DOCSLIB.ORG

The Biomechanics and Evolution of High-Speed Throwing

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Biomechanics and Evolution of High-Speed Throwing The Biomechanics and Evolution of High-Speed Throwing The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Roach, Neil. 2012. The Biomechanics and Evolution of High-Speed Throwing. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:9822375 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA © 2012 Neil Thomas Roach All rights reserved. Advisor: Daniel Lieberman Neil Thomas Roach The Biomechanics and Evolution of High-Speed Throwing Abstract Throwing with power and accuracy is a uniquely human behavior and a potentially important mode of early hunting. Chimpanzees, our closest living relatives, do occasionally throw, although with much less velocity. At some point in our evolutionary history, hominins developed the ability to produce high performance throws. The anatomical changes that enable increased throwing ability are poorly understood and the antiquity of this behavior is unknown. In this thesis, I examine how anatomical shifts in the upper body known to occur during human evolution affect throwing performance. I propose a new biomechanical model for how humans amplify power during high-speed throwing using elastic energy stored and released in the throwing shoulder. I also propose and experimentally test a series of functional hypotheses regarding how four key shifts in upper body anatomy affect throwing performance: increased torso rotational mobility, laterally oriented shoulders, lower humeral torsion, and increased wrist hyperextensability. iii These hypotheses are tested by collecting 3D body motion data during throws performed by human subjects in whom I varied anatomical parameters using restrictive braces to examine their effects on throwing kinematics. These data are broken down using inverse dynamics analysis into the individual motions, velocities, and forces acting around each joint axis. I compare performance at each joint across experimental conditions to test hypotheses regarding the relationship between skeletal features and throwing performance. I also developed and tested a method for predicting humeral torsion using range of motion data, allowing me to calculate torsion in my subjects and determine its effect on throwing performance. My results strongly support an important role for elastic energy storage in powering humans’ uniquely rapid throwing motion. I also found strong performance effects related to anatomical shifts in the torso, shoulder, and arm. When used to interpret the hominin fossil record, my data suggest high-speed throwing ability arose in a mosaic-like fashion, with all relevant features first present in Homo erectus. What drove the evolution of these anatomical shifts is unknown, but as a result the ability to produce high-speed throws was available for early hunting and likely provided an adaptive advantage in this context. iv Table of Contents Abstract………………………………………………………………………………………………...... iii List of Figures………………………………………………………………………………………….. vii List of Tables…………………………………………………………………………………………… viii Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………………………. ix Chapter 1 – An Introduction………………………………………………………………….. 1 1.1. Why throwing?......................................................................................................... 1 1.2. Thesis Overview...................................................................................................... 1 1.3. Literature Cited....................................................................................................... 6 Chapter 2 – The Effect of Humeral Torsion on Rotational Range of Motion in the Shoulder and Throwing Performance…………………….. 7 2.1. Chapter Summary……………………………………………………………………… 7 2.2. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………… 9 2.3. Model………………...……………………………………………………………………… 13 2.4. Materials and Methods…….………………………………………………………… 17 2.5. Results…………………………….………………………………………………………… 22 2.6. Discussion……………………….………………………………………………………… 25 2.7. Acknowledgements………….………………………………………………………… 31 2.8. Literature Cited……………….………………………………………………………… 32 Chapter 3 – Elastic Energy Storage in the Shoulder and the Evolution of High-Speed Throwing in Homo………………………………………………….. 37 3.1. Chapter Summary……………………………………………………………………… 37 3.2. