Selected Physical Characteristics of Junior Davis Cup Players and Their Relation to Success in Tennis
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
This dissertation has been microfilmed exactly as received 6 7-2485 MALMISUR, Michael Charles, 1934- SELECTED PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF JUNIOR DAVIS CUP PLAYERS AND THEIR RELATION TO SUCCESS IN TENNIS. The Ohio State University, Fh.D., 1966 Education, physical University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan SELECTED PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF JUNIOR DAVIS CUP PLAYERS AND THEIR RELATION TO SUCCESS IN TENNIS DISSERTATION Presented In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Michael Charles Malmisur, B.A., M.Ed. The Ohio State University 1 9 6 6 Approved by Adviser Department of Physical Education ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer wishes to express his gratitude to Dr. Lewis Hess, major adviser and director of this dissertation, for his guidance and counseling, both personal and profes sional, rendered by him during my entire doctoral study, and to Dr. Bruce L. Bennett, and Dr. John W. Hendrix, both members of the dissertation committee, for their assistance through out this study. I wish to express my deepest gratitude to my wife, Karen, and my daughter, Joanna, for their faith and confi dence in me and for many inconveniences they endured on my behalf throughout the course of this study. ii VITA March 2, 1934 Born - Youngstown, Ohio 1956 .... B.A., Heidelberg College, Tiffin, Ohio 1962 .... M.Ed., Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, Ohio 1963-1966 . Instructor, Department of Physical Education, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio PUBLICATIONS Malmisur, Michael C. "Let'B Close the Gap Between Physical Education and Athletics," Ohio Schools, XLII (May, 1964), p. 32. Sicuro, Nathaniel A. and Malmisur, Michael C. "Placement Procedures for Coaching Positions," The Ohio High School Athlete, XXV (December, 1965), p. 107. FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Physical Education Allied Fields: Health Education and Educational Adminis tration ili CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION .................................... 1 Importance of the S t u d y ..................... 4 Design of the S t u d y ......................... 9 Definitions ....................................13 Assumptions and Limitations ................. 15 II. RELATED LITERATURE................................ 17 Reaction Time and Movement Ti m e .............. 17 Depth Perception ........................... 30 Dynamic Balance ............................. 37 Arm-Shoulder Coordination, Speed, and A g i l i t y ................................... 43 III. METHOD AND PROCEDURE OP GATHERING D A T A ........... 53 The Problem ....................................53 Height and W e i g h t ............................. 54 Reaction and Movement T i m e ..................... 54 Arm-Shoulder Coordination ................... 60 Pure S p e e d ..................................... 62 A g i l i t y ........................................63 Wall Rebounding T e s t ........................... 65 Depth Perception............................... 67 Dynamic Balance ............................. 69 Subjective Evaluation ....................... 71 Competition............. 74 National Championship Seeding .............. 75 Composite of Test I t e m s ....................... 76 National Rankings ............................. 76 IV. ANALYSIS OF THE D A T A ..............................80 Hypotheses to be T e s t e d ....................... 80 Statistical Applications ..................... 81 V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . 98 Measured Test Items with Respect to Each O t h e r ................................... 99 iv Chapter Page Success Criteria with Respect to Each O t h e r ................................... 99 Measured Test Items with Respect to Success Criteria ........................... 99 Summary of the Tests of the Null Hypotheses...................................100 Conclusions ...................................100 Recommendations for Future Research .......... 101 APPENDIXES............................................... 104 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................ 126 V TABLES Table Page 1 . The Experimental G r o u p ............................. 55 2. Judgment S h e e t ..................................... 73 3. Statistical Application for Composite of Measured Items ................................ 79 4. Mean and Standard Deviations for Subjects on Variables Tested .......................... 83 5. Intercorrelation Matrix for Independent Vari ables Combining Composite of Measured Test I t e m s ........................................... 