Gender differences in the kinematics and ball velocity of overarm throwing in elite team handball players

Transcription

1 This article was downloaded by: [Hoegskolen I Nord Troendelag], [Roland Van Den Tillaar] On: 19 March 2012, At: 05:49 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: Registered office: Mortimer House, Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Journal of Sports Sciences Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: Gender differences in the kinematics and ball velocity of overarm throwing in elite team handball players Roland Van Den Tillaar a & Jan M. H. Cabri b a Research Centre for Sport, Health and Human Development, Portugal & Nord Trøndelag University College, Norway b Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Norway Available online: 19 Mar 2012 To cite this article: Roland Van Den Tillaar & Jan M. H. Cabri (2012): Gender differences in the kinematics and ball velocity of overarm throwing in elite team handball players, Journal of Sports Sciences, DOI: / To link to this article: PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

2 Journal of Sports Sciences, 2012; 1 7, ifirst article Gender differences in the kinematics and ball velocity of overarm throwing in elite team handball players ROLAND VAN DEN TILLAAR 1 & JAN M. H. CABRI 2 1 Research Centre for Sport, Health and Human Development, Portugal & Nord Trøndelag University College, Norway and 2 Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Norway Abstract The aim of this study was to investigate the throwing velocity and kinematics of overarm throwing in team handball of elite female and male handball players. Kinematics and ball velocity of a 7 metre-throw in eleven elite male (age yr, body mass kg, height m) and eleven elite female (age yr, body mass kg, height m) team handball players were recorded. The analysis consisted of maximal joint angles, angles at ball release, maximal angular velocities of the joint movements, and maximal linear velocities of the distal endpoints of segments and their timing during the throw. The ball release velocity of the male handball players was significantly higher than the females (21.1 vs m s 71 ;p5 0.05). No major differences in kinematics were found, except for the maximal endpoint velocities of the hand and wrist segment, indicating that male and female handball players throw with the same technique. It was concluded that differences in throwing velocity in elite male and female handball players are generally not the result of changes in kinematics in the joint movements. Keywords: ball velocity, team handball, coordination, kinematics Introduction Team handball is an international sport that is played both by males and females. In team handball overarm throwing is the major activity and is used to pass the ball to team members and to score goals. Throwing fast is considered to be an advantage in order to surpass the goalkeeper and score. Therefore, training is greatly focused on enhancing throwing velocity by optimizing throwing technique. Several studies reported on performance and kinematics in overarm throwing in team handball (Toyoshima & Miyashita, 1973; Barata, 1992; Tuma & Zahalka 1997; Fradet et al., 2004; van den Tillaar & Ettema, 2004a, 2006, 2007, 2009a, 2009b; Wagner, Buckecker, von Duvillard, & Müller, 2010). However, all these studies used male team handball players as subjects. The main findings of these studies were that, in overarm throwing only a temporal proximal-to-distal sequence is exhibited for the initiation of the joint movements. However, no such sequence is found for the maximal velocity of the joints and distal endpoints of segments (Fradet et al., 2004; van den Tillaar & Ettema, 2009). Furthermore, van den Tillaar and Ettema (2004a, 2007) found that the internal rotation of the shoulder and the elbow extension are the main contributors for maximal ball velocity at release. In addition van den Tillaar and Ettema (2007) found that better throwers throw with a higher internal shoulder rotation and elbow extension. Wagner et al. (2010) and Wagner, Pfusterschmied, von Duvillard, & Müller (2011) showed that maximal pelvis and trunk rotation velocity and flexion correlated possitively with ball velocity, i.e. the better throwers had a higher maximal pelvis and trunk rotation velocity. Van den Tillaar and Ettema (2004a) also found that varying throwing weights (from 0.2 to 0.8 kg) influences maximal velocity of shoulder internal rotation, elbow extension and ball velocity. Only Jöris, Edwards van Muijen, van Ingen Schenau, & Kemper (1985) performed a kinematic analysis on female team handball throwers, which consisted in reporting the development of the linear velocity of the endpoints of the segments between good and poor throwers. They showed that the main difference between elite and less experienced throwers lies in the higher maximal segmental velocities and stronger deceleration of these segments in the last 50 ms before ball release. According to the results of earlier studies, men throw faster then women (Jöris et al., 1985; Edwards van Muijen, Jöris, Kemper, & Van Ingen Schenau, 1991; Hoff & Almåsbakk 1995; Fradet et al., 2004; Correspondence: Roland van den Tillaar, Nord Trøndelag University College, Levanger, Norway. roland.tillaar@svt.ntnu.no ISSN print/issn X online Ó 2012 Taylor & Francis

