LE1000. Journal of Sport Rehabilitation, 8(3), 195-208.
20. Harvey, D., & Mansfield, C. (2000). Measuring flexibility for performance and injury prevention. In C. J. Gore (Ed.), Physiological Tests for Elite Athletes. Australian Sports Commission. South Australia: Human Kinetics.
21. Harvey, L., Herbert, R. D., & Crosbie, J. (2002). Does stretching induce lasting increases in joint ROM? A systematic review. Physiotherapy Research International, 7(1), 1-13.
22. Henrick, A. (2000). Dynamic flexibility training. Strength & Conditioning Journal, 22(5), 33-38.
23. Herbert, R. D., & Gabriel, M. (2002). Effects of stretching before and after exercising on muscle soreness and risk of injury: Systematic review. British Medical Journal, 325(7362), 468.
24. Hopkins, W. G. (2000). Measures of reliability in sports medicine and science. Sports Medicine, 30(1), 1-15.
25. Hsieh, C. Y., Walker, J. M., & Gillis, K. (1983). Straight-leg-raising test. Comparison of three instruments. Physical Therapy, 63(9), 1429-1433.
26. Klee, A., & Wiemann, K. (2002). Stretch and contraction specific changes in passive torque in human M. rectus femoris. European Journal of Sports Science, 2(6), 1-10.
27. Knudson, D. V. (1999). Stretching during warm-up: Do we have enough evidence? The Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 70(7), 24-27.
28. Knudson, D. V., Magnusson, S. P., & McHugh, M. (2000). Current issues in flexibility fitness. Physical Fitness Research Digest, 3(10), 1-8.
29. Knudson, D. V., Noffal, G. J., Bahamonde, R. E., Bauer, J. A., & Blackwell, J. R. (2004). Stretching has no effect on tennis serve performance. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 18(3), 654-656.
30. Kokkonen, J., Nelson, A. G., & Cornwell, A. (1998). Acute muscle stretching inhibits maximal strength performance. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 69(4), 411-416.
31. Mann, D., & Whedon, C. (2001). Functional stretching: Implementing a dynamic stretching program. Athletic Therapy Today, 6(3), 10-13.
32. O’Connor, B. (2003, January). Stretching the truth: It is no bargain! (General Training). Coach & Athletic Director, 72, 46-50.
33. Power, K., Behm, D., Cahill, F., Carroll, M., & Young, W. (2004). An acute bout of static stretching: Effects on force and jumping performance. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 36(8), 1389-1396.
34. Roberts, J. M., & Wilson, K. (1999). Effect of stretching duration on active and passive range of motion in the lower extremity. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 33(4), 259-263.
35. Ross, M. (1999). Effect of lower-extremity position and stretching on hamstring muscle flexibility. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 13(2), 124-129.
36. Shellock, F. G., & Prentice, W. E. (1985). Warming-up and stretching for improved physical performance and prevention of sports-related injuries. Sports Medicine, 2, 267-278.
37. Siatras, T., Papadopoulos, G., Mameletzi, D., Gerodimos, V., & Kellis, S. (2003). Static and dynamic acute stretching effect on gymnasts’ speed in vaulting. Paediatric Exercise Science, 15(4), 383-391.
38. Stark, S. D. (1997). The stark reality of stretching: An informed approach for all activities and every sport (3rd ed.). Richmond, BC, Canada: Stark reality corp.
39. Taylor, D. C., Brooks, D. E., & Ryan, J. B. (1997). Viscoelastic characteristics of muscle: passive stretching versus muscular contractions. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 29(12), 1619-1624.
40. Tubbs, R. S., Caycedo, F. J., Oakes, W. J., & Salter, E. G. (2006). Original communication: Descriptive anatomy of the insertion of the biceps femoris muscle [Electronic version]. Clinical Anatomy, 19. Retrieved January 13, 2006, from <http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgibin/fulltext/112141010/PDFSTART>
41. Wallin, D., Ekblom, B., Grahn, R., & Nordenborg, T. (1985). Improvement of muscle flexibility. A comparison between two techniques. The American Journal of Sports Medicine, 13(4), 263-269.
42. Walshe, A. D., Wilson, G. J., & Murphy, A. J. (1996). The validity and reliability of a test of lower body musculotendinous stiffness. European Journal of Applied Physiology & Occupational Physiology, 73(3-4), 332-339.
43. Weldon, S. M., & Hill, R. H. (2003). The efficacy of stretching for prevention of exercise-related injury: a systematic review of the literature. Manual Therapy, 8(3), 141-150.
44. Wiemann, K., & Knut, H. (1997). Influence of strength-, stretching-, and circulatory exercises on flexibility parameters of the human hamstrings. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 5(18), 340-346.
45. Williford, H. N., East, J. B., Smith, F. H., & Burry, L. A. (1986). Evaluation of warm-up for improvement in flexibility. American Journal of Sports Medicine, 14(4), 316-319.
46. Wilson, G. J., Elliott, B. C., & Wood, G. A. (1992). Stretch shorten cycle performance enhancement through flexibility training. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 24(1), 116-123.
47. Worrell, T. W. (1994). Factors associated with hamstring injuries. An approach to treatment and preventative measures. Sports Medicine, 17(5), 338-345.
48. Worrell, T. W., Smith, T. L., & Winegardner, J. (1994). Effect of hamstring stretching on hamstring muscle performance. Journal of the Sports Physical Therapy, 20(3), 154-160.
49. Young, W. B., & Behm, D. G. (2002). Should static stretching be used during a warm-up for strength and power activities? Strength & Conditioning Journal, 24(6), 33-37.
50. Young, W. B., & Elliot, S. (2001). Acute effects of static stretching, proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation stretching and maximum voluntary contractions on explosive force production and jumping performance. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 72(3), 273-279.
51. Young, W. B., & Behm, D. G. (2003). Effects of running, static stretching and practice jumps on explosive force production and jumping performance. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 43(1), 21-27.
52. Young, W. B., Clothier, P., Otago, L., Bruce, L., & Liddell, D. (2004). Acute effects of static stretching on hip flexor and quadriceps flexibility range of motion and foot speed in kicking a football. Journal of Science & Medicine in Sport, 7(1), 23-31.
53. Zakas, A., Vergou, A., Grammatikopoulou, M. G., Zakas, N., Sentelidis, T., & Vamvakoudis, S. (2003). The effect of stretching during warming-up on the flexibility of junior handball players. Journal of Sports Medicine & Physical Fitness, 43(2), 145-149.