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………… 38 3.3. Model………………...……………………………………………………………………… 39 3.4. Materials and Methods…….………………………………………………………… 40 3.5. Results…………………………….………………………………………………………… 44 3.6. Discussion……………………….………………………………………………………… 48 3.7. Acknowledgements………….………………………………………………………… 50 3.8. Literature Cited……………….………………………………………………………… 51 Chapter 4 – The Biomechanics of Power Generation during Rapid, Overhand Throwing in Humans…………………………………………………..… 54 4.1. Chapter Summary……………………………………………………………………… 54 4.2. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………… 55 4.3. Model………………...……………………………………………………………………… 58 4.4. Hypotheses……………….…….………………………………………………………… 60 4.5. Materials and Methods……….……………………………………………………… 65 4.6. Results…………………………….………………………………………………………… 71 4.7. Discussion……………………….………………………………………………………… 80 v 4.8. Acknowledgements………….………………………………………………………… 89 4.9. Literature Cited……………….………………………………………………………… 90 Chapter 5 – Throwing and the Evolution of the Hominin Forelimb……… 95 5.1. Chapter Summary……………………………………………………………………… 95 5.2. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………… 96 5.3. Who throws?……...……………………………………………………………………… 99 5.4. How do we throw?…………..………………………………………………………… 104 5.5. Who threw first?.............……….……………………………………………………… 110 5.6. Why do we throw?…….…….………………………………………………………… 135 5.7. What questions remain?…………………….………………………………………. 142 5.8. Acknowledgements………….………………………………………………………… 144 5.9. Literature Cited……………….………………………………………………………… 145 Appendix 1 – Supplemental Data for Chapter 2..................................................... 168 Appendix 1 – Supplemental Material for Chapter 3............................................ 169 vi List of Figures Figure 2.1: Humeral torsion vs. retroversion……………………………………………. 10 Figure 2.2: Predicting humeral torsion from rotational range of motion…… 15 Figure 2.3: Measuring humeral torsion using computed tomography............. 19 Figure 2.4: Measuring range of motion at the shoulder…….………………………. 20 Figure 2.5: Torsion prediction regressions………………...…….………………………. 24 Figure 3.1: Model of throwing differences between Pan and Homo…...………. 41 Figure 3.2: Shoulder and elbow power during throwing……………...…...………. 45 Figure 3.3: Brace-restricted power during throwing…………………...…...………. 47 Figure 3.4: Humeral torsion and throwing performance……………...…...………. 49 Figure 4.1: Free-Body diagram of the arm during cocking……….…...…...………. 59 Figure 4.2: Critical upper Body motions during throwing.…………...…...………. 61 Figure 4.3: Reflective markers and kinetic model…………......………...…...………. 66 Figure 4.4: Arm-cocking and acceleration phases…………......………...…...………. 70 Figure 4.5: Kinematic and kinetic data for 4 critical motions..……...…...………. 72 Figure 5.1: Chimpanzee throwing…………………………………….....……...…...………. 100 Figure 5.2: Arm-cocking and acceleration phases…………......………...…...………. 103 Figure 5.3: Critical upper Body motions during throwing.…………...…...………. 106 Figure 5.4: Free-Body diagram of the arm during cocking……….…...…...………. 108 Figure 5.4: Humeral torsion………………………………………….……….…...…...………. 125 Supplemental Figure 3.1: Reflective markers…...………….……….…...…...………. 170 Supplemental Figure 3.2: Kinetic model……...…...………….……….…...…...………. 174 Supplemental Figure 3.3: Residual analysis – full trial…...………….……….….... 177 Supplemental Figure 3.4: Residual analysis – critical period…......……….….... 177 Supplemental Figure 3.5: Phase duration………………………….…......……….….... 183 Supplemental Figure 3.6: Maximum Ball speed………………….…......……….….... 188 Supplemental Figure 3.7: Shoulder sham power……….……….…......……….….... 189 Supplemental Figure 3.8: Free-Body diagram of the arm during cocking…. 196 Supplemental Figure 3.9: Static optimization…………………………………………. 197 vii List of Tables Table 4.1: Segment definitions…………………..……………………………………………. 67 Table 4.2: Torso restriction data………………..……………………………………………. 73 Table 4.3: Clavicle restriction data………………..…………………………………………. 75 Table 4.4: Shoulder restriction data………………..………….……………………………. 77 Table 4.5: Wrist restriction data…….…………..……………………………………………. 79 Supplemental Table 2.1: Measurement reliability data…………………………… 168 Supplemental Table 3.1: Segment definitions…………….…………………………… 172 Supplemental Table 3.2: Joint definitions………………….…………………………… 175 Supplemental Table 3.3: Cutoff frequency data………….…………………………… 179 Supplemental Table 3.4: Shoulder muscle volumes…...…………………………… 185 Supplemental Table 3.5: Modeled power comparison….….……………………… 186 Supplemental Table 3.6: Chimpanzee throwing velocity….……………………… 191 viii Acknowledgements The process of completing a PhD is long, at times difficult, and could not be done alone. I owe a great debt of gratitude to many friends, colleagues, and mentors for their support and encouragement during the past seven years. You have made my time in graduate school interesting and enjoyable. Thank you! First and foremost, I would like to thank my advisor, Dan Lieberman. Over the last seven years Dan has been my strongest advocate, provided good