3 2 R. van den Tillaar & J. M. H. Cabri van den Tillaar & Ettema 2004b; Zapartidis, Gouvali, Bayios, & Boudolos, 2007; Ettema, Gløsen, & van den Tillaar, 2008; Fabrica, Gomez, & Farina, 2008; Granados, Izquierdo, Ibanez, Ruesta, & Gorostiaga, 2008; Wagner et al., 2010). van den Tillaar & Ettema (2004b) compared throwing performances between women and men directly and found that male throwers threw faster than the female handball players even with correction for the ball weight. They concluded that body characteristics (height, mass and free fat mass) and isometric strength of the upper limb explain the differences in throwing velocity between men and women. Men throw faster and produce more force because they are taller. When compensated for height, weight and fat free mass only a small gender difference in throwing velocity was found (van den Tillaar & Ettema, 2004b). This finding strengthens the notion that gender difference is mainly based on differences in height and muscle mass. In other words, when a male and a female handball player have the same amount of fat free mass they could theoretically produce the same ball release velocity. However, another factor that may influence throwing velocity could be throwing kinematics. Liu, Leigh and Yu (2010) studied the kinematics in elite male and female javelin throwers and found that the sequence of upper and lower extremity motions was significantly different between gender. This indicates that kinematic variables could influence throwing velocity, also. To the best of our knowledge, no study has directly compared the kinematics in overarm throwing between elite male and female handball players. Since body size explains most of the differences in throwing velocity (van den Tillaar & Ettema, 2004a), differences in kinematics may represent another important variable differentiating differences in performance. Thus, this study aimed to compare the throwing performance (throwing velocity) and the kinematics of the upper extremity, trunk and lower extremity movements in overarm throwing in team handball between elite male and female team handball players in order to better determine the origin of throwing performance between male and female throwers. Methods Twenty-two subjects participated in this study. Eleven elite male (age years, body mass kg, height m, training experience years) and eleven elite female (age years, body mass kg, height m, training experience years) handball players, playing in the Norwegian national competition, volunteered for the study. The subjects were fully informed about the protocol before participating in this study. Informed consent was obtained prior to all testing from all subjects, in accordance with the recommendations of local ethical committee and current ethical standards in sports and exercise research. Procedure After a general warm-up of 15 minutes, which included running, dribbling and throwing, performance was tested in a standing throw situation with the front foot on the ground at all times. Subjects were instructed to perform an overarm throw towards a target at seven metres distance. Furthermore, they were asked to throw as fast as possible with a regular ball (males: 0.46 kg, females: 0.36 kg) and to try hitting a target, aiming at a 0.5 by 0.5 m square target at 1.65 m height located in the middle of a handball goal (263 metres) (van den Tillaar & Ettema, 2003; van den Tillaar & Ettema, 2004a; van den Tillaar & Ettema, 2007). Once three successful attempts were captured, testing was completed. The average of these three attempts was used for further analysis. The subjects were not informed about the total amount of throws they had to throw. The subjects had approximately 1 min rest between each attempt to avoid an effect of fatigue on throwing velocity. Measurements Velocity of the different segments and joints was measured using a 3D motion capture system (Qualysis, Sävedalen, Sweden, eight cameras, 240 Hz), tracking the position of the reflective markers (2.6 cm diameter) placed on the following anatomical landmarks: (a) Ankle: lateral maleolus of the front leg, (b) Knee: lateral epycondyle of the front