Kauane Grimbor Gechele*

gechelek@gmail.com

Luiz Augusto da Silva**

lasilva7@hotmail.com

Kelly Cristina Nogueira Soares**

kelly@uniuaraica.edu.br

Marcos Roberto Brasil+

brasilmr@hotmail.com.br

Marcieli Cristina da Silva++

cristinamarcieli777@gmail.com

Carlos Ricardo Maneck Malfatti+++

crmalfatti@gmail.com

*Graduação em Educação Física pela UniGuairacá

**Programa de Pós-Graudação em Promoção da Saúde da UniGuairacá

+Doutor em Educação Física pela Universidade Estadual de Maringá

Professor Assistente da Universidade Estadual do Centro-Oeste (UNICENTRO)

Tutor EAD-SR do Centro de Ensino Superior de Maringá (UNICESUMAR)

Professor Titular do Centro Universitário Guairacá (UNIGUAIRACÁ)

++Mestranda em Ciências Farmacêuticas, pela Universidade Estadual do Centro Oeste

Especialista em Fisiologia do Exercício Aplicada ao Treinamento Esportivo

Bacharel em Educação Física pela UniGuairacá

Estudante de Biomedicina pela Unicesumar

+++Prof. Associado C, Universidade Estadual do Centro-Oeste

Pós-doutorado em Tecnologia de Processos Químicos e Bioquímicos

Mestre e Doutor em Bioquímica

Especialista em Investigação Forense e Perícia Criminal

Especializando em Segurança Pública

(Brasil)

Reception: 05/24/2023 - Acceptance: 07/11/2023

1st Review: 06/24/2023 - 2nd Review: 07/08/2023

Accessible document. Law N° 26.653. WCAG 2.0

Suggested reference: Gechele, K.G., Silva, L.A. da, Soares, K.C.N., Brasil, M.R., Silva, M.C. da, e Malfatti, C.R.M. (2023). Physiological Demands and Performance Indicators in Basketball: Positional Variations and Implications for Training. Lecturas: Educación Física y Deportes, 28(304), 135-145. https://doi.org/10.46642/efd.v28i304.7047

 

Abstract

    Basketball is a sport that uses aerobic and anaerobic abilities, so it is important to analyze which position relates to each type of ability. The objective of this study was to evaluate the differences between aerobic and anaerobic capacity in basketball players according to their position in the game. The methodology consisted of the quantitative research, cross-sectional design, and the research subjects were male athletes, basketball players, aged 15 to 18 years, from the city of Castro-PR. Leger test, 50 meters and anthropometric measurements were performed. The physical abilities of basketball athletes were analyzed, as well as the identification of VO2max, fat percentage, anthropometric measurements and body composition. In the aerobic capacity we had the position of shooting guard with the highest oxygen consumption, with a mean of 52 ml/kg/min, with the lowest oxygen consumption, the center position, with a mean of 45 ml/kg/min. In anaerobic capacity, the small forward position was characterized as the fastest position, and the center position was characterized as the slowest. The point guard have characteristics of being shorter and lighter, they tend to be faster, already the center position that has characteristics of being of greater stature and heavier tend to be slower. Based on the information presented, it was possible to conclude that it hears significant differences in the study.

    Keywords: Basketball. Aerobic and anaerobic capacity. VO2max.

 