Load more

Recommended publications
  • An Engineering-Design Oriented Exploration of Human Excellence in Throwing
    Sådhanå (2018) 43:28 Ó Indian Academy of Sciences https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-018-0788-z Sadhana(0123456789().,-volV)FT3](0123456789().,-volV) An engineering-design oriented exploration of human excellence in throwing SUSHEEL DHARMADHIKARI1,* and ANINDYA CHATTERJEE2 1 Structural Dynamics Team, Eaton Technologies, EON IT Park, Pune 411014, India 2 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur 208016, India e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] MS received 3 November 2016; revised 12 March 2017; accepted 19 July 2017; published online 10 March 2018 Abstract. Humans are fast throwers, and their bodies differ correspondingly from those of other hominids. One might ask why humans evolved to throw fast while others did not; whether the design of a fast thrower is unique or special and whether indeed humans remain fast within broader comparison sets of non-hominid throwers. As a non-hominid comparison set, we consider a random population of five-link robots with simplified joint angle and torque constraints. We generate 20,000 such robot models and sequentially optimize their throwing motion. Since good initial guesses are needed for each optimization, the robots are first arranged in distance-minimizing sequences in design parameter space. Each robot’s optimal throw then serves as an initial guess for the next one in sequence. Multiple traversals of these sequences, and random perturbations, are used to avoid local optima. Subsequently, regression models are used to predict throwing performance as a function of robot design parameters. From these regression models, the dominant heuristic predictor of fast throwing is found to be a long and light last link.
    [Show full text]
  • Language Evolution to Revolution: from a Slowly Developing Finite Communication System with Many Words to Infinite Modern Language
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/166520; this version posted July 20, 2017. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. Language evolution to revolution: from a slowly developing finite communication system with many words to infinite modern language Andrey Vyshedskiy1,2* 1Boston University, Boston, USA 2ImagiRation LLC, Boston, MA, USA Keywords: Language evolution, hominin evolution, human evolution, recursive language, flexible syntax, human language, syntactic language, modern language, Cognitive revolution, Great Leap Forward, Upper Paleolithic Revolution, Neanderthal language Abstract There is overwhelming archeological and genetic evidence that modern speech apparatus was acquired by hominins by 600,000 years ago. There is also widespread agreement that modern syntactic language arose with behavioral modernity around 100,000 years ago. We attempted to answer two crucial questions: (1) how different was the communication system of hominins before acquisition of modern language and (2) what triggered the acquisition of modern language 100,000 years ago. We conclude that the communication system of hominins prior to 100,000 years ago was finite and not- recursive. It may have had thousands of words but was lacking flexible syntax, spatial prepositions, verb tenses, and other features that enable modern human language to communicate an infinite number of ideas. We argue that a synergistic confluence of a genetic mutation that dramatically slowed down the prefrontal cortex (PFC) development in monozygotic twins and their spontaneous invention of spatial prepositions 100,000 years ago resulted in acquisition of PFC-driven constructive imagination (mental synthesis) and converted the finite communication system of their ancestors into infinite modern language.
