Hay J G
Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 1986;14:401-46.
The preceding review has been based on over 200 publications in Czech, English, French, German, Japanese, Polish, and Russian. Even a cursory perusal of these materials is sufficient to show that much has been done to try and obtain a scientific understanding of long jump techniques. It is clear, too, that still more remains to be done. Much of the work to date has been focused on just a few aspects of long jump technique. Other important aspects have received relatively little attention. The latter include the accuracy of the approach, the techniques used during the final strides of the approach, the role of elastic energy in the takeoff, the initiation and control of the jumper's angular momentum, and the techniques used in the landing. Future research efforts might well be directed towards resolving major issues concerning these aspects of long jump technique. The methods used to gather data in the studies reviewed have been rather unimaginative. Two-dimensional cinematography has been used in the vast majority of the studies and force platforms in a few. Other data-gathering procedures like three-dimensional cinematography, electromyography and accelerometry have rarely, if ever, been used. In only one or two studies was anything remotely approaching experimental or technological innovation in evidence. The methods used to analyze data have also been very limited. With the notable exception of a study by Ballreich, few papers have involved anything more sophisticated than means, standard deviations, correlation coefficients and an occasional multiple regression equation. Given these facts, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that our knowledge of long jump techniques might be greatly improved if the full range of available and appropriate procedures were turned to the purpose. Finally, no review of the literature on long jump techniques would be complete without reference to the level of scholarship displayed in the works under consideration. With only a few exceptions, the level shown in the scientific papers reviewed here left much to be desired. Time and again, variables were not defined, crucial measurement techniques were not described and major results were not presented or discussed. In addition, much of the data presented in tables and graphs were patently in error. In light of all this, it is clear that unless the level of scholarship improves, future progress in this area of sports biomechanics is likely to be very slow.
上述综述基于200多篇捷克语、英语、法语、德语、日语、波兰语和俄语的出版物。即使只是粗略地浏览一下这些资料,也足以表明在试图科学理解跳远技术方面已经做了很多工作。同样明显的是,仍有更多工作有待完成。迄今为止,大部分工作只集中在跳远技术的几个方面。其他重要方面相对较少受到关注。后者包括助跑的准确性、助跑最后几步所使用的技术、弹性能量在起跳中的作用、跳远运动员角动量的启动和控制以及着陆时所使用的技术。未来的研究工作很可能会致力于解决与跳远技术这些方面相关的主要问题。在所综述的研究中用于收集数据的方法相当缺乏想象力。绝大多数研究使用了二维摄影,少数研究使用了测力平台。其他数据收集程序,如三维摄影、肌电图和加速度测量,即使曾经使用过,也很少见。只有一两项研究显示出哪怕是稍微接近实验或技术创新的迹象。用于分析数据的方法也非常有限。除了Ballreich的一项研究外,很少有论文涉及比均值、标准差、相关系数和偶尔的多元回归方程更复杂的内容。鉴于这些事实,很难避免得出这样的结论:如果将所有可用且合适的程序都用于这一目的,我们对跳远技术的了解可能会有很大提高。最后,如果不提及所审议著作中所展示的学术水平,对跳远技术文献的任何综述都是不完整的。除了少数例外,这里所综述的科学论文所展示的水平很不尽人意。变量常常未作定义,关键测量技术未作描述,主要结果未呈现或讨论。此外,表格和图表中呈现的许多数据明显有误。鉴于所有这些情况,很明显,除非学术水平提高,否则体育生物力学这一领域未来的进展可能会非常缓慢。