Resumo

    Basquetebol é um esporte que utiliza habilidades aeróbicas e anaeróbicas, portanto, é importante analisar qual posição está relacionada a cada tipo de habilidade. O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar as diferenças entre a capacidade aeróbica e anaeróbica em jogadores de basquetebol de acordo com a sua posição no jogo. A metodologia consistiu em uma pesquisa quantitativa, de desenho transversal, e os instrumentos da pesquisa foram atletas masculinos, jogadores de basquetebol, com idade entre 15 e 18 anos, da cidade de Castro-PR. Foram realizados o teste de Leger, teste de 50 metros e medidas antropométricas. As habilidades físicas dos atletas de basquetebol foram analisadas, assim como a identificação do VO2max, percentual de gordura, medidas antropométricas e composição corporal. Na capacidade aeróbica, a posição de ala/armador apresentou o maior consumo de oxigênio, com uma média de 52 ml/kg/min, enquanto a posição de pivô apresentou o menor consumo de oxigênio, com uma média de 45 ml/kg/min. Na capacidade anaeróbica, a posição de ala foi caracterizada como a mais rápida, e a posição de pivô foi caracterizada como a mais lenta. Ainda, armadores têm características de serem mais baixos e mais leves, eles tendem a ser rápidos, enquanto a posição de pivô, que tem características de ser de maior estatura e mais pesado, tende a ser mais lento. Com base nas informações apresentadas, foi possível concluir que há diferenças significativas no estudo.

    Unitermos: Basquetebol. Capacidade aeróbica e anaeróbica. VO2max.

 

Resumen

    El baloncesto es un deporte que utiliza tanto habilidades aeróbicas como anaeróbicas, por lo que es importante analizar qué posición se relaciona con cada tipo de habilidad. El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar las diferencias entre la capacidad aeróbica y anaeróbica en jugadores de baloncesto según su posición en el juego. La metodología consistió en una investigación cuantitativa, con diseño transversal, y los sujetos de investigación fueron jugadores de baloncesto masculinos, con edades entre 15 y 18 años, de la ciudad de Castro-PR. Se realizó la prueba de Leger, prueba de 50 metros y medidas antropométricas. Se analizaron las capacidades físicas de los jugadores de baloncesto, así como la identificación del VO2max, porcentaje de grasa, medidas antropométricas y composición corporal. En capacidad aeróbica, la posición de alero bajo presentó el mayor consumo de oxígeno, con una media de 52 ml/kg/min, mientras que la posición de pívot presentó el menor consumo de oxígeno, con una media de 45 ml/kg/min. En capacidad anaeróbica, la posición de alero se caracterizó como la más rápida, y la posición de pívot se caracterizó como la más lenta. Los bases tienen características de ser más bajos y livianos, tienden a ser más rápidos, mientras que la posición de pívot, que tiene las características de ser más alto y más pesado, tiende a ser más lento. Con base en la información presentada, fue posible concluir que existen diferencias significativas en el estudio.

    Palabras clave: Baloncesto. Capacidad aeróbica y anaeróbica. VO2máx.

 

Lecturas: Educación Física y Deportes, Vol. 28, Núm. 304, Sep. (2023)

---

 

Introduction 

 

    Basketball, as a team sport, requires athletes to possess a range of physical skills and abilities, including strength, speed, and agility, to excel on the court (Krause, & Nelson, 2018; Ferreira et al., 2017). The game involves various energy systems, with the anaerobic and aerobic pathways playing crucial roles in supporting the physiological demands of basketball (Querido et al., 2022; Pojskić et al., 2015; Powers, & Howley, 1994).

 

    The anaerobic energy system, specifically the ATP-CP system, provides rapid energy for short bursts of high-intensity activity, such as quick sprints or explosive movements (Krause, & Nelson, 2018). Meanwhile, the glycolytic pathway contributes to ATP production during longer durations of intense exercise, relying on carbohydrates as the primary fuel source (Powers, & Howley, 1994). The oxidative pathway, which operates aerobically, utilizes oxygen to generate ATP and is essential for sustained efforts and endurance performance. (Powers, & Howley, 1994)

 

    The physiological demands placed on basketball players vary according to their positions on the court. For instance, ship-owners or wing players often exhibit greater agility and speed, while pivots tend to possess a larger stature and physical size (Gomes et al., 2015; Adigüzel, & Günay, 2016). These positional differences can influence the athletes' aerobic and anaerobic capacities (Ferreira et al., 2017; Nunes et al., 2008). Ship-owners may demonstrate higher aerobic capacity compared to wings and pivots, although statistical significance may not be observed. (Ferreira et al., 2017)