leg, (c) Hip: trochanter major on both sides, (d) Shoulder: lateral tip of the acromion on the both sides, (e) Elbow: lateral epicondyle of the throwing arm, (f) Wrist: radial styloid process and ulnar styloid process of the throwing arm, (g) Hand: os metacarpal III, (h) Finger: DIP III and (i) Ball: top of the ball. Linear movements were calculated as the absolute change of position in time of the markers placed on the segments endpoints. Computation of velocity of the distal endpoint of the segments, joints and the ball was carried out using a five point differential filter on their respective time signals. The velocity at ball release and the moment of release were derived from the change in distance between the wrist and the ball (at the moment the ball leaves the hand the distance between the wrist marker and the ball marker increases abruptly and dramatically, see van den Tillaar & Ettema, 2003; 2004a; 2007; 2009a,

4 Comparison kinematics gender in throwing in team handball b). The joint angles were derived from relative positions of the distal segment relative to the proximal segment of the joint of interest (e.g., Feltner & Dapena, 1989; Fradet et al., 2004; Stodden, Fleisig, Mclean, & Andrews, 2005; van den Tillaar & Ettema, 2007, 2009a, 2009b). A local coordinate system was constructed with the origin at joint of interest and with the x-axis aligned with the proximal segment. All calculations were performed in Matlab 7.0 (The Mathworks Inc., MA, USA). Apart from ball velocity at ball release the following kinematic variables were also analysed: maximal angle and angular velocity of flexion of the metacarpophalangeal joint (further referred to as finger flexion), wrist flexion, elbow extension, external/internal rotation of the shoulder, shoulder horizontal adduction, shoulder abduction, trunk tilt, trunk tilt sideways, upper torso rotation, and horizontal pelvis rotation together with the angles of these joints at ball release (Figure 1). Furthermore, maximal linear velocity of the distal endpoint of each segment was calculated. The distal endpoints analysed were: hand (proximal interphalanx III), wrist (average of the markers on radial styloid process and ulnar styloid process), elbow, shoulder and hip. Timing of all kinematic variables was also calculated together with the timing of initiation of joint movements. Timing was defined as the time before ball release. The time at which the ball was released from the hand was considered as zero and the time before ball release was defined as negative. The time of initiation of the joint movement was defined as the first time at which the angular velocity was positive and remained positive until ball release (van den Tillaar & Ettema, 2009a). To investigate the difference between sexes of the radius of the throwing arm, segmental lengths were calculated as the distances between the finger marker and the elbow (forearmþhand) and the shoulder marker at ball release together with the distance between the elbow and shoulder marker (upper arm). Statistical analysis To compare the throwing performance and kinematics between the male and female handball players a student-t test for independent variables was used. The level of significance was set at p and all data are expressed as mean + SD. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 18.0 for windows (SPSS, inc., Chicago, IL). Results The male handball players were on average 0.1 m higher ( m vs m, p ) and 17 kg heavier than the females ( kg vs kg, p ). The elite male handball players produced significantly higher ball release velocities than the female handball players (21.1 vs m s 71,p50.05). Significant higher maximal linear velocities of the endpoints of wrist and hand segments were found in the male group (see Table 1). With respect to maximal angles and joint angles at ball release, the only significant differences between men and women were found for maximal elbow flexion and shoulder abduction angle i.e. men had a larger maximal joint angle than the women (see Table 2). No significant gender differences for the maximal angular velocities of the different joint movements (Table 3). The time of occurrence of the different maximal velocities and angles of the endpoints and the joint movement between the men and women was only significantly different for the maximal linear velocity of the humerus distal endpoint, maximal trunk tilt sideway angle, initiation of the finger flexion, Figure 1. Definition of the different kinematic parameters: (a) shoulder flexion (b) wrist flexion (c) internal rotation shoulder (d) shoulder abduction (e) horizontal pelvis and upper torso rotation (f) finger flexion (g) elbow flexion (h) upper torso and pelvis tilt (i) trunk tilt forwards (j) trunk tilt sideways.

