See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/320188859

Specific Physical Training In Elite Male Team Handball

Article  in  The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research · June 2017

DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002094

CITATIONS READS
3 2,887

6 authors, including:

Herbert Wagner David W. Bacharach

University of Salzburg St. Cloud State University
79 PUBLICATIONS   907 CITATIONS    69 PUBLICATIONS   454 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Serge P. von Duvillard

None
54 PUBLICATIONS   39 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Conducted at the University of Graz Medical School. View project

New Patient Transfer Devices View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Serge P. von Duvillard on 04 October 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

SPECIFIC PHYSICAL TRAINING
MALE TEAM HANDBALL
HERBERT WAGNER,1 MANUEL GIERLINGER,2 NERMIN ADZAMIJA,2 SAMUEL AJAYI,1
DAVID W. BACHARACH,3 AND SERGE P. VON DUVILLARD1
1
Department of Sport Science and Kinesiology, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria; 2Team Handball Club HC Linz AG,
Linz, Austria; and 3Department of Kinesiology, Human Performance Laboratory, St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud,
Minnesota
ABSTRACT
Wagner, H, Gierlinger, M, Adzamija, N, Ajayi, S, Bacharach, DW,
and von Duvillard, SP. Specific physical training in elite male
team handball. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000–000, 2017—
Specific physical training in elite team handball is essential for
optimal player’s performance; however, scientific knowledge is
generally based on temporary training studies with subelite ath-
letes. Therefore, the aim of the study was to analyze the effects
of specific physical training in an elite male handball team over
the entire season. Twelve players of a male handball team from
the First Austrian Handball League conducted a 1-year specific
physical training program in addition to their normal (team hand-
ball techniques and tactics) weekly training. Performance was
measured with 5 general and 4 specific tests as well as game
statistics during competition. Repeated measures analysis of
variances and paired sample t-test were used to analyze differ-
ences in performance during training. We found a significant
increase in oxygen uptake, offense time, defense time, fast break
time, and jump height in the specific tests. Game performance
statistics revealed a lower throwing percentage in the hosting
team (59%) compared with the rival teams (63%). Our results
indicated that specific endurance and agility are an acceptable
modality in elite male team handball. However, performance in
competition is strongly influenced by specific techniques and
tactics. We recommend to strength and conditioning professio-
nals that they tailor strength and power training, coordination
and endurance as specific as possible, using free weights, agility
exercises that include change in direction and jumps as well as
short (10–15 seconds) high-intensity intervals.
KEY WORDS oxygen uptake, strength and power, jump height,
ball velocity, agility
Address correspondence to Dr. Serge P. von Duvillard, spvonduvillard@
aol.com.
00(00)/1–11
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

2017 National Strength and Conditioning Association
Copyright ª 2017 National Strength and Conditioning Association
IN ELITE
INTRODUCTION
T
eam handball is a dynamic sport game that is
characterized by frequent changes in intensities,
high demands on specific techniques, tactics and
cognition as well as challenging physical confron-
tations during the game. The large number of competitions
on a very high level, especially in elite team handball, require
high levels of a player’s physical performance. Consequently,
physical training in elite team handball is essential to
improve performance in competitions to enable an optimal
regeneration between competitions and training and to pre-
vent injuries.
In previous studies, it was found that male team handball
players of varied performance levels differ in upper-body and
lower-body strength and power, body weight and throwing
performance and a lack of general endurance and sprinting
as well as jumping performance (13,33,36,40). However,
using specific agility tests instead of straight sprinting tests
and game-based performance tests (GBPTs) instead of gen-
eral endurance tests, differences were found between elite,
subelite, and nonelite male team handball players in specific
agility and endurance (34). The influence of strength and
power on throwing, jumping and sprinting performance
are well documented (5,19,20,31); but, there is a lack of
scientifically based knowledge and its influence on endur-
ance and coordination on team handball–specific perfor-
mance. Evaluating the physiological capacity and physical
demands during match-play (23,25), the relative workload is
65–80% of the maximal oxygen uptake (V_ O2max) with post-
match blood lactate concentration (BLC) ranging from 3 to
11 mmol$L21. In treadmill running tests (ITRTs), shuttle-run
tests, small-size games and GBPTs, the V_ O2max of elite male
team handball players (2,4,24,34,35) ranged between 50 and
65 ml$kg21$min21 and a peak BLC of 10–12 mmol$L21 was
found in GBPTs (34,35). The positive effect of strength and
power training (11,12,14,18,27,32) and specific endurance
(small-size game, repeated sprints, or high-intensity training
[HIT]) and agility training (3,7,12,39) was found in several
training studies; however, these training studies were con-
ducted during a short training period (6–8 weeks), subelite
and nonelite players, and/or isolated training methods (e.g.,
VOLUME 00 | NUMBER 00 | MONTH 2017 | 1
Training in Elite Team Handball

only bench press training). Unfortunately, these training
studies do not represent the daily strength and conditioning
routines of professionals in elite team handball.
Based on the results of scientific studies in training and
competition as well as practical experience in team handball,
specific physical training should include (1) strength and
power training that significantly influence jumping and
throwing performance as well as physical confrontations in
team handball (2), specific agility training that significantly
influence quickness in team handball offense and defense,
and (3) specific endurance training to delay fatigue in team
handball training and competition. To enable a strong link
between science and practice, which was the main focus of
the present study, specific physical training and all tests to
determine specific and general performance should be a part
of the entire season of training for an elite handball team and
not during a short training period or with isolated training
methods as in previous studies. To the best of our knowl-
edge, this is the first study that measures the influence of
specific physical training in elite team sport over the entire
season. The results of this study should guide strength and
conditioning professionals, athletes, and coaches in team
handball to increase the quality of specific physical training
as well as significantly impact the limited knowledge in team
sport science. Consequently, the aim of the present study
was (1) to analyze general and specific performance of an
elite male handball team, (2) to conduct a specific physical
training program over the entire season based on the player’s
deficits in physical performance, (3) to analyze the differ-
ences in performance because of the physical training, and
(4) to analyze game performance in competition. We
hypothesized to observe an increase in (1) strength and
power, (2) specific endurance, (3) specific agility, and (4)
game performance when specific physical training was part
of the yearly training.
METHODS
Experimental Approach to the Problem
This was a longitudinal training study over a 1-year period
that included the regular competitive season of the Handball
League Austria (HLA) 2015/2016 (Qualification round: 18
games + 1 Cup game, Playoff: 8 games + 1 Cup game,
Quarterfinal: 2 games). As shown in Figure 1, a pretest
was conducted during the postseason 2014/2015, followed
by a second and third test during the preseason 2015/2016.
Pretest, second, and third test as well as posttest consisted of
general tests (isokinetic trunk and shoulder rotation test, iso-
metric leg extension test, countermovement jump [CMJ]
test, incremental ITRT, and 30-m sprint test) and aGBPT.
The fourth test was conducted during the competition break