### Tables

#### Table 1
Time spent on each stretch

Stretch Type	Stretch Time (seconds)
Static stretching*
Toe-touch^a	75^c
Forward swing^a	75^c
Surpine sling^a	75^c
Dynamic stretching*
Forward leg swing^b	75^d
Crossed-body leg swing^b	75^d
Bicycle kicks^b	75^d

(*) 10 seconds rest pause after each repetition and 10 seconds before switching over to the next type of stretch.
(a) 5 Stretches
(b) 5 Sets
(c) 15 seconds hold for each static stretch
(d) 7-8 swings/ kicks equivalent to around 15 seconds of stretching time for each set.

#### Table 2
Comparison of Dynamic and Static Hamstring flexibility measures in reliability study

Test 1^b	Test 2^a	Test 1 Mean (SD)	Test 2 Mean (SD)	F	df	P	Part Eta²
SPH	DSUH	91.90 (18.02)	88.61 (16.97)	18.20	1.000	< .001	.363
SPH	DSHNB	91.90 (18.02)	89.96 (15.91)	1.28	1.000	.267	.038
DSUH	DSHWB	88.61 (16.97)	91.66 (15.65)	4.46	1.000	.043	.122
DSUH	DSHNB	88.61 (16.97)	89.96 (15.91)	.835	1.000	.368	.025
DSHWB	DSHNB	91.66 (15.65)	89.96 (15.91)	10.44	1.000	.003	.246

Significant at p < .05
(a) All measurements are in degrees
(b) Number of participants performing each test = 33

#### Table 3
Cronbach alpha measure of reliability for each test repetition for two test sessions

Flexibility Test	Alpha Occasion (SEM)*	Alpha Occasion 2 (SEM)*
Static-passive hamstring	.9950 (1.28)	.9946 (1.32)
Dynamic-supine hamstring	.9908 (1.71)	.9891 (1.77)
Dynamic-standing hamstring with brace	.9915 (1.45)	.9917 (1.42)
Dynamic-standing hamstring no brace	.9905 (1.51)	.9897 (1.61)

(*) SEM – Standard Error of Measurement.

