Advertisement

Sports Medicine

, Volume 49, Issue 5, pp 827–829 | Cite as

Comment on: “Challenging Conventional Paradigms in Applied Sports Biomechanics Research”

  • Howie J. CarsonEmail author
  • Dave Collins
Letter to the Editor

Dear Editor,

We read with interest a recent paper by Glazier and Mehdizadeh [1] on the application of biomechanics within applied sport settings. Their article challenges several conventional techniques and assumptions purportedly prevalent within the sports biomechanics domain. Consequently, two main conclusions are drawn; firstly, that it is inherently flawed to rely on group-based data when working with an athlete to modify their already existing movement pattern and, secondly, that biomechanists and coaches should be more circumspect when interpreting the results of biomechanical research because studies do not account for the pre-existing characteristics of the specific athlete in question. Within the authors’ arguments, several important factors are realised that attest to the ongoing difficulties and complexity that so well defines real-world practice in sport [2, 3]. In this regard, we welcome such attention as a contrast to the often too reductionist approaches of...

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Funding

No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this letter.

Conflict of interest

Howie J. Carson and Dave Collins declare that they have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this letter.

References

  1. 1.
    Glazier PS, Mehdizadeh S. Challenging conventional paradigms in applied sports biomechanics research. Sports Med. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-018-1030-1.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abraham A, Collins D. Taking the next step: ways forward for coaching science. Quest. 2011;63(4):366–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lyle J. Modelling the complexity of the coaching process: a commentary. Int J Sports Sci Coach. 2007;2(4):407–9.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gray R. Comparing cueing and constraints interventions for increasing launch angle in baseball batting. Sport Exerc Perform Psychol. 2018;7(3):318–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carson HJ, Collins D. Refining and regaining skills in fixation/diversification stage performers: the five-A model. Int Rev Sport Exerc Psychol. 2011;4(2):146–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carson HJ, Collins D. Effective skill refinement: focusing on process to ensure outcome. Cent Eur J Sport Sci Med. 2014;7(3):5–21.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Newell KM. Constraints to the development of coordination. In: Wade MG, Whiting HTA, editors. Motor development in children: aspects of coordination and control. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff; 1986. p. 341–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hanin Y, Korjus T, Jouste P, Baxter P. Rapid technique correction using old way/new way: two case studies with Olympic athletes. Sport Psychol. 2002;16(1):79–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Collins D, Morriss C, Trower J. Getting it back: a case study of skill recovery in an elite athlete. Sport Psychol. 1999;13(3):288–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Carson HJ, Collins D. Tracking technical refinement in elite performers: the good, the better, and the ugly. Int J Golf Sci. 2015;4(1):67–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Carson HJ, Collins D, Jones B. A case study of technical change and rehabilitation: intervention design and interdisciplinary team interaction. Int J Sport Psychol. 2014;45(1):57–78.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Carson HJ, Collins D, Kearney P. Skill change in elite-level kickers: interdisciplinary considerations of an applied framework. In: Hiroyuki H, Hennig E, Smith N, editors. Football biomechanics. Abingdon: Routledge; 2017. p. 173–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Smith A, Roberts J, Wallace E, Pui WK, Forrester S, MacKenzie S, et al. Golf coaches’ perceptions of key technical swing parameters compared to biomechanical literature. Int J Sports Sci Coach. 2015;10(4):739–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Collins L, Simon S, Carson HJ. Para-adventure: a hyper-dynamic problem for the inclusive coach. Sport Soc. 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2018.1504776.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Christina RW. Motor learning: Future lines of research. In: Safrit MJ, Eckert HM, editors. The cutting edge in physical education and exercise science research. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 1987. p. 26–41.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Panjabi MM, White AA III, Brand RA Jr. A note on defining body parts configurations. J Biomech. 1974;7(4):385–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Paoloni M, Mangone M, Fratocchi G, Murgia M, Maria Saraceni V, Santilli V. Kinematic and kinetic features of normal level walking in patellofemoral pain syndrome: more than a sagittal plane alteration. J Biomech. 2010;43(9):1794–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Carson HJ, Richards J, Mazuquin B. Examining the influence of grip type on wrist and club head kinematics during the golf swing: benefits of a local co-ordinate system. Eur J Sport Sci. 2019;19(3):327–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Brown SJ, Selbie WS, Wallace ES. The X-Factor: an evaluation of common methods used to analyse major inter-segment kinematics during the golf swing. J Sports Sci. 2013;31(11):1156–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Carson HJ, Collins D. Implementing the five-A model of technical change: key roles for the sport psychologist. J Appl Sport Psychol. 2016;28(4):392–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Carson HJ, Collins D. Refining motor skills in golf: a biopsychosocial perspective. In: Toms M, editor. Routledge international handbook of golf science. Abingdon: Routledge; 2017. p. 196–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Carson HJ, Collins D, Richards J. Intra-individual movement variability during skill transitions: a useful marker? Eur J Sport Sci. 2014;14(4):327–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Carson HJ, Collins D, Richards J. Initiating technical refinements in high-level golfers: evidence for contradictory procedures. Eur J Sport Sci. 2016;16(4):473–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hanin Y, Malvela M, Hanina M. Rapid correction of start technique in an Olympic-level swimmer: a case study using old way/new way. J Swim Res. 2004;16(1):11–7.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Godbout A, Boyd JE. Corrective sonic feedback for speed skating: a case study. 16th international conference on auditory display, Washington. 2010. pp. 23–30.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Coaching and PerformanceUniversity of Central LancashirePrestonUK

Personalised recommendations