86 6. Coefficients of Determination for Highly Correlated Variables from Table 5 87 7. Intercorrelation Matrix for Independent V a r i a b l e s ....................................... 90 8. Coefficients of Determination for Highly Correlated Variables from Table 7 91 9* Intercorrelation Matrix for Dependent V a r i a b l e s ....................................... 92 10. Coefficients of Determination for Highly Correlated Variables from Table 9 94 11. Intercorrelation Matrix for Independent and Dependent Variables .....................95 12. Coefficients of Determination for Highly Correlated Variables from Table 11 ............ 97 13* 50-Yard Dash for Boys .................. .112 14. Softball Throw for B o y s .......................... 113 15. Physical Fitness Test Norms ..................... 114 vi Table Page 16. Raw Scores for all Subjects, Wall Rebounding Test Reported in Legal Hits, Agility Re ported in S e c o n d s ............................. 115 17. Raw Scores for all Subjects Reported from Judgments of Experts .......................... 116 18. Ranking of Subjects Reported from Major Tournaments .................................... 117 19. Ranking of all Subjects Reported in USLTA National Junior Championship Seeds and USLTA National Junior Rankings ................ 118 20. Raw Scores for all Subjects, Height Reported in Inches, Weight Reported in Pounds .......... 119 21. Raw Scores for all Subjects, Pure Speed Measured in Seconds, Arm-Shoulder Coordination Measured in F e e t ................ 120 22. Raw Scores for all Subjects, Reaction Time Reported in Hundredths of a S e co nd............ 1 21 23* Raw Scores for all Subjects, Dynamic Balance Reported in Number of Contacts................ 1 22 24. Raw Scores for all Subjects, Movement Time Reported in Hundredths of a S e cond............ 123 25. Average of Tournament Rankings Recorded in Standings.................................... 124 26. Raw Scores for all Subjects, Depth Perception Reported in Millimeters ...................... 125 vii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Fortunate is the physical educator afforded the opportunity to study selected physical characteristics of an elite group of athletes for the ultimate purpose of learning more about the nature of those who excel in specific motor performances. The United States Lawn Tennis Associ ation (USLTA) made an investigation of motor traits possible through their Junior Davis Cup program. Realizing the importance of developing young tennis talent, the USLTA in 1930 initiated a broad program of assisting promising boys, entitled the Junior Development program. To strengthen this plan the USLTA in 1937 estab lished the Junior Davis Cup program to select the outstanding players from the Junior Development program. The Junior Davis Cup program supplements the efforts of the Junior Development program by making available further special training and assistance to the more promising members and graduates of the Development program. Tournaments play a 1 vital role In the Junior Development program, and for the boys the USLTA holds annual National Junior Championships.^ Competition in the National Junior Championships is open to those "who have not reached their eighteenth birthday before January first of the year of competition."^ The objectives of the Junior Davis Cup program as a partner in this event are— 1. To encourage a greater number of young players who have finished the junior age program to continue tennis as their major sport in order that there shall be more outstanding men players available for tourna ment play throughout the country; 2. To promote the aggressive style of play as recom mended by the Davis Cup committee and to develop a larger group of able players from which the Davis Cup teams may be selected; 3. To promulgate and Insist upon the highest standards of character, conduct, and sportsmanship and of amateurism on the part of all players participating in this program.3 The Junior Davis Cup program provided a clinic and professional teaching during the summer of 1965 for the players who were considered among the best in the country. This Intensive training period lasted two weeks and preceded 1John William Hendrix, "Factors Influencing Styles of Play in Tennis" (unpublished Ed. D. dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1955), P« 167. 2United States Lawn Tennis Association, Official Guide and Tennis Yearbook (New York: H. A. Zimmer, Inc., 1965), P. £88.--------- ^United States Lawn Tennis Association, Official Guide and Tennis Yearbook (New York: H. 0. Zimmer, Inc., 1961), p. 3d. 3 three major tournaments and the USLTA National Junior Champi onship. Many activities make up the Junior Development pro gram, and this clinic is representative, but "the National Junior Championship has become the mecca for all young tennis players."2*' The clinic sessions were conducted at The Ohio State University under the direction of Dr. John William Hendrix, Professional