#### Table 4
Test – retest reliability

Flexibility Test	Coefficient of Stability / Reliability (SEM)
Static-passive hamstring	.992 (1.61)
Dynamic-supine hamstring	.993 (1.45)
Dynamic-standing hamstring with brace	.989 (1.66)
Dynamic-standing hamstring no brace	.983 (2.04)

#### Table 5
Paired samples T test comparing the effect of the intervention treatments on dynamic and static hamstring flexibility

Treatment^b	Pairs (Pre-Post Test Scores)	Mean (SD)	Std. Error Mean	95% Conf. Int. of the Difference		t^a	Sig. (2-tailed)
Treatment^b	Pairs (Pre-Post Test Scores)	Mean (SD)	Std. Error Mean	Lower	Upper	t^a	Sig. (2-tailed)
No stretch	Static flexibility	2.13 (2.68)	0.77	0.43	3.84	2.758*	0.019
No stretch	Dynamic flexibility	0.23 (2.57)	0.74	-1.40	1.87	0.315	0.759
Static stretching	Static flexibility	4.04 (3.34)	0.96	1.92	6.16	4.191*	0.002
Static stretching	Dynamic flexibility	1.35 (6.51)	1.88	-2.78	5.48	0.719	0.487
Dynamic stretching	Static flexibility	1.86 (2.46)	0.71	0.30	3.42	2.622*	0.024
Dynamic stretching	Dynamic flexibility	1.75 (1.06)	0.31	1.07	2.43	5.694*	0.000

(*) Significant at p < .05
(a) Degrees of freedom = 11
(b) Number of participants undergoing each treatment = 12

#### Table 6
Tukey’s Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) test exploring differences in the degree of change in static and dynamic flexibility following dynamic stretching

Experimental Group	Dependent Variable (I)	Intervention (J)	Mean Difference (I-J)	Std. Error	Sig.
Dynamic Stretching	Post Static Flexibility	No Stretching	-0.006	4.14	1.00
		Static stretching	1.08	4.14	0.96
	Post Dynamic flexibility	No stretching	-1.24	4.60	0.97
		Static stretching	-1.13	4.60	0.97

### Corresponding Author
Gayle Silveira, MBBS
Modbury Hospital
Smart Road
Modbury, SA 5092
Australia
<gaylerebello@yahoo.com>
+6 (143) 172-1469

U.S. Sports Academy2013-11-25T16:34:15-06:00March 3rd, 2011|Contemporary Sports Issues, Sports Coaching, Sports Exercise Science, Sports Management|Comments Off

A Coach’s Responsibility: Learning How to Prepare Athletes for Peak Performance

Scott R. Johnson, Pamela J. Wojnar, William J. Price, Timothy J. Foley, Jordan R. Moon, Enrico N. Esposito, and Fred J. Cromartie

### Abstract

The coaching profession is ever-changing and coaches at each level of sport competition need to know more than just the Xs and Os in order to be successful. As the primary individuals tasked with developing athletes and helping them achieve their goals, coaches should acquire a working knowledge of all areas affiliated with performance enhancement. Specifically, the disciplines of sports administration, sports medicine, strength and conditioning, and sports psychology can assist coaches while physically and mentally training their athletes. This article illustrates six primary components of these disciplines: risk management, injury prevention, communication, nutrition, goal setting, and athlete development. It is imperative coaches gain a familiarity with these aforementioned components in order to teach athletes about skill development and prepare them to achieve peak performance.
(more…)

U.S. Sports Academy2018-10-22T15:29:44-05:00February 14th, 2011|Sports Coaching, Sports Exercise Science, Sports Management|Comments Off