Figure 1. Description of the study design including tests, specific and general physical training, games and training blocks. (HIT15 s/15 s: High-intensity training
including 5 repetitions and 3 series of 15 seconds high and 15 seconds low intensity, HIT4 min/3 min: High-intensity training including 4 series of 4 minutes high
and 3 minutes low intensity, LIT20 min/LIT40 min: 20/40 minutes low-intensity endurance training).

the TM

2 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright ª 2017 National Strength and Conditioning Association

 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

in January and the posttest between the end of the playoffs to sign a contract with the club indicating that all players
and the first quarterfinal game (Figure 1). In the fourth test, (and therefore all subjects of the study) had to perform all
the subjects have not performed the specific test because of trainings and competitions ensuring training frequency close
the short time for preparation before the playoffs. General to 100% for the entire training period.
and specific tests were used to determine general and team A control group was not incorporated in the study
handball–specific performance that should be increased by because in elite team sports it is virtually impossible to
the specific physical training used in this study. analyze a team of the same league that would strengthen the
Specific physical training was divided into 4 training comparison between control and training group.
blocks with different focus and included low-intensity
endurance training (LIT), HIT with different intervals, Subjects
specific agility training as well as strength and power Twelve male elite (7 players have been selected to the Senior
training. During the preparation phase (first and second or Junior National Team in their country) team handball
training phase), 6–7 training sessions (Figure 2) and in the players (4 wings, 2 pivots, 6 backcourt players; age: 24.6 6
competitive phase of the periodization (third and fourth 5.5 [range: 18–35] years, body mass: 91.2 6 12.5 kg, height:
training phase) 4 training sessions (Figure 3) with specific 1.88 6 0.06 m, training experience: 18.6 6 5.5 years) from
physical training were included in 6–8 training sessions per a club playing in the HLA participated in the present study.
week. The numbers of training sessions per week depend on All subjects provided their written consent to participate in
the timing (e.g., a competition on Sunday needs an addi- this study after being informed of all procedures and risks.
tional tactical training on Saturday) and a number of com- They were physically healthy, in good physical condition
petitions per week. In summary, only 2–4 training sessions and reported no injuries, infections, or cardiopulmonary risk
per week were used exclusively for specific physical training. factors during the time of the study.
All other training sessions per week were combination train- The normal weekly training routine of the players
ing (specific physical training combined with team handball consisted of 6–8 training sessions (100–140 minutes for
technical and tactical training) or exclusive team handball each session) and 1–2 competition games per week. The
technical and tactical training (Figures 2 and 3, respectively). training background of the players was focused on team
All trainings were coached by the head and assistant coach handball–specific training (technical and tactical skills), aer-
of the team and the physical conditioning coach additionally obic and anaerobic training (on- and off-court exercises), and
observed and coached the specific physical components of strength and power training (medicine balls, weightlifting,
training. In elite handball teams, every player of the team had and strength training equipment exercises).
Two subjects (not included
in the 12 subjects described
above) had to be excluded
from the study because of an
anterior cruciate ligament
injury and a later reduced
income to the team (both in
January 2016). None of the
other subjects reported any
current or ongoing neuromus-
cular diseases or musculoskel-
etal injuries during the time of
the study. At the beginning of
the study (pretest), all players
were in the end of the compet-
itive phase (postseason 2014/
2015) of their periodization.
Before participation, the exper-
imental procedures, potential
risks, and benefits of the pro-
ject were fully explained to the
subjects, and they all provided
written informed consent
Figure 2. Example of a training week (week #9) of the second training block. (1RM = 1 repetition maximum; HIT = before entering the study. The
high-intensity training; LIT = low-intensity training; CoD = change in direction; acc = acceleration). study was approved by the
Institutional Review Board of