    [Show full text]
  • Of All SPORTS Territory of All SPORTS CONTENTS
    Territory of all SPORTS Territory of all SPORTS CONTENTS Mulhouse Alsace Urban Area (m2A), at the crossroads of Europe ..................................................04 Sports area / Plaine Sportive de l’Ill .....................................08 A whole host of premium sports facilities Ill Stadium Alsace Regional Sports Center High performance Swimming Training Center Illberg Water Sports and Swimming Stadium Mulhouse Olympic Skating Rink Sports area / Palais des Sports Gilbert Buttazzoni Sports area / Plaine Sportive du Waldeck ..........................20 A wide range of leisure facilities Canoe-Kayak, Rowing and Sailing Centers ........................ 22 3 ultra-specialised facilities Training, recuperation, relaxation ..........................................24 See the film 6 water sports sites designed for you m2A, territory of all sports on mulhouse-alsace.fr/sport-premium m2A, territory of all sports .....................................................26 02 03 MULHOUSE ALSACE URBAN AREA AT THE EUROAIRPORT MULHOUSE TGV / MAIN HIGHWAYS CROSSROADS Basel-Mulhouse-Fribourg HIGHSPEED TRAIN STATION via the A35 and A36 30 km from Mulhouse direct trains from Zurich - OF EUROPE Marseille - Lyon - Paris - CDG 1:30 BERLIN 1:40 LONDON EuroAirport TGV / highspeed train station Heathrow 1:30 AMSTERDAM 1:15 550 flights a week PARIS in 2 hrs 40: 11 round trips a day 3 EuroVelo (EV) cycling routes: BRUSSELS 100 international destinations LYON: 6 round trips a day EV 6 (River Route) 9 million passengers a year MARSEILLE: 3 round trips a day EV 5 (Via Roma Francigéna) 3:03 ZURICH: 6 round trips a day EV 15 (The Rhine Cycle Route) FRANKFURT 2:40 PARIS Gare de Lyon 1:10 PARIS Roissy 46’ STRASBOURG 41’ FRIBOURG 1:40 VIENNA m2A has a wide range of educational and MULHOUSE 20’ BASEL training facilities •All educational levels: secondary schools and a university.
    [Show full text]
  • The Biomechanics of Spear Throwing: an Analysis of the Effects of Anatomical Variation on Throwing Performance, with Implications for the Fossil Record
    Washington University in St. Louis Washington University Open Scholarship All Theses and Dissertations (ETDs) Spring 4-24-2013 The iomechB anics of Spear Throwing: An Analysis of the Effects of Anatomical Variation on Throwing Performance, with Implications for the Fossil Record Julia Marie Maki Washington University in St. Louis Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/etd Part of the Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Maki, Julia Marie, "The iomeB chanics of Spear Throwing: An Analysis of the Effects of Anatomical Variation on Throwing Performance, with Implications for the Fossil Record" (2013). All Theses and Dissertations (ETDs). 1044. https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/etd/1044 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Theses and Dissertations (ETDs) by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY IN ST. LOUIS Department of Anthropology Dissertation Examination Committee: Erik Trinkaus, Chair Ruth Clark Glenn Conroy Jane Phillips-Conroy Herman Pontzer E.A. Quinn The Biomechanics of Spear Throwing: An Analysis of the Effects of Anatomical Variation on Throwing Performance, with Implications for the Fossil Record by Julia Marie Maki A dissertation presented to the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for degree of Doctor of Philosophy May 2013 St. Louis, Missouri © 2013, Julia Marie Maki TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES v LIST OF TABLES viii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ix ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS xii ABSTRACT xv CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1 Research Questions and Hypotheses 3 CHAPTER 2: THROWING IN CONTEXT 8 CHAPTER 3: THROWING IN THE PALEOLITHIC 16 I.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Introduction Athletics is an exclusive collection of sporting events that involve competitive running, jumping, throwing, and walking. The most common types of athletics competitions are track and Field, road running, cross country running, and race walking. The simplicity of the competitions, and the lack of a need for expensive equipment, makes athletics one of the most commonly competed sports in the world. Track and field events are generally individual sports with athletes challenging each other to decide a single victor. The racing events are won by the athlete with the fastest time, while the jumping and throwing events are won by the athlete who has achieved the greatest distance or height in the contest. The running events are categorised as sprints, middle and long distance events, relays, and hurdling. Regular jumping events include long jump, triple jump, high jump, and pole vault, while the