5 4 R. van den Tillaar & J. M. H. Cabri Table 1. Maximal linear velocity of the endpoints of the segments (Mean + SD) and their timing during the throws for males and females. Maximal velocity (m s 71 ) Timing max velocity (s) Males Females Males Females Ball velocity * Hand * Wrist * Elbow * Shoulder Hip *Significantly difference between males and females on a significance level of p Table 2. Angles at ball release and the maximal angles their timing (Mean + SD) for males and females. Angle at ball release (8) Maximal angle (8) Timing max angle (s) Males Females Males Females Males Females Finger flexion Wrist flexion Elbow flexion * Shoulder flexion Shoulder internal rotation Shoulder abduction * Trunk tilt forwards Trunk tilt sideways * Upper torso tilt Pelvis tilt Upper torso rotation Pelvis rotation *Significantly difference between males and females on a significance level of p Table 3. Maximal angular velocity (Mean + SD) and their timing during the throws for males and females. Maximal velocity (rads 71 ) Timing max velocity (s) Timing initiation positive velocity (s) Males Females Males Females Males Females Finger flexion * Wrist flexion Elbow extension Shoulder flexion Shoulder internal rotation Shoulder abduction Trunk tilt forwards Trunk tilt sideways Upper torso tilt * * Pelvis tilt Upper torso rotation Pelvis rotation *Significantly difference between males and females on a significance level of p initiation and maximal velocity of the upper torso tilt (Tables 1 to 3). It was found that the maximal velocity of the upper torso tilt (Table 3), maximal linear velocity of the elbow (Table 1) and initiation of the finger flexion occurred closer to ball release in the male compared to the female participants. The start of the upper torso tilt movement (Table 3) and the maximal trunk tilt sideway angle (Table 2) occurred closer to ball release in female compared to male participants. Significant differences in segmental length was found for the forearmþhand (p ) and the distance between the shoulder marker and the finger marker at ball release (p ¼ 0.006) between the male

6 Comparison kinematics gender in throwing in team handball 5 Table 4. Segmental length of upper extremity and distance between shoulder marker and finger marker at ball release (Mean+SD) for males and females. Males Distance (m) Females Upper arm (shoulder-elbow marker) Forearmþhand * Distance shoulder-finger marker at ball release * *Significantly difference between males and females on a significance level of p and female throwers i.e. male throwers had longer forearmþhand and the distance between the shoulder and finger marker at ball release was longer. No significant difference was found in the segmental length of the upperarm between gender (p ¼ 0.23; Table 4). Discussion In this study, the throwing performance and kinematics of experience male and female team handball players were examined. The main findings were that ball release velocity between men and women was different i.e. men produced a higher ball release velocity than the women. However, no major differences in the kinematics of upper extremity, trunk and lower extremity movements in overarm throwing were found. The reported velocities in our study in women (19.2 m s 71 ) is comparable to the earlier reported studies (Jöris et al., 1985; Edwards van Muijen et al., 1990; Hoff & Almåsbakk 1995; Tillaar & Ettema 2004b; Zapartidis et al., 2007; Ettema et al., 2008; Fabrica et al., 2008; Granados et al., 2008) in which maximal ball velocities vary from 16.3 m s 71 (Fabrica et al., 2008) to 23.3 m s 71 (Hoff & Almåsbakk, 1995). The maximal throwing velocity in the standing throw for the experience male handball players (21.1 m s 71 ) in our study is also comparable to earlier studies (Kotzamanidis, Papadopoulos and Giavroglou, 1976; Barata, 1992; Fleck et al., 1992; Bayios, Anastasopoulou, Sioudris, & Boudolos, 2001; van den Tillaar and Ettema 2003, 2004b, 2006, 2007, 2009a, 2009b), ranging from 18.4 to 26.7 m s 71. The main reason for differences in ball release velocity is of course the level of the players, but also the set up. In the studies of van den Tillaar and Ettema (2003, 2006, 2007, 2009a, 2009b) a similar set up was used as in our study, which includes markers attached to the ball, while in other studies (Kotzamanidis et al., 1976; Fleck et al., 1992; van den Tillaar and Ettema, 2004b) maximal ball velocity was measured by video or radar gun. The difference in throwing velocity between elite male (21.1 m s 71 ) and female (19.2 m s 71 ) handball players in this study is in line with an earlier study (23.2 and 19.2 m s 71 ) by van den Tillaar and Ettema (2004b). None of the other earlier mentioned studies on maximal ball velocity compared elite male and female handball players, which makes it difficult to compare with our study. The kinematics of the maximal velocities of the joint movements and the endpoints of the segments and their timings are in line with the findings of the earlier studies (van den Tillaar & Ettema, 