VOLUME 00 | NUMBER 00 | MONTH 2017 | 3

Copyright ª 2017 National Strength and Conditioning Association

Training in Elite Team Handball
Figure 3. Example of a training week (week #36) of the fourth training block. (1RM = 1 repetition maximum; HIT =
high-intensity training; LIT = low-intensity training; CoD = change in direction; acc = acceleration).
the University of Salzburg, Austria, in accordance with the
Declaration of Helsinki.
Procedures
General Tests. Before testing, subjects were informed about
the nature of the tests and performed a standardized warm-
up of 20 minutes. In the general test block, all subjects
performed a 30-m sprint test, an isokinetic trunk and
shoulder rotation test, an isometric leg extension test,
a CMJ test and an ITRT.
In the 30-m sprint test, each subject performed a sprint as
fast as possible from a standing start with their front foot 1
meter behind the first timing gate. All subjects were
instructed to sprint as fast as possible. To measure sprinting
time, we used 3 light beams (Brower Timing System CM L5;
Brower, UT, USA) placed at 0, 15, and 30 m of the testing
distance. Each light beam consisted of an infrared sender and
an infrared emitter with antennas. Each unit was mounted
on a tripod 1 m above the floor. Data were sent from the
beam sets directly to the handheld coach monitor. Each
subject had to repeat the sprint test twice (2-minute recovery
between tests). The fastest 30-m sprinting time was used for
further calculation. A high test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.94,
CV = 0.04) was found in a similar test (20-m sprint test) in
female soccer players (16).
Isokinetic trunk and shoulder rotation strength tests were
conducted using an IsoMed 2000 dynamometer (D&R Ferstl
GmbH, Hemau, Germany) combined with the manufac-
turer’s attachments for bilateral trunk and unilateral shoulder
rotation. Before testing, subjects were informed about the
nature of the tests and they were asked to perform 4–5
moderate-to-submaximal specific warm-up practice trials
to become familiarized with the testing procedure. To
the TM
4 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright ª 2017 National Strength and Conditioning Association
measure trunk rotation (9,10,29),
subjects sat in the chair of the
IsoMed 2000 in an upright
position with their feet on the
frontal platform to produce
a consistent hip and knee angle
of 908. For fixation, hip and
knee pads were used to restrict
lower-body movement and
a hinged bracket to secure
trunk rotation. For all subjects,
the range of motion was 808
and set to reach rotation from
240 (rotated to the left) to
+408 (rotated to the right)
using an angular velocity of
808 per second with a fast
acceleration at the beginning
and a strong deceleration at
the end of the movement.
Trunk rotation was performed
in both directions (left and
right). To assess shoulder rotation (1,8) of the dominant
arm (throwing arm), subjects were placed on a custom-
made chair with a hip and knee angle of 908 as well as an
arm abduction and elbow flexion of 908 in the frontal plane.
The positions of the chair, height of the dynamometer head,
and the shoulder attachment were adjusted to adapt the
longitudinal axis of the humerus to the rotation axis of the
dynamometer. To fix the upper body, we used Velcro straps
on the backrest of the seat and the dominant arm was
secured on the hinged bracket of the shoulder dynamometer.
For all subjects, the range of motion was 808 and set to reach
10o (arms raised upward) to 908 using an angular velocity of
1508 per second with a fast acceleration at the beginning and
a strong deceleration at the end of the movement. The
shoulder rotation measurement trials were conducted with
30-second recovery time between each trial. For both meas-
urements, we used a rest period of 1 minute between prac-
tice and testing and the tests were introduced by
a standardized verbal countdown. To determine maximal
strength, we calculated the peak torque within a range of
motion of 508 (225/258 for trunk and 25/758 for shoulder
rotation). The highest peak torques for shoulder and trunk
rotation of the 5 trials were used for further calculation. A
high test-retest reliability was found for the trunk rotation
(ICC = 0.89, CV = 0.09) (29) and for a similar protocol as
used for the shoulder rotation (ICC = 0.96) using the IsoMed
2000.
To measure isometric multijoint leg extension strength,
subjects performed a maximal isometric contraction over 3
seconds with one leg (first left) on a leg press in a sitting
position with a hip, knee, and ankle angle of 1008. Leg press
force was measured (150 Hz) by a load cell (HBM load cell
27-2; Hottinger Baldwin Measuring, Darmstadt, Germany)

and maximal force was calculated using our own analysis
software in LabVIEW (LabVIEW 8.1; National Instruments,
Salzburg, Austria). Each test was repeated 3 times with a 20-
second rest between each interval. Maximal leg strength was
defined as the peak force within the measuring interval. A
high test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.96) for isometric multi-
joint leg extension strength was found in a previous study
(26) using a similar measuring protocol.
To determine jump height, subjects performed 3 CMJ’s on
an AMTI force platform (AMTI BP600900-2000; AMTI,
Watertown, NY, USA) from an upright position. Arm swing
was allowed during the jump. Jump height in the CMJ was
calculated by the vertical velocity of the center of mass cal-
culated from force time curves by subtracting body mass,
divided by body mass, and using the trapezoidal rule for
numeric integration with respect to time (38). Data were
recorded and reduced using LabVIEW (LabVIEW 8.1;
National Instruments, Salzburg, Austria). In a validation
study of the CMJ test, a high test-retest reliability (intraclass
correlation coefficients [ICC] = 0.995, coefficient variation
[CV] = 0.02) was found in elite male basketball and soccer
players (28). For leg extension strength and CMJ tests, max-
imal values of the 3 repetitions were included in calculations.
To determine general endurance, all subjects performed
an ITRT. After a 5-minute warm-up at a constant running
speed of 6 km$h21, the ITRT started with an initial tread-
mill speed of 6 km$h21 (hp cosmos Saturn, hp cosmos,
Traunstein, Germany) using a 18 treadmill incline evalua-
tion. Speed increased by 1.5 km$h21 every minute until
volitional fatigue. Initial speed, incremental speed, and
treadmill elevation of 18 were selected to ensure a total
testing time of 8–12 minutes to determine maximal oxy-
gen uptake (V_ O2ITRT) during the ITRT (15,22). During the
test, heart rate (HR) (Suunto T6d; Suunto, Vantaa, Finnland)
and oxygen uptake (ZAN 600 CPET; nSpire Health
GmbH, Oberthulba, Germany) were monitored and re-
corded. Maximal oxygen uptake (V_ O2general) was calculated
by manufacturer’s software and was defined as the maximal
value from a 30-second rolling average. Total testing time
(excluding warm-up) was also measured to determine
endurance running performance. The air condition in the
laboratory enabled a constant temperature/humidity of 228
C/33% and was equivalent for all subjects on testing days.
The high validity and reliability of the used method to
determine maximal oxygen uptake has been shown in sev-
eral studies (17,21,22,37).
Specific Test. Before the test, all subjects were familiarized with
the testing procedures (in 2 additional training sessions before
the test) and testing equipment (on the day of the study). In the
GBPT, all subjects had to perform one warm-up heat and 8
testing-heats including defense, defense to offense, offense,
offense to defense, and breaks. To standardize these actions,
(20-second breaks between the actions within a heat and 40-
second breaks for the determination of BLC between heats),
Copyright ª 2017 National Strength and Conditioning Association
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com
they started with a 3-second acoustic countdown controlled by
Multi-Timer-Ultimate software (Multi-Timer-Ultimate 3.1;
Multi Timer, Wallroth, Germany). All distances during these
actions (6-m line to 9-m line in defense, 9-m line to 12-m line in
offense, 3 m left and right in defense and offense) were
standardized by special markers on the court. During defensive
actions, subjects had to tackle mat roles (to simulate a tackle-
like movement in competition), and in offensive actions,
subjects had to catch and pass the ball during pushing
movements (to simulate pushing movements similar to com-
petition). After the last catch in the offensive action, subjects
had to throw the ball as fast as possible to the left low corner of
the goal after maximal take-off from the left foot (for right-
handed players). A mat role was positioned in front of the goal
similar to the position of the goalkeeper in competition. To
simulate game-specific intensities, defensive and offensive
actions had to be performed once in 5 heats (#1, 2, 5, 7 and
8) and twice in 3 heats (# 3, 4 and 6), whereas these 3 heats
also included fast breaks (# 3 and 6) and/or running backs (#4
and 6). The number of activity changes, changes in direction,
throws, passes, and tackles was selected as described in studies
measured during the competition (24,25). A more detailed
description of the GBPT including figures and tables of the
measuring area and the test protocol was reported in a separate
study (35).
During the GBPT, the peak oxygen uptake (V_ O2specific)
and peak HR (HRspecific) were measured using a portable
respiratory gas exchange measurement analysis system in
the breath-by-breath mode (K4b2; Cosmed, Rome, Italy).
To prevent errors in the determination of V_ O2specific, only
peak values were used where 2 breath-by-breath values
before and after the peak value were not less than 90%.
BLC was obtained from the hyperemic earlobe by an expe-
rienced sport scientist using 20 ml capillary tubes using a fully
enzymatic amperometric measurement system (Biosen
5040; EKF Diagnostics, Leipzig, Germany). The highest
peak value for the V_ O2specific, HRspecific, and BLC of all heats
was used for further calculations. To determine offense and
defense time as well as specific sprinting performance
(sprinting time during fast breaks and running backs), a local
position measuring system (Inmotiotec, Abatec, Regau, Aus-
tria) was used. Data (1000 Hz) from the transponder, fixed at
the waist belt on the subjects, were transmitted to a base
station and 2D positions were calculated by manufacturer’s
computer software. The mean value of all offense, defense,
fast breaks, and running backs in all heats was used for fur-
ther calculations. Ball velocity and jump height during the
jump throws in the GBPT were measured by the calculation
of the 2D-position of the center of the ball and flight time
from high-speed video files (Basler piA640-210gm; Basler
Ag, Ahrensburg, Germany) using PeakMotion (PeakMotion
8.1; Vicon Peak, Oxford, United Kingdom). We used the
mean value of the 4 best ball velocities and jump heights,
out of 7 throw for further calculations. Temperature and
humidity were measured during the GBPT and remained
VOLUME 00 | NUMBER 00 | MONTH 2017 | 5
Training in Elite Team Handball

