Analysis of angular momentum effect on swimming kick-start performance.

The aim of this study was to analyse the mechanics of rotation and the temporal, angular and kinematics variables during the aerial phase for the kick-start with respect to the grab start. Nine elite swimmers (70.0 ± 7.7 kg; 178 ± 9.4 cm; 24.5 ± 5.3 years; 824 ± 119 FINA points scoring) performed the starts on the OMEGA OSB11 starting block followed by 5 m gliding at maximum velocity. Nineteen comparisons of kinematics variables across start technique were performed with critical alpha adjusted using a Holm's correction to maintain an experiment-wise type I error rate of p <0.05. The differences were statistically evaluated by T-test and Wilcoxon test. Significant advantages for the kick-start were observed in all temporal variables (except in the flight time) and in the vertical take-off velocity. Similarities in the centre of mass angular momentum at take-off (120.89 ± 17.66, 126.61 ± 13.51 s(-1).10(-3), p-value <0.294; kick-start and grab start) caused that KS did not increase the temporal advantages obtained on the block at 5 m distance. Two different rotational movements were found for both techniques. A displacement of the rear leg and front leg on the block and during the flight respectively permits a higher lower limbs position relative to the trunk at hands entry for kick-start. However, larger rotational movement of the trunk characterized grab start. It was concluded that shorter block times and rotational displacements of the lower limbs on the block and flight phase are the key of the best performance for kick-start at 5 m distance.

Biomechanical characteristics of adults walking forward and backward in water at different stride frequencies.

The aim of this study was to examine spatiotemporal characteristics and joint angles during forward and backward walking in water at low and high stride frequency. Eight healthy adults (22.1 ± 1.1 years) walked forward and backward underwater at low (50 pulses) and high frequency (80 pulses) at the xiphoid process level with arms crossed at the chest. The main differences observed were that the participants presented a greater speed (0.58 vs. 0.85 m/s) and more asymmetry of the step length (1.24 vs. 1.48) at high frequency whilst the stride and step length (0.84 vs. 0.7 m and 0.43 vs. 0.35 m, respectively) were lower compared to low frequency (P < 0.05). Support phase duration was higher at forward walking than backward walking (61.2 vs. 59.0%). At initial contact, we showed that during forward walking, the ankle and hip presented more flexion than during backward walking (ankle: 84.0 vs. 91.8º and hip: 22.8 vs. 8.0º; P < 0.001). At final stance, the knee and hip were more flexed at low frequency than at high frequency (knee: 150.0 vs. 157.0º and hip: -12.2 vs. -14.5º; P < 0.001). The knee angle showed more flexion at forward walking (134.0º) than backward walking (173.1º) (P < 0.001). In conclusion, these results show how forward and backward walking in water at different frequencies differ and contribute to a better understanding of this activity in training and rehabilitation.