 

    Understanding the physiological characteristics associated with each basketball position is crucial for developing position-specific training strategies. Coaches and trainers can tailor conditioning programs to enhance the players' energy systems and optimize performance on the court (Querido et al., 2022; Adigüzel, & Günay, 2016). Furthermore, ongoing research in this field can provide insights into the physiological adaptations that occur in response to basketball-specific training interventions, contributing to the advancement of player development and performance enhancement strategies. (Knihs, 2016; Marques Junior, 2005)

 

Fonte: Gerador de imagens de Bing (#Efdeportes)

 

    Moreover, recent articles (Petway et al., 2020; Aoki et al., 2016) have emphasized the importance of analyzing physiological attributes associated with basketball positions to identify areas for improvement and individualize training plans. By recognizing the unique demands of each position, coaches can focus on enhancing specific skills, physical qualities, and energy systems that are most relevant to the players' roles on the court. Position-specific training not only enhances performance but also helps prevent injuries by addressing position-specific movement patterns and potential physical imbalances.

 

    In addition to individual position-specific training, recent studies (Conte et al., 2018; Calleja-Gonzalez et al., 2016) have highlighted the benefits of integrating sport-specific conditioning drills that simulate game scenarios in basketball teams. These drills aim to replicate the physiological demands and energy system requirements encountered during actual game play, thus improving players' ability to execute skills and make decisions under realistic conditions. By incorporating both individualized position-specific training and team-based conditioning drills, coaches can optimize overall performance and contribute to the team's success.

 

    Furthermore, advancements in technology have facilitated the monitoring and assessment of physiological parameters during basketball training and competition, as highlighted by recent research (Ferioli et al., 2019; Caparrós et al., 2018). Modern wearable devices, such as heart rate monitors and GPS tracking systems, provide valuable data on athletes' workloads, running distances, and physiological responses. This information can help coaches and sports scientists evaluate the effectiveness of training programs, quantify players' energy system contributions, and make informed decisions regarding load management and recovery strategies, thereby enhancing performance and reducing the risk of overtraining or injuries. (Caparrós et al., 2018)

 

    In summary, basketball players rely on both anaerobic and aerobic energy systems to meet the physiological demands of the sport. The unique positional requirements in basketball can influence athletes' aerobic and anaerobic capacities. By considering these physiological factors, coaches and trainers can tailor training programs to optimize performance based on the specific demands of each position. Continued research in this area will contribute to a deeper understanding of the physiological aspects underlying basketball performance and aid in the development of evidence-based training approaches. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate the differences between aerobic and anaerobic capacity in basketball players according to their position in the game.

 

Methods 

 

Sample 

 

    The research subjects consisted of 16 male high-performance basketball athletes aged 15 to 18 years from Castro-PR, who had been practicing the sport for at least 1 year and participated in state championships in Paraná. The study excluded athletes outside the specified age range, those with less than 1 year of practice, and those who did not participate in state championships.

 

Ethical statement 

 

    Ethical considerations were taken into account, and a letter of introduction was sent to the owner of the bodybuilding gym to obtain permission for conducting interviews with interested and eligible participants. Informed consent forms were obtained, ensuring the confidentiality of participants' names. The responsible individuals were required to sign the informed consent, in addition to the subjects being investigated. The ethical approval was realized by the committee with protocol number 2.850.084/2018 in Universidade Estadual do Centro-Oeste.

 

Procedures 

 

    The research employed various tests to evaluate the athletes, including tests for assessing VO2max, body composition, speed of movement, and anaerobic power. These tests included anthropometric analysis, the Leger and Lambert test, and the 50-meter run test, providing standardized and organized situations for evaluating specific characteristics in physical education.