most common throwing events are shot put, javelin, discus and hammer. There are also "combined events", such as heptathlon, and decathlon, in which athletes compete in a number of the above events. Track and field events are divided into three broad categories: track events, field events, and combined events. The majority of athletes tend to specialise in just one event (or event type) with the aim of perfecting their performances, although the aim of combined events athletes is to become proficient in a number of disciplines. There are two types of field events: jumps, and throws. In jumping competitions, athletes are judged on either the length or height of their jumps. The performances of jumping events for distance are measured from a board or marker, and any athlete overstepping this mark is judged to have fouled.
    [Show full text]
  • Sports History in the British Library: Selected Titles
    SPORT & SOCIETY The Summer Olympics and Paralympics through the lens of social science www.bl.uk/sportandsociety Sports history in the British Library: selected titles Any analysis of sport, sporting events and sports governance must inevitably take into account the historical events which underpin them. For sports researchers, the British Library has an unrivalled collection of resources covering all aspects of the subject and in many different media, from books describing sporting events, to biographies and autobiographies of grass roots and elite athletes; coaching manuals; sport yearbooks and annual reports; directories of athletics clubs; sports periodicals; newspaper reports; and oral history interviews with sports people, including Olympians and Paralympians. These materials cover a long period of sporting activity both in Great Britain and elsewhere in the world. Some early materials As a glance at the earliest editions of the British Museum Library subject index show, the term ‘sport’ in the 18th century (and for much of the nineteenth) usually referred to blood sports. Nevertheless the existence of such headings as Rowing, Bowls, Cricket, Football, and Gymnastics in these early indexes point to a longstanding role for sport -as currently understood - in British social life. As was the case in ancient times, sports might originate as forms of preparation for war (from 1338, when the Hundred year’s war with France began, a series of English kings passed laws to make football illegal for fear that it would consume too much of the time set aside for archery practice); but they could also represent the natural human desire for friendly competition, so that alongside the jousting of the elite, games like bowling, stool ball and football could hold important places in the lives of ordinary people.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparison of the Effects on Throwing Velocity of Straight Plane
    University of North Dakota UND Scholarly Commons Physical Therapy Scholarly Projects Department of Physical Therapy 2005 A Comparison of the Effects on Throwing Velocity of Straight Plane versus Diagonal Plane Shoulder Exercises on 18-30 Year Old Non-Athletes Jason Allred University of North Dakota Kevin O'Brien University of North Dakota Peter Tran University of North Dakota Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.und.edu/pt-grad Part of the Physical Therapy Commons Recommended Citation Allred, Jason; O'Brien, Kevin; and Tran, Peter, "A Comparison of the Effects on Throwing Velocity of Straight Plane versus Diagonal Plane Shoulder Exercises on 18-30 Year Old Non-Athletes" (2005). Physical Therapy Scholarly Projects. 8. https://commons.und.edu/pt-grad/8 This Scholarly Project is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Physical Therapy at UND Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Physical Therapy Scholarly Projects by an authorized administrator of UND Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A COMPARISON OF THE EFFECTS ON THROWING VELOCITY OF STRAIGHT PLANE VERSUS DIAGONAL PLANE SHOULDER EXERCISES ON 18-30 YEAR OLD NON-ATHLETES by Jason Allred Bachelor of Science University of Wyoming, 2002 Kevin O'Brien Bachelor of Arts, Bachelor of Science in Physical Therapy University of North Dakota, 2003 Peter Tran Bachelor of Science in Physical Therapy University of North Dakota, 2003 A Scholarly Project Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Department of Physical Therapy School of Medicine University. of North Dakota in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Physical Therapy Grand Forks, North Dakota May, 2005 This Scholarly Project, submitted by Jason Allred, Kevin O'Brien, and Peter Tran in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Physical Therapy from the University of North Dakota, has been read by the Advisor and Chairperson of Physical Therapy under whom the work has been done and is hereby approved.