the same for all subjects during all testing days and ranged throws and additional data of all players, separated in host
within 20–248 C and 30–35%, respectively. and rival teams were summarized and are shown in Figure 4.
The test-retest reliability in the GBPT was determined for The host team comprised all subjects (n = 12) in the study,
V_ O2specific (ICC = 0.92, CV = 0.02), BLC (ICC = 0.80, CV = and all other players of the team (n = 6) competed for the
0.12), HRspecific (ICC = 0.73, CV = 0.03), offense time (ICC = club in the HLA season 2015/2016. The rival teams sum-
0.73, CV = 0.02), defense time (ICC = 0.74, CV = 0.02), fast marized that all other players from all other teams competed
break time (ICC = 0.44, CV = 0.04), ball velocity (ICC = against the host team in the HLA season 2015/2016.
0.76, CV = 0.4), and jump height (ICC = 0.66, CV = 0.16) in
a previous validation study (35). Regarding the validity of the Specific Physical Training. As described in the experimental
GBPT, it was also found that male team handball players of approach to the problem, specific physical training consisted
different performance level (elite, subelite, and nonelite) dif- of 4 training blocks (Figure 1), each with a different focus.
fer significantly (p # 0.05) in V_ O2specific, HRspecific, offense For basic physical training, all players had to perform a 40-
time, defense time, ball velocity, and jump height in the jump minute low-intensity endurance training (LIT40 min) and med-
throw (34) as well as found that the percentage of low icine ball (3–5 kg) throws (10 minutes) one time per week
(;75%), moderate (;15%), and high intensities (;10%) in during the entire training year. Running intensity in the
the GBPT was similar to those in a team handball test game LIT40 min was controlled by the player’s individual training
(35) and in competition (23). HR (determined in the ITRT) using Polar Team App (Polar
H7; Polar Electro Inc., Kempele, Finnland).
Game Performance. To determine the specific performance in In the first training block, all players of the team had to
all games in the HLA season 2015/2016 (n = 30), we used perform high-intensity training (HIT15 s/15 s) (15 seconds
team handball game statistic software (CoachBook Team high/15 seconds low intensity/5 repetitions/3 series) and
Handball App, Zimmermann, Germany). During the game, specific agility training for 40 minutes (including numerous
throwing position, throwing direction (area in the goal or changes in directions, jumps, and short accelerations using
beside the goal), and throwing efficiency (goal, missed, or coordination ladders, hoops, and hurdles as well as passing
goalkeeper save) of every throw from each player of both and throwing drills) one time per week. All HIT15 s/15 s and
teams were inserted on the iPad touch screen in CoachBook specific agility training was included in the regular team hand-
by an experienced team handball statistician. Additional data ball training (combination training). Two times per week, all
as in yellow and red cards, 2-minute suspension, 7-m throw, players performed maximal lower-body and upper-body
fast breaks and technique errors were also documented. All strength training. One set in the lower-body and upper-
body strength training consisted
of 4 net body weight exercises
(sit-ups, whole body rolling
movements, pelvis lifting and
asymmetric leg and arm lifting,
30 reps for each exercise),
bench press in combination
with subsequent 5 medicine ball
throws and back squats with
subsequent 5 CMJs (8–10 reps
with 80% 1 repetition maxi-
mum [1RM] or 1–3 reps with
95–100% of 1RM), power
cleans and overhead squats (15
reps with 60–70% of 1RM),
dumbbell and barbell curls,
strength training equipment ex-
ercises for knee flexion as well
as leg abduction, and adduction
(20 reps with 60–70% of 1RM).
In the first training session, the
following was performed: 3 sets
Figure 4. Game statistics (own team and rival teams) in 26 team handball games in the regular season and
playoffs of the Handball League Austria (HLA) Season 2015/2016. (Perc = throwing percentage; FB = fast break;
(bench press and back squat
7 m = penalty throw; 2 min = two-minutes suspension; Yellow = yellow card; Red = red card). with 80% of 1RM) with a subse-
quent HIT4 min/3 min (4 minutes
the TM

6 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright ª 2017 National Strength and Conditioning Association