 

    The measurement of skinfolds was used as an indirect method to estimate body fat mass. By summing the skinfold measurements, a regression equation was applied to determine the percentage of body fat. (Vannucchi et al., 1996)

 

    The Leger and Lambert test, which measures maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max), was validated through physiological responses such as heart rate and direct measurements of test performance, such as the distance covered within a given time. This test was chosen to assess the VO2max of the participants. (Camarada, & Barros Neto, 2005)

 

    The 50-meter run test was conducted on a flat surface, evaluating movement speed and lactic anaerobic power by measuring the shortest possible time to cover the distance. (Marques Junior et al., 2005)

 

Statistical analyses 

 

    All results are presented as mean ± SD. The Shapiro-Wilk test was used to assess the normality of variables, and comparisons between physical capacities of the players were performed using analysis of variance (ANOVA). Values were considered statistically significant based on P<0.05. The post hoc Student-Newman-Keuls test was used, when appropriate, to identify differences between groups.

 

Results 

 

    16 athletes who were evaluated, all male, with an average age of 16 years, being 4 ship-owners, 4 wards, 4 wards/4 pivots. Table 1 shows the average among all evaluated.

 

Variables	Average ± SD
Age (years)	16 ± 1
Weight (kg)	77 ± 9
Height (m)	1,8 ± 0,1
VO2max (ml.kg.min)	48 ± 5
%Fat	7,8 ± 2
50 meters	8,2 ± 2
Leger (min)	9 ± 3

Values described in Mean ± SD. Source: Research data

 

    Table 2 shows the average test of 50 meters, Leger test, VO2max, fat percentage, weight and height, related to each position.

 

Position	Point Guard (n=4)	Shooting Guard (n=4)	Small Forward (n=4)	Center (n=4)
50 m	8,2 ± 0,1	7,6 ± 0,1	8,2 ± 0,1	8,7 ± 0,1
Leger (min)	8,6 ± 1	11,5 ± 2	9,7 ± 1	6,7 ± 1
VO2max (ml.kg.min)	46 ± 4	52 ± 3	51 ± 4	45 ± 2
%Fat	11 ± 6	12 ± 4	11 ± 2	14 ± 1
Weight (kg)	65 ± 6	86 ± 4	73 ± 4	91 ± 1
Height (m)	1,7 ± 0,0	1,9 ± 0,0	1,8 ± 0,0	1,9 ± 0,0

Values described in Mean ± SD. Source: Research data

 

Discussion 

 

    The percentage of body fat observed in the subjects of this study was 7.8%. This finding aligns with Knihs (2016), who reported a body fat percentage of 7.6% among basketball athletes in the literature. Thus, the percentage of fat observed in this study falls within the suggested range for athletes in this sport. It is worth noting that maintaining a low body fat percentage can significantly contribute to improved athletic performance, particularly in activities involving jumping and sprinting. (Knihs, 2016)

 

    The average VO2max found in this study was 48 ml/kg/min. This value is similar to the aerobic capacity reported for basketball players, which typically ranges between 42 and 59 ml/kg/min (Nunes et al., 2008). Nunes et al. (2008) conducted a study and reported an average VO2max of 46.9 ml/kg/min, with higher values observed among players in the point guard and small forward positions compared to those in the pivot position. In our study, the average VO2max of 48 ml/kg/min was observed, with the small forward, shooting guard, and point guard positions exhibiting higher oxygen consumption than the pivot positions.