    [Show full text]
  • Cooperative Feeding and Breeding, and the Evolution of Executive Control
    Noname manuscript No. (will be inserted by the editor) Cooperative feeding and breeding, and the evolution of executive control Krist Vaesen Philosophy & Ethics Eindhoven University of Technology The Netherlands E-mail: [email protected] http://home.ieis.tue.nl/kvaesen/ forthcoming in Biology & Philosophy Abstract Dubreuil (2010b, this journal) argues that modern-like cognitive abilities for in- hibitory control and goal maintenance most likely evolved in Homo heidelbergensis, much before the evolution of oft-cited modern traits, such as symbolism and art. Dubreuil's argument pro- ceeds in two steps. First, he identifies two behavioral traits that are supposed to be indicative of the presence of a capacity for inhibition and goal maintenance: cooperative feeding and cooper- ative breeding. Next, he tries to show that these behavioral traits most likely emerged in Homo heidelbergensis. In this paper, I show that neither of these steps are warranted in light of current scientific evidence, and thus, that the evolutionary background of human executive functions, such as inhibition and goal maintenance, remains obscure. Nonetheless, I suggest that coopera- tive breeding might mark a crucial step in the evolution of our species: its early emergence in Homo erectus might have favored a social intelligence that was required to get modernity really off the ground in Homo sapiens. 1 Introduction There is a growing trend against the model known as the \Human Revolution", according to which modern behaviors (such as art and symbolism) emerged suddenly some 50,000 years ago, an event supposedly signaling a dramatic cognitive advance, most likely triggered by a reorganization of the human brain (see, most notably, McBrearty and Brooks, 2000, and the collection of essays in Mellars et al., 2007).
    [Show full text]
  • Softball Skills — Overhand Throw, Pitching, Fielding Grounders, Batting
    GRADES 5-8 LESSON FOCUS Softball Skills — Overhand Throw, Pitching, Fielding Grounders, Batting SHAPE Standards: DPE Outcomes: Equipment: 2 • I can select appropriate movement concepts that • Station 1: 2 batting tees, 4 balls, and 2 bats apply in softball. • Station 2: 4 balls • I can catch a thrown by my partner, demonstrating • Station 3: 4 bases and 4 balls three of four cues. • Station 4: 4 balls and 2 bats • I can field a rolled ball demonstrating three of four cues. Instructions Skills Practice the following skills: 1. Overhand Throw In preparation for throwing, the child secures a firm grip on the ball, raises the throwing arm to shoulder height, and brings the elbow back. For the overhand throw, the hand with the ball is then brought back over the head so that it is well behind the shoulder at about shoulder height. The left side of the body is turned in the direction of the throw, and the left arm is raised in front of the body. The weight is on the back (right) foot, with the left foot advanced and the toe touching the ground. The arm comes forward with the elbow leading, and the ball is thrown with a downward snap of the wrist. The body weight is brought forward into the throw, shifting to the front foot. There should be good follow-through so that the palm of the throwing hand faces the ground at completion of the throw. The eyes should be on the target throughout, and the arm should be kept free and loose during the throw.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Determinants of Track and Field Throwing Performance
    Journal of Functional Morphology and Kinesiology Review Biological Determinants of Track and Field Throwing Performance Nikolaos Zaras 1,*, Angeliki-Nikoletta Stasinaki 2 and Gerasimos Terzis 2 1 Human Performance Laboratory, Department of Life and Health Sciences, University of Nicosia, Nicosia 1700, Cyprus 2 Sports Performance Laboratory, School of Physical Education and Sport Science, University of Athens, 17237 Athens, Greece; [email protected] (A.-N.S.); [email protected] (G.T.