 TABLE 1. Mean (6SD) values of the pretest, second (for n = 6 and n = 12 subjects), third, fourth test, and posttest in the specific and general variables as well
as p-value, effect size, and power for repeated measures ANOVA.*
Copyright ª 2017 National Strength and Conditioning Association

3rd test 4th test Posttest

Pretest (n = 6) 2nd test, (n = 6) n = 12 (n = 12) (n = 12) (n = 12) p h2 Power

BLC peak (mmol$L21) 10.6 6 1.7 (10.3 6 1.6) 10.1 6 1.6 8.7 6 1.6 9.0 6 1.9 ,0.05z¶ 0.52 0.72
V_ O2specific (ml$kg21$min21) 45.4 6 4.7 (50.7 6 4.7) 50.2 6 4.1 54.7 6 3.9 55.9 6 3.6 ,0.001†zk¶**†† 0.79 1.00
HRspecific (b$min21) 198 6 14 (191 6 6) 196 6 10 199 6 12 200 6 13 0.44 0.15 0.17
Running time (s) 373 6 68 (413 6 58) 408 6 45 441 6 52 445 6 54 403 6 52 ,0.05§#zz§§ 0.69 0.86
V_ O2general (ml$kg21$min21) 52.0 6 4.0 (54.3 6 4.4) 53.3 6 3.7 52.0 6 4.2 51.6 6 4.1 49.4 6 4.2 ,0.05** 0.59 0.68
HRgeneral (b$min21) 190 6 5 (187 6 9) 190 6 10 188 6 11 188 6 11 191 6 12 0.26 0.35 0.29
Offense time (s) 6.21 6 0.48 (6.16 6 0.27) 6.17 6 0.37 5.91 6 0.30 5.94 6 0.30 ,0.01¶** 0.70 0.96
Defense time (s) 6.39 6 0.06 (6.18 6 0.21) 6.16 6 0.27 5.83 6 0.21 5.95 6 0.25 ,0.001†zk¶**††zz 0.80 1.00
Fast breakacc (s) 2.05 6 0.09 (2.05 6 0.16) 2.06 6 0.13 1.91 6 0.10 1.96 6 0.10 ,0.01z¶ 0.66 0.92
Fast breakthrow (s) 2.10 6 0.09 (1.83 6 0.17) 1.81 6 0.15 1.84 6 0.15 1.80 6 0.15 0.31 0.21 0.22
30-m sprint test (s) 4.09 6 0.24 (4.09 6 0.20) 4.13 6 0.21 3.98 6 0.0.06 3.99 6 0.12 4.11 6 0.18 0.70 0.07 0.10
Jump height throw (m) 0.31 6 0.06 (0.28 6 0.04) 0.29 6 0.07 0.37 6 0.07 0.38 6 0.06 ,0.001zk¶** 0.79 1.00
Ball velocity (m$s21) 24.0 6 1.4 (25.3 6 2.0) 25.1 6 1.7 25.7 6 1.5 26.1 6 2.3 0.30 0.21 0.22
Jump height CMJ (m) 0.41 6 0.07 (0.39 6 0.05) 0.39 6 0.05 0.40 6 0.05 0.40 6 0.05 0.40 6 0.05 0.52 0.12 0.14
Leg strength (N) 2,360 6 180 (2,250 6 180) 2,280 6 260 2,320 6 350 2,420 6 350 2,420 6 350 0.11 0.36 0.43

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Trunk rotation (Nm) 241 6 40 (252 6 45) 244 6 40 240 6 40 241 6 41 236 6 45 0.70 0.07 0.10

the
Shoulder rotation (Nm) 88 6 17 (90 6 18) 84 6 17 81 6 17 80 6 17 80 6 18 0.17 0.42 0.38

*ANOVA = analysis of variance; BLC = blood lactate concentration; HRspecific/V _ O2specific = peak heart rate/oxygen uptake in the game-based performance test;
HRgeneral/V_ O2general = maximal heart rate/oxygen uptake in the incremental treadmill running test; Fast breakacc = fast break time in the first 9 m; Fast breakthrow = fast break time
in the second 9 m that finish with the jump throw.
†Between pretest and second test.
zBetween pretest and third test.
§Between pretest and fourth test.
VOLUME 00 | NUMBER 00 | MONTH 2017 |

kBetween pretest and posttest.

¶Between second and third test.
#Between second and fourth test.
**Between second and posttest.
††Between third and fourth test.
zzBetween third and posttest.
§§Between fourth and posttest.

TM
| www.nsca.com
7
Training in Elite Team Handball

90–95% HRmax/3 minutes 70–75% HRmax/4 series) one In the third and fourth training block, specific agility was
time per week (30) (exclusively physical training). In the sec- reduced to one time per week. Endurance and strength
ond training of the week, 3 sets (bench press and back squats training (in the 2 subgroups) were performed that was
with 95–100% of 1RM) with subsequent technical and tactical equivalent to the second training block. However, in the
team handball training (combination training) were per- fourth training block, bench press and back squats were
formed by all players. The focus in lower-body and upper- trained eccentrically (5–6 reps with 140% of 1RM) instead of
body strength training was to use free weightlifting exercises concentrically (8–10 reps with 80% of 1RM) in the first
as often as possible instead of strength equipment exercises. lower-body and upper-body strength training in the training
In the second training block, specific agility training was week.
increased to 2–3 training sessions per week, whereas the
HIT15 s/15 s was excluded. Based on the results of the second Statistical Analyses
test, the 12 subjects were divided into 2 subgroups of 6 sub- Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS ver. 22.0
jects. The first subgroup (endurance group) performed 3 sets software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). All variables were
of lower-body and upper-body strength training (bench tested for normal distribution, and mean and SDs of the
press and back squats with 80% of 1RM) and a HIT4 min/ variables were calculated for descriptive statistics. To deter-
3 min, and the second group (strength group) performed 5 mine the differences in performance because of the specific
sets of lower-body and upper-body strength training (bench physical training, we calculated a repeated measures analysis
press and back squats with 80% of 1RM) and a 20 minutes of variance (ANOVA) (n = 12) from the second test to the
LIT (LIT20 min) one time per week. Similar to the first train- posttest (factor time) for all variables tested in the specific
ing block, all players performed additional 3 sets of lower- and general tests. Global differences between the tests were
body and upper-body strength training (bench press and considered significant if p-values were less than 0.05. In addi-
back squats with 95–100% of 1RM) with subsequent techni- tion, effect size (h2) and power (b21) were calculated. Effect
cal and tactical team handball training (combination train- size (h2) was defined as low for h2 . 0.01, moderate for h2 .
ing) one time per week. 0.09, and high for h2 . 0.25 (6). To determine significant
differences between each test,
we used the Bonferroni post
hoc tests. Six players missed
the pretest because of no con-
tract at that time (3 players),
one was injured, and 2 players
were absent because of a train-
ing camp with the Austrian
National Team. Therefore, on-
ly 6 subjects performed the
pretest. We additionally calcu-
lated a paired sample t-test (n =
6) from pretest to posttest to
determine the difference in
general and specific perfor-
mance between pretest and all
other tests. All variables of
game performance, separated
in host team and rival teams
were only calculated for
descriptive statistics to ascer-
tain the influence of specific
physical training on perfor-
mance in competition.