 

    In terms of weight, the average recorded in our study was 77 kg. Nunes et al. (2008) also investigated weight in relation to positions and found that small forward and point guard tend to have lower weights compared to pivots. The pivot position, due to its characteristics involving physical contact and active involvement in rebounding, often presents higher values in variables related to body weight. (Nunes et al., 2008)

 

    Furthermore, Gomes et al. (2015) noted that pivot players are generally slower due to the positional requirements they face. These positional characteristics contribute to the observed differences in metabolic and anthropometric variables. Specifically, lighter players with lower body fat percentages tend to exhibit better performance in running and VO2max tests. (Gomes et al., 2015)

 

    It is important to consider that metabolic and anthropometric variables can differ depending on functional specialization within the game. Consequently, distinct somatic and metabolic profiles can be observed based on players' positions. Center, for instance, typically exhibit higher weight and height compared to other positions (Powers, & Howley, 1994). On the other hand, despite not reaching statistical significance, shooting guard demonstrate a higher oxygen uptake, highlighting the need for faster movements and their significant impact on oxygen consumption, particularly given their shorter stature. (Powers, & Howley, 1994)

 

    Moreover, the relationship between anthropometric measurements, body composition, and physical performance indicators cannot be overlooked. These variables have shown strong associations, suggesting that lighter players with lower body fat percentages may possess enhanced running capabilities and higher VO2max values (Gomes et al., 2015). These findings emphasize the importance of considering both body composition and physical fitness parameters when evaluating basketball players.

 

    The literature provides valuable insights into the physiological demands and performance indicators specific to basketball. For instance, Powers and Howley (1994) highlight the significance of skeletal muscle structure and function in sports performance. Understanding the metabolic pathways utilized during basketball can further enhance our comprehension of the sport's energy demands.

 

    The present study's findings align with previous research, indicating that basketball athletes rely on both aerobic and anaerobic energy systems during game play. This is consistent with Pojskić et al. (2015), who reported positional differences in the aerobic and anaerobic power of elite basketball players. Such variations highlight the unique physiological demands imposed by different positions in the sport. It is crucial to acknowledge that assessing body composition, metabolic capacity, and performance indicators can provide valuable insights for designing effective training programs and optimizing performance in basketball. Coaches and trainers can use this information to tailor training strategies that address the specific physiological requirements of each player's position.

 

    Future research could explore additional variables, such as muscle strength and power, to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the physical capacities associated with basketball performance. Furthermore, longitudinal studies could investigate how these physiological parameters evolve over time and assess the impact of specific training interventions on performance outcomes.

 

Conclusion 

 

    In conclusion, this study provided valuable insights into the anthropometric and metabolic characteristics of basketball players, shedding light on body composition, aerobic capacity, and physical performance across different positions. The findings demonstrated that the players analyzed exhibited favorable body fat percentages within the recommended range for athletes in this sport, which can positively impact athletic performance, particularly in activities involving jumping and sprinting. Moreover, the aerobic capacity, measured by VO2max, was found to be adequate for basketball players, aligning with previous literature. Variations in metabolic and anthropometric variables were observed among positions, with point guards and wings displaying higher oxygen consumption compared to pivots. These findings highlight the importance of position-specific metabolic demands and maintaining optimal body composition for optimal athletic performance.

 

References 

 

Adigüzel, N.S., & Günay, M. (2016). The effect of eight weeks plyometric training on anaerobic power, counter movement jumping and isokinetic strength in 15-18 years basketball players. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11(10), 3241-3250. http://www.ijese.net/makale/511.html

 

Aoki, M.S., Torres Ronda, L., Marcelino, P.R., Drago, G., Carling, C., Bradley, P. S., & Moreira, A. (2016). Monitoring training loads in professional basketball players engaged in a periodized training program. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 31(2), 348-358. https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0000000000001507

 

Calleja-Gonzalez, J., Terrados, N., Mielgo-Ayuso, J., Delextrat, A., Jukic, I., Vaquera, A., Torres, L., Schelling, X., Stojanovic, M., & Ostojic, SM (2016). Evidence-based post-exercise recovery strategies in basketball. The Physician and Sportsmedicine, 44(1), 74-78. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913847.2016.1102033

 

Camarada, S.R.A., & Barros Neto, T.L. (2005). Novo teste de estágio tipo vai e vem, máximo e submáximo, para produzir o consumo de oxigênio. Revista Brasileira de Ciência e Movimento, 13(2), 7-15. https://doi.org/10.18511/rbcm.v13i3.642