2004a, 2006, 2007, 2009a, 2009b). Also the maximal linear velocities and the timing of the endpoints of segment of the female handball players (Table 1) are similar to those reported by Jöris et al. (1985). These similar kinematics indicates that in the our study the participants threw with the same throwing pattern as the earlier mentioned studies. With respect to throwing kinematics, only a few differences were found with between males and females. Maximal elbow flexion and the shoulder abduction angles seem to be significantly greater in males (Table 2). However, these differences occur at around s before ball release, which is just before the start of the throwing movement also called wind up or arm cocking phase (van den Tillaar & Ettema, 2007). It is probably to state that these maximal angles will not influence maximal throwing velocity. No differences were found for the angles at ball release and for the maximal joint velocities (Tables 2 and 3) indicating that elite male and female handball players throw with the same technique. The difference in timing of the maximal trunk tilt sideway angles (Table 2) between the males (0.79 s) and females (0.51 s) also occurs during the wind up phase but does not explain the difference in maximal ball velocity between male and female handball players. The differences in maximal ball velocity between gender were also found for the maximal linear velocities of the endpoints of the hand and the wrist. These differences are the result of the differences in arm length between men and women. The male athletes were on average 0.1 m taller and the distance between the shoulder and finger marker was at ball release 0.06 m longer (Table 4). Furthermore, the segmental length of the forearm with hand was on average 0.04 m longer for the males (Table 4). Van den Tillaar and Ettema (2004a) estimated that the elbow extension and internal shoulder rotation are responsible for 67 to 73 percent of the maximal ball velocity, as expressed in the following equation: v ball modelled ¼ p fðo shoulder D sinða elbow ÞÞ 2 þðo elbow D Þ 2 g ð1þ

7 6 R. van den Tillaar & J. M. H. Cabri in which D being distance from elbow to ball (approx. length between elbow marker and finger marker), a joint angle and o joint velocity. Using the data from the present study this results in an estimated velocity of 18.9 m s 71 for males and 17.7 m s 71 for females, reflecting almost the same differences as measured (D1.9 m s 71 ). The female handball players in the study of Jöris et al. (1985) threw on average 17.2 m s 71, which was 2ms 71 less than in the current study. In that same study the women were 1.69 m tall, which was 0.06 m less than the female athletes in our study, which could result in a difference in forearm and hand length of 0.03 m. When using the data from the present study, the estimated velocity would be 16.6 m s 71, which is 1.1 m s 71 less than the modelled velocity of the women in the current study. Thus, the difference in arm length could already explain a lot for the differences found between men and women and between both studies. The differences in timing of the maximal endpoint velocity of the elbow, initiation of the finger flexion, initiation and maximal velocity of the upper torso tilt show only small differences and could perhaps explain the rest of the differences between the male and female handball players. Another variable that could explain the differences in throwing velocity was the free fat mass, which was not measured in the present study. Male elite handball players have generally more free fat mass than female handball players (van den Tillaar & Ettema, 2004b) and can therefore throw faster because of the subsequent higher muscle mass. Even when throwing with 0.1 kg heavier balls, the male elite handball players managed to throw on average 1.9 m s 71 faster. This was in line with Liu, Leigh and Yu (2010) who found in javelin throwing a difference of 28 m between elite male and female javelin throwers when the males threw with 0.2 kg heavier javelins. When males would throw with the same balls as the female elite handball players this difference in ball velocity would be even larger. Given that the male elite handball players were taller (0.1 m) than the female players they would have more strength; since strength, being directly related to muscle cross-section, increases by body height 2 according to the geometric scaling paradigm (van den Tillaar & Ettema, 2004b). Therefore, based upon the findings of the current study and that of van den Tillaar and Ettema (2004b) it can be expected that the maximal ball velocity would be approximately the same when female and male handball players would be of the same height with the same free fat mass (muscle bulk). In conclusion, it can be stated that throwing kinematics is quite similar between elite male and female handball throwers, and that both develop about the same angular velocities at the joints. References Barata, J. (1992). Changes in ball velocity in the handball free