RESULTS
Descriptive data of mean, SDs,
Figure 5. Mean values (6SD) in specific peak oxygen uptake (V_ O2specific) and defense time in the game-based and p-values for the repeated
performance test as well as general maximal oxygen uptake (V_ O2general) in the incremental treadmill running test
and 30-m sprint test time. (dashed line: 6 subjects in the pretest and second test; filled line: 12 subjects in the measures ANOVA are pre-
second, third, fourth test, and posttest). * p,0.05; *** p,0.001. sented in Table 1 and Figure
3. To show the differences in
the TM

8 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright ª 2017 National Strength and Conditioning Association


the second test, the mean values 6 SD of the 6 subjects
measured in the pretest and all subjects (n = 12) measured
in all other tests in the study were added in Table 1 and
Figure 3. We found a significant increase in the performance
in the BLC, V_ O2specific, running time, offense and defense
time, fast breakacc time, and jump height in the team hand-
ball jump throw. Analyzing the game performance of the
team during the HLA season 2015/2016, we found a lower
throwing percentage (59% vs. 63%) of the host team com-
pared with the rival teams based on more missed throws
(137 vs. 104) and more saves by the visiting goalkeepers
(325 vs. 304) as shown in Figure 2.
DISCUSSION
The aim of this study was to conduct a specific physical
training program over the entire team handball season based
on the player’s deficits in physical performance and to mea-
sure the increase in specific and general performance.
The general concept of the study was to increase specific
physical performance; however, based on the results of the
pretest and the basic conditions (competition, time for
technical and tactical training, training per week, training
facilities, and gym for training), the detailed plan for physical
training was finalized after the pretest. In the pretest, we
found a V_ O2general (52.0 6 4.0 ml$kg21$min21) that was on
the minimum level (55–65 ml$kg21$min21) found in previ-
ous studies in elite male team handball players (2,4,24).
However, the V_ O2specific measured in the GBPT was lower
(45.4 6 4.7 ml$kg21$min21). Based on these results, we
decided to focus on specific and general endurance in the
first training block. To enable short holidays for all players
during summer, all teams in the HLA normally use this time
of the year for basic training. Although 6 players missed the
pretest because of injuries (1 player), absence because of the
National Team training (2 players), or no contract at that
time (3 players), all players of the team were able to partic-
ipate in the first training block. By performing specific and
general training, it was possible to increase V_ O2specific (+22%)
within this 6-week training block until the second test
(Figure 5 and Table 1). Similar effects of polarized training
(HIT, LIT, and sprints) to V_ O2peak (+11%) was also found in
a 9-week training study of competitive endurance athletes (30).
In the pretest and in the second test, specific agility
(offense, defense, and fast break time) in the subjects of the
present study was similar to those measured in a male
subelite handball team (34). Consequently, we decided to
focus on specific agility in the second training block. As
shown in Figure 5 and Table 1, the combination of 2–3
specific agility training sessions and 2 general endurance
training sessions per week leads to an increase in offense,
defense, and fast break time as well as jump height in the
jump throw and V_ O2specific in the GBPT from the second test
to the third test. We propose that agility training with
numerous changes in direction and jumps in combination
with passing and throwing drills is a very effective training
Copyright ª 2017 National Strength and Conditioning Association
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com
method to increase specific team handball performance.
However, the character of this agility training (high intensi-
ties over 40 minutes) also increased performance in
V_ O2specific (+20%). Similar effects were also found in training
studies comparing team handball small-size games with
high-intensity interval training (3,7). Both training methods
increased V_ O2peak and other specific endurance parameters
but small-size games additionally improved performance in
team handball–specific techniques. We recommend that in
team sports specific agility and endurance training serve as
effective methods to optimize economy in fast accelerations,
decelerations, and changes in direction.
It is well known that in elite male team handball, the
focus during the period of competition is on technical and
tactical training. Therefore, we reduced physical training in
the third and fourth training block (Figure 1). However, the
subjects in the study were able to retain their performance
level from the third test to posttest in specific and general
endurance, specific agility (except defense time), sprinting
performance, strength and power as well as ball velocity,
and jump height in the team handball jump throw (Figure 5
and Table 1).
In numerous studies in team handball, it was suggested
that strength and power are the most important factors in
physical performance of elite male team handball players
(5,13,19,20,33,34,40). Thus, one important aim of the study
was to improve performance in strength and power. There
was no increase in strength and power during the entire
season in the lower body (leg strength) or in the upper body
(trunk and shoulder rotation). Therefore, we considered the
level of strength and power in all players that was already
quite high because of intensive training over several years
that limited an improvement by the addition of 2 more
training sessions per week. A further increase in strength
and power may only be possible by an increase to 3–4 train-
ing sessions per week. The financial possibilities of the most
clubs in the HLA, especially the possibilities of the club that
cooperated in the present study, allowed for only marginal
financial support for the players. Therefore, most players had
to either work or study during the weeks of the study and
that reduced the possibilities of additional training sessions.
However, from a practical point of few, it was important to
reduce the inhomogeneity of the team. That is, especially
true for the pivots that we were able to increase performance
in specific agility and endurance that reduced the difference
compared to the other players.
Physical performance is important in team handball;