 

Caparrós, T., Casals, M., Solana, A., Peña, J., & Alcaraz, P.E. (2018). Low external workloads are related to higher injury risk in professional male basketball games. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, 17(2), 289-297. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325227230

 

Conte, D., Kolb, N., Scanlan, A.T., Santolamazza, F., & Favero, T. (2018). Monitoring training load and well-being during the in-season phase in National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I men's basketball. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 13(8), 1067-1074. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2017-0689

 

Ferioli, D., Schelling, X., Bosio, A., La Torre, A., Rucco, D., & Rampinini, E. (2019). Match activities in basketball games: Comparison between different competitive levels. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 33(4), 991-999. https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0000000000003039

 

Ferreira, SA, Souza, WCD, Nascimento, MAD, Tartaruga, MP, Portela, BS, Mascarenhas, LPG, & Queiroga, MR (2017). Morphological characteristics, muscle strength, and anaerobic power performance of wheelchair basketball players. Revista Brasileira de Cineantropometria & Desempenho Humano, 19(3), 343-353. http://dx.doi.org/10.5007/1980-0037.2017v19n3p343

 

Gomes, J.H., Chaves, R.G., Charro, M.A., & Evangelista, A. (2015). Relação entre antropometria, desempenho físico e estatística de jogo em jogadores jovens de elite de basquetebol. Revista Brasileira de Ciência e Movimento, 23(2), 66-73. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282511361

 

Knihs, D.A. (2016). Aptidão física, composição corporal e somatotipo de jogadores de basquetebol masculino adulto profissional de Blumenal-SC: um estudo descritivo. Biomotriz, 10(01), 119-135.

 

Krause, J.V., & Nelson, C. (2018). Basketball skills & drills. Human Kinetics Publishers.

 

Marques Junior, N.K. (2005). Testes para o jogador de voleibol. Revista Mineira de Educação Física, 13(1), 130-174. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/43763860

 

Nunes, J.A., Montagner, P.C., Rose Junior, D. de, & Ritti-Dias, R. (2008). Antropometria, desempenho físico e técnico da seleção de basquetebol feminino do Brasil participantes dos jogos olímpicos de Atenas 2004. Brazilian Journal of Biometricity, 2(2), 109-121. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26518686

 

Petway, A.J., Freitas, T.T., Calleja-González, J., Medina Leal, D., & Alcaraz, P.E. (2020). Training load and match-play demands in basketball based on competition level: A systematic review. PLoS One, 15(3), e0229212. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0229212

 

Pojskić, H., Šeparović, V., Užičanin, E., Muratović, M., & Mačković, S. (2015). Positional role differences in the aerobic and anaerobic power of elite basketball players. Journal of Human Kinetics, 49(1), 219-227. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/hukin-2015-0124

 

Powers, S.K., & Howley, E.T. (1994). Skeletal muscle: structure and function. In Exercise Physiology: Theory and Application to Fitness and Performance. Brown and Benchmark.

 

Puente, C., Coso, J.D., Salinero, J.J., & Abián-Vicén, J. (2015). Basketball performance indicators during the ACB regular season from 2003 to 2013. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 15(3), 935-948. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/24748668.2015.11868842

 

Querido, S.M., Radaelli, R., Brito, J., Vaz, J.R., & Freitas, S.R. (2022). Analysis of recovery methods’ efficacy applied up to 72 hours postmatch in professional football: a systematic review with graded recommendations. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 17(9), 1326-1342. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2022-0038

 

Vannucchi, H., Unamuno, M.R.D.L., & Marchinhi, S.J. (1996). Avaliação do estado nutricional. Medicina, 29, 5-18. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2176-7262.v29i1p5-18

Lecturas: Educación Física y Deportes, Vol. 28, Núm. 304, Sep. (2023)