throw, induced by two different speed-strength training programs. Motricidade humana: Portuguese Journal of Human Performance Studies, 8, Bayios, I.A., Anastasopoulou, E.M., Sioudris, D.S., & Boudolos, K.D. (2001). Relationship between isokinetic strength of the internal and external shoulder rotators and ball velocity in team handball. Journal of Sports Medicine & Physical Fitness, 41, Edwards van Muijen A.J., Jöris, H.J.J., Kemper, H.C.G. & Van Ingen Schenau, G.J. (1991). Throwing practice with different ball weights: Effects on throwing velocity and muscle strength in female handball players. Sports Training, Medicine and Rehabilitation, 2, Ettema, G., Gløsen, T., & van den Tillaar, R. (2008). Effect of specific strength training on overarm throwing performance. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 3, Fabrica, G., Gomez, M., & Farina, R. (2008). Angle and speed in female handball penalty throwing: Effects of fatique and player position. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 8, Feltner, M.E., & Dapena, J. (1989). Three-dimensional interarctions in a two-segment kinetic chain. Part I: General model. International Journal of Sports Biomechanics, 5, Fleck, S.J., Smith, S.L., Craib, M.W., Denahan, T., Snow, R.E., & Mitchell, M.L. (1992). Upper extremity isokinetic torque and throwing velocity in team handball. Journal of Applied Sport Science Research, 6, Fradet, L., Botcazou, M., Durocher, C., Cretual, A., Multon, F., Prioux, J., & Delamarche, P. (2004). Do handball throws always exhibit a proximal-to distal segmental sequences? Journal of Sports Sciences, 22, Granados, C., Izquierdo, M., Ibanez, J., Ruesta, M., & Gorostiaga, E.M. (2008). Effects of an entire season on physical fitness in elite female handball players. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 40, Hoff, J. & Almåsbakk, B. (1995). The effects of maximum strength training on throwing velocity and muscle strength in female team-handball players. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 9, Jöris, H.J.J., Edwards van Muijen, A.J., van Ingen Schenau, G.J., & Kemper, H.C.G. (1985). Force velocity and energy flow during the overarm throw in female handball players. Journal of Biomechanics, 18, Kotzamanidis, C., Papadopoulos, C., & Giavroglou, A. (1976). Kinematic-dynamic analysis of support phase in different throws of handball. In R.C. Nelson & C.A. Morehouse (Eds.), Biomechanics IV (pp ). London: Macmillan. Liu, H., Leigh, S., & Yu, B. (2010). Sequences of upper and lower extremity motions in javelin throwing. Journal of Sports Sciences, 28, Stodden, D.F., Fleisig, G.S., Mclean, S.P., & Andrews, J.R. (2005). Relationship of biomechanical factors to baseball pitching velocity: Within pitcher variation. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 21, Toyoshima, S., & Miyashita, M. (1973). Force-velocity relation in throwing. Research Quarterly, 44, Tuma, M., & Zahalka, F. (1997). Three dimensional analysis of jump shot in handball. Acta Universitatis Carolinae Kinanthropologica, 33, van den Tillaar, R., & Ettema, G. (2003). Instructions emphasizing velocity, accuracy, or both in performance and kinematics of overarm throwing by experienced team handball players. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 97,

8 Comparison kinematics gender in throwing in team handball 7 van den Tillaar, R., & Ettema, G. (2004a). A force-velocity relationship and coordination patterns in overarm throwing. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, 3, van den Tillaar, R., & Ettema, G. (2004b). Effect of body size and gender in overarm throwing performance. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 91, van den Tillaar, R., & Ettema, G. (2006). A comparison of kinematics between novices and experts in overarm throwing under the influence of type of instruction. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 103, van den Tillaar, R., & Ettema, G. (2007). A three-dimensional analysis of overarm throwing in experienced handball players. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 23, van den Tillaar, R., & Ettema, G. (2009a). Proximal-to distal sequence in overarm throwing in handball. Journal of Sports Science, 9, van den Tillaar, R., & Ettema, G. (2009b). A comparison of performance and kinematics in throwing with the dominant and non-dominant arm in handball players. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 109, Wagner, H., Buckecker, M., von Duvillard, S., & Müller, E. (2010). Kinematic description of the elite vs. low level players in team-handball jump throw. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, 9, Wagner, H., Pfusterschmied, J., von Duvillard, S., & Müller, E. (2011). Performance and kinematics of various throwing techniques in team-handball. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, 10, Zapartidis, I., Gouvali, M., Bayios, I., & Boudolos, K. (2007). Throwing effectiveness and rotational strength of the shoulder in team handball. Journal of Sports Medicine & Physical Fitness, 47,