however, performance in competition is strongly influenced
by specific techniques and tactics. Game statistics over the
entire season revealed a smaller throwing percentage of the
host team (59%) compared with the rival teams (63%).
Although the host team threw more in all games, the players
scored less goals based on more missed throws and more
saves by the rival goalkeeper (Figure 4). In this context, it has
to be added that 6 players of the team were 21 years old or
VOLUME 00 | NUMBER 00 | MONTH 2017 | 9
Training in Elite Team Handball
younger and had less experience in the HLA. A lower
throwing percentage, especially in match-winning situations
or throwing in closer distances to the goal may be due to
reduced experience of the younger players. In the closer
distance (between 6 and 9 m) in the middle of the field,
the percentage of the host team (65%) was drastically lower
compared with the rival teams (74%) as shown in Figure 4.
From a tactical point of view, the host team had a higher
mismatch in throwing and scoring between the left and the
right backcourt positions that enabled the rival defense to
focus more on the left backcourt. Less experience of the host
team may also explain more 2 minutes suspensions of the
host team and more penalty throws of the rival teams (Fig-
ure 4). Thus, the final performance of the team (eighth place
in the HLA) was not expected at the beginning of the
season.
The current study may be considered somewhat limited
because of the absence of a control group, as the comparison
of a control team with the training group would allow for
a more definitive conclusion about the influence of the used
physical training in relation to performance. As mentioned in
the methods, it is impossible to recruit elite players from
a rival team in the HLA for 4–5 general and specific tests
during the entire game season. However, comparing the
results from the pretest (end of the season 2014/2015) and
the posttest (end of the season 2015/2016), the increase in
physical performance may be justified by the physical train-
ing used in the present study.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
The main goal of the present study was to link science with
practice. Consequently, the used training methods could be
transferred directly to practice. Based on the results of our
study, we offer the following recommendations to strength
and conditioning professionals and coaches in team
handball:
 Strength and power training should include net body
weight exercises for the trunk (basic exercises that are
also used in gymnastics), bench press in combination
with subsequent medicine ball throws, back squats
with subsequent CMJs, power cleans and overhead
squats, dumbbell and barbell curls. Team handball in-
cludes numerous different complex movements in
offense and defense. We, therefore recommend using
free weightlifting exercises instead of fixed strength
equipment exercises as often as possible.
 Coordination training should include specific agility ex-
ercises that have numerous changes in direction,
jumps, and short accelerations using coordination lad-
ders, hoops, and hurdles. We suggest that straight
sprinting exercises are not adequate to improve spe-
cific team handball performance.
 Endurance training should include high-intensity train-
ing with intervals close to team handball–specific
competition (10–15 seconds high intensity). Based
the TM
10 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright ª 2017 National Strength and Conditioning Association
on the results of the present study, the combination of
specific agility training as described above with passing
and throwing drills is a very effective method to
increase specific performance in team handball. To
prevent or reduce fatigue in team handball training
and competition, we suggest training endurance as
specific as possible.
The specific physical training of the present study was
designed for team handball; however, we suggest that the
practical applications may also be very effective in an
adapted form in other team sports, e.g., basketball, American
football, ice hockey, rugby, soccer, volleyball, and others.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors thank all players and officials from the team
handball club HC Linz AG for their commitment during
testing and training as well as for the possibility to finalize
this study. The authors also thank Johannes Dirnberger,
Monika Stadlmann, Philip Fuchs, Patrick Fuchs, Benedikt
Sperl, Martin Breitsching, and Anne Schmauk from the
University of Salzburg as well as Hans-Joachim Menzl from
the University of Minas Gerais in Belo Horizonte, Brazil, for
their support during data recording and reduction. The
results of the current study do not constitute endorsement of
the product by the authors or the NSCA. No founding was
used in the preparation of this manuscript. The authors have
no conflicts of interest to disclose.
REFERENCES
1. Bassett, RW, Browne, AO, Morrey, BF, and An, KN. Glenhumeral
muscle force and moment mechanics in a position of shoulder
instability. J Biomech 23: 409–415, 1990.
2. Buchheit, M. The 30-15 intermitten fitness test: Accuracy for
individualizing interval training of young intermittent sport players.
J Strength Cond Res 22: 365–374, 2008.
3. Buchheit, M, Laursen, PB, Kuhnle, J, Ruch, D, Renaud, C, and
Ahmaidi, S. Game-based training in young elite handball players. Int
J Sport Med 30: 251–258, 2009.
4. Buchheit, M, Lepretre, PM, Behaegel, AL, Millet, GP, Cuvelier, G,
and Ahmaidi, S. Cardiorespiratory responses during running and
sport-specific exercises in handball players. J Sci Med Sports 12: 399–
405, 2009.
5. Chelly, MS, Hermassi, S, and Shephard, RJ. Relationships between
power and strength of the upper and lower limb muscles and
throwing velocity in male handball players. J Strength Cond Res 24:
1480–1487, 2010.
6. Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. New
York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Assosiates, 1988.
7. Dello Iacono, A, Ardigo, LP, Meckel, Y, and Padulo, J. Effect of
small-sided games and repeated shuffle sprint training on physical
performance in elite handball players. J Strength Cond Res 30: 830–
840, 2016.
8. Dillman, CJ, Fleisig, GS, and Andrews, JR. Biomechanics of pitching
with emphasis upon shoulder kinematics. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther
18: 402–408, 1993.
9. Dirnberger, J, Huber, C, Hoop, D, Kosters, A, and Muller, E.
Reproducibility of concentric and eccentric isokinetic multi-joint leg
extension measurements using the IsoMed 2000-system. Isokinetics
Exerc Sci 21: 195–202, 2013.