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +357-22842318; Fax: +357-22842399 Abstract: Track and field throwing performance is determined by a number of biomechanical and biological factors which are affected by long-term training. Although much of the research has focused on the role of biomechanical factors on track and field throwing performance, only a small body of scientific literature has focused on the connection of biological factors with competitive track and field throwing performance. The aim of this review was to accumulate and present the current literature connecting the performance in track and field throwing events with specific biological factors, including the anthropometric characteristics, the body composition, the neural activation, the fiber type composition and the muscle architecture characteristics. While there is little published information to develop statistical results, the results from the current review suggest that major biological determinants of track and field throwing performance are the size of lean body mass, the neural activation of the protagonist muscles during the throw and the percentage of type II muscle fiber cross-sectional area. Long-term training may enhance these biological factors and possibly Citation: Zaras, N.; Stasinaki, A.-N.; lead to a higher track and field throwing performance.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Sport Invention3
    THE INSTITUTE FOR AESTHLETICS GUIDE TO SPORT INVENTION! Hello! If you are reading this you have had the unfortunate pleasure to sit through an Institute for Aesthletics workshop on sport design! Now you must read through this resource packet! We here at the Institute do not believe so much in formal thought so we will try to keep this packet as useful and unlaborious as possible. That being said, we have many helpful insights on sport design that we would love to share with you. Since we may have reviewed many of these pointers, this guide both serves as a refresher and also expands on some ideas only touched on at the workshop. Introduction Why Invent New Sports? Why would you invent a new sport when there are already so many great sports out there like Underwater Ice Hockey, Wife Carrying, and Volleyball? The list is endless! So what is the point when we already have these great games? Well, the thing is, while it is great to be able to just go outside and play a sport like ski jumping or synchronized swimming without having to “invent” anything, the labor of making up a game is actually worthwhile and fun. To see how fun and, gasp, how educational sport invention is, we can turn to the foremost experts of sport inventors: children. Children invent sports all the time, at least they used to before Play Station. When I was a young lad, growing up in the hardscrabble streets of an upper middle class Brooklyn neighborhood, we were forced to make up our own fun.
    [Show full text]
  • Maximising Ball Release Speed in Overhead Throwing Through Optimising Arm Segment Masses
    MAXIMISING BALL RELEASE SPEED IN OVERHEAD THROWING THROUGH OPTIMISING ARM SEGMENT MASSES A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Patrick Fasbender Department of Life Sciences, Brunel University London 28 September 2017 Abstract The tapering distribution of segment masses in the human arm helps in the generation of high ball release speeds in overarm throwing. However, the masses of the individual arm segments might not be optimal; arm segment masses could be optimised in order to improve throwing performance. The aim of this project was to identify and understand the optimal upper arm mass that results in the highest ball release speed in overarm throwing. The first study was a theoretical study, using a simple two-segment model of the arm to determine the optimal combination of arm segment masses that maximises ball release speed. This simplified throw was chosen to identify the basic mechanism causing changes in ball release speed with a heavier upper arm mass. The study identified that there is an optimal upper arm mass, but this optimum depends on the forearm mass and the shoulder torque. Furthermore, the study showed that a heavier forearm mass produces a lower ball release speed. An experimental approach was used in the second study to analyse the effect of additional upper arm mass on ball release speed and throwing mechanics in an overarm throw similar to that used by baseball pitchers. However, group analysis of the ball release speed did not reveal an optimal upper arm mass, and most of the kinematic, kinetic, and temporal variables were not affected by additional upper arm mass.
    [Show full text]