10. Dirnberger, J, Wiesinger, HP, Kosters, A, and Muller, E.
Reproducibility for isometric and isokinetic maximum knee flexion
and extension measurements using the IsoMed 2000-dynamometer.
Isokinetics Exerc Sci 20: 149–153, 2012.
11. Ettema, G, Glosen, T, and van den Tillaar, R. Effect of specific
resistance training on overarm throwing performance. Int J Sports
Physiol Perform 3: 164–175, 2008.
12. Gorostiaga, EM, Granados, C, Ibanez, J, Gonzalez-Badillo, JJ, and
Izquierdo, M. Effects of an entire season on physical fitness changes
in elite male handball players. Med Sci Sport Exerc 38: 357–366, 2006.
13. Gorostiaga, EM, Granados, C, Ibanez, J, and Izquierdo, M.
Differences in physical fitness and throwing velocity among elite
and amateur male handball players. Int J Sport Med 26: 225–232,
2005.
14. Hermassi, S, Chelly, MS, Fathloun, M, and Shephard, RJ. The effect
of heavy- vs. moderate-load training on the development of
strength, power, and throwing ball velocity in male handball players.
J Strength Cond Res 24: 2408–2418, 2010.
15. Howley, ET, Bassett, DR Jr, and Welch, HG. Criteria for maximal
oxygen uptake: Review and commentary. Med Sci Sport Exerc 27:
1292–1301, 1995.
16. Kutlu, M, Yapici, H, and Yilmaz, A. Reliability and validity of a new
test of agility and skill for female amateur soccer players. J Hum
Kinet 56: 219–227, 2017.
17. Lucia, A, Fleck, SJ, Gotshall, RW, and Kearney, JT. Validity and
reliability of the COSMED K2 instrument. Int J Sports Med 14: 380–
386, 1993.
18. Marques, MC. In-season strength and power training for
professional male team handball players. J Strength Cond Res 32: 74–
81, 2010.
19. Marques, MC, van den Tillaar, R, Vescovi, JD, and Gonzalez-
Badillo, JJ. Relationship between throwing velocity, muscle power,
and bar velocity during bench press in elite handball players. Int J
Sport Physiol Perform 2: 414–422, 2007.
20. McGuigan, MR, Wright, GA, and Fleck, SJ. Strength training for
athletes: Does it really help sports performance? Int J Sport Physiol
Perform 7: 2–5, 2012.
21. McLaughlin, JE, King, GA, Howley, ET, Bassett, DR, and
Ainsworth, BE. Validation of the COSMED K4 b(2) portable
metabolic system. Int J Sports Med 22: 280–284, 2001.
22. Meyer, T, Gabriel, HH, and Kindermann, W. Is determination of
exercise intensities as percentages of VO2max or HRmax adequate?
Med Sci Sport Exerc 31: 1342–1345, 1999.
23. Michalsik, LB, Aagaard, P, and Madsen, K. Locomotion
characteristics and match-induced impairments in physical
performance in male elite team handball players. Int J Sport Med 34:
590–599, 2013.
24. Michalsik, LB, Madsen, K, and Aagaard, P. Physiological capacity
and physical testing in male elite team handball. J Sport Med Phys Fit
55: 415–429, 2015.
25. Michalsik, LB, Madsen, K, and Aagaard, P. Technical match
characteristics and influence of body anthropometry on playing
View publication stats Copyright ª 2017 National Strength and Conditioning Association
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com
performance in male elite team handball. J Strength Cond Res 29:
416–428, 2015.
26. Raschner, C, Platzer, HP, Patterson, C, Werner, I, Huber, R, and
Hildebrandt, C. The relationship between ACL injuries and physical
fitness in young competitive ski racers: A 10-year longitudinal study.
Br J Sport Med 46: 1065–1071, 2012.
27. Rensing, N, Westermann, A, Moller, D, and von Piekartz, H. Effects
of reactive jump training in handball players regarding jump height
and power development in the Triceps Surae muscle [in German].
Sportverletz Sportschaden 29: 236–243, 2015.
28. Rodriguez-Rosell, D, Mora-Custodio, R, Franco-Marquez, F, Yanez-
Garcia, JM, and Gonzalez-Badillo, JJ. Traditional vs. sport-specific
vertical jump test: Reliability, validity, and relationship with the legs
strength and sprint performance in adult and teen soccer and
basketball player. J Strength Cond Res 31: 196–206, 2017.
29. Roth, R, Donath, L, Kurz, E, Zahner, L, and Faude, O. Absolute
and relative reliability of isokinetic and isometric trunk strength
testing using the IsoMed-2000 dynamometer. Phys Ther Sport 24:
26–31, 2017.
30. Stöggl, T and Sperlich, B. Polarized training has greater impact on
key endurance variables than threshold, high intensity or high
volume training. Front Physio 5: 33, 2014.
31. Van den Tillaar, R and Ettema, G. A force-velocity relationship and
coordination patterns in overarm throwing. J Sport Sci Med 3: 211–
219, 2004.
32. van den Tillaar, R and Marques, MC. Effect of different training
workload on overhead throwing performance with different
weighted balls. J Strength Cond Res 27: 1196–1201, 2013.
33. Wagner, H, Buchecker, M, von Duvillard, SP, and Müller, E.
Kinematic description of elite vs. low level players in team-handball
jump throw. J Sport Sci Med 9: 15–23, 2010.
34. Wagner, H, Fuchs, PX, and von Duvillard, SP. Specific physiological
and biomechanical performance in elite, sub-elite and in non-elite
male team handball players. J Sport Med Physic Fitness, 2017. Epub
ahead of print.
35. Wagner, H, Orwat, M, Hinz, M, Pfusterschmied, J, von Duvillard,
SP, and Müller, E. Testing game based performance in team-
handball. J Strength Cond Res 30: 2794–2801, 2016.
36. Wagner, H, Pfusterschmied, J, von Duvillard, SP, and Müller, E.
Performance and kinematics of various throwing techniques in
team-handball. J Sport Sci Med 10: 73–80, 2011.
37. Wagner, H, Stadlmann, M, Wicker, A, Papamichalopoulos, C, and
von Duvillard, SP. Comparison of stationary ZAN 600 to portable
Cosmed K4b2 metabolic cart in experienced game sport athletes.
Int J Sport Exerc Health Res 1: 54–59, 2017.
38. Wagner, H, Tilp, M, von Duvillard, SP, and Müller, E. Kinematic
analysis of volleyball spike jump. Int J Sports Med 30: 760–765, 2009.
39. Young, WB, McDowell, MH, and Scarlett, BJ. Specificity of sprint
and agility training methods. J Strength Cond Res 15: 315–319, 2001.
40. Ziv, G and Lidor, R. Physical characteristics, physiological
attributes, and on-court performances of handball players: A review.
Europ J Sport Sci 9: 375–386, 2009.
VOLUME 00 | NUMBER 00 | MONTH 2017 | 11