Perceptual and Motor Skills, 2009, 108, 670-676.

© Perceptual and Motor Skills 2009

RELATIONS OF ANTHROPOMETRIC PARAMETERS

WITH SCORES ON BASIC AND SPECIFIC MOTOR
TASKS IN YOUNG HANDBALL PLAYERS1

MILVI VISNAPUU AND TOIVO JÜRIMÄE

Faculty of Exercise and Sport Sciences

Centre of Behavioural and Health Sciences
University of Tartu

Summary. — The aim of the present cross-sectional study was to investigate the

relations of anthropometric variables with scores on basic and specific motor tests
for 133 young male handball players. These Estonian boys were divided into four
age groups: 10–11 years (n = 34), 12–13 years (n = 39), 14–15 years (n = 39), and 16–17
years (n = 21). The anthropometric parameters were body height, sitting height,
height with outstretched hands, arm span, leg length, and body mass. Body Mass
Index (kg · m2) was calculated. Basic motor ability tests were 30-m run from stand-
ing position, vertical jump with hands on hip and with arm swing, medicine ball
(1 kg) overhand throw with dominant hand from sitting position, and handgrip
strength. Specific motor ability tests were 4- × 10-m shuttle-run, slalom dribble test,
30-m dribbling test, handball throw with dominant hand from sitting position, ver-
tical jump from one step run-up on dominant leg, and passing the handball on
speed and precision. Relatively few anthropometric parameters were significantly
associated with scores on basic motor tasks in a stepwise multiple regression analy-
sis, but sitting height was significantly associated with scores on all measured basic
motor tests for the 14- to 15-yr.-old group (16.5–52.4%; R2 × 100) and also with spe-
cific motor tests for 12- to 13-yr.-olds and 14- to 15-yr.-olds (13.4–41.6%; R2 × 100).
The anthropometric parameters are then relatively poor predictors for basic and
specific motor ability test scores of young handball players.

Handball is known as a sport which is characterized by repeated ac-

celerations, sprints, jumps, rapid changes in moving directions, a large
number of ball throws, and frequent body contacts between players. To be
successful, regular players’ actions, such as feints, shots, and tackles, have
to be carried out with maximal intensity (Ronglan, Raastad, & Borgesen,
2006).
Successful performance in handball is characterized by several fitness
components such as speed, agility, and vertical jump height; each must
be performed repeatedly with maximal intensity (Hoffmann, Epstein,
Einbinder, & Weinstein, et al. 2000). Throwing velocity, dependent on the
ability to generate speed, is important for success. Strength and explosive
power are important in jumping and change of direction (Young, McDow-
ell, & Bentley, 2001); however, for talent selection in handball only a skill
test was a good indicator (Lidor, Falk, Arnon, Cohen, Segal, & Lander,
1
Address correspondence to Prof. Toivo Jürimäe, Ph.D., Faculty of Exercise and Sport Sci-
ences, University of Tartu, 18 Ülikooli str., Tartu 50090, Estonia or e-mail (toivo.jurimae@
ut.ee).
DOI 10.2466/PMS.108.3.670-676
 ANTHROPOMETRICS, MOTOR PERFORMANCE 671

2005). In sport games, motor abilities are both basic and specific (Gorosti-
aga, Granados, Ibanez, & Izquierdo, 2005; Lidor, et al., 2005). Tests involv-
ing balls and movements used in handball were used in assessing specific
motor abilities; however, there are no standard test batteries for adults or
young players.
The physique and anthropometric variables of players may be essen­
tial for success in sports (Ostojic, Mazic, & Dikic, 2006). Various anthro-
pometric variables have been tested to evaluate the effects of training
(Reilly, Williams, Nevill, & Franks, 2000). More muscular and powerful
players have an advantage in handball (Gorostiaga, et al., 2005). As a rule,
the handball players are tall but the relations of anthropometric measures
with players’ fitness is not well-known. Information is especially scarce for
age groups during adolescence. The influence of rapid growth and simul-
taneous increase in fitness is not well understood.
In this study, anthropometric variables were hypothesized to be more
strongly associated with basic scores rather than on specific motor tasks
simply because more mature children have normally better fitness. An-
thropometric parameters are weak predictors of scores on specific motor
tasks which are needed for agility and technical skills in handball. The
aim of the present cross-sectional study was to investigate the relations of
anthropometric variables with scores on basic and specific motor tasks of
young male handball players.
Method
In total, 133 handball-playing Estonian boys 10 to 17 years old par-
ticipated. They were divided into four age groups: 10–11 years (n = 34),
12–13 years (n = 39), 14–15 years (n = 39), and 16–17 years (n = 21). Biologi-
cal age of the children was not measured as the boys were selected only
by chronological age for competitions. All players belonged to their age-
category of teams participating in the Estonian national championships.
This study was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of the Univer-
sity of Tartu.
From the anthropometric parameters, body height, sitting height,
height with outstretched hands, and arm span were measured to the near-
est .1 cm (Martin metal anthropometer). Leg length was calculated as body
height minus sitting height. Body mass was measured to the nearest .05 kg
(medical balance scale). Body Mass Index (kg · m2) was calculated.
For assessment of basic motor tasks, several tests were used (Lidor, et
al., 2005; Kotzamanidis, 2006): the 30-m run from a standing position on
an indoor handball court (.01-sec. accuracy by an electronic timer), verti-
cal jump on contact platform (Newtest OY, Finland) with hands on hip
and also with arm swing, a medicine ball (1 kg) overarm throw with the
dominant hand and from sitting position, and maximal handgrip strength
 TABLE 1

672
Anthropometric Parameters, General and Specific Motor Test Scores of Young Handball Players: Means and Standard Deviations
Variable 10–11 yr. (n = 34) 12–13 yr. (n = 39) 14–15 yr. (n = 39) 16–17 yr. (n = 21)
M SD M SD M SD M SD
Body height, cm 146.6 6.8 160.1 9.2 173.0 6.4 176.6 7.7
Body mass, kg 37.7 6.1 47.1 8.0 60.9 9.0 68.3 10.3
BMI, kg · m² 17.3 1.7 18.2 1.6 20.4 1.7 21.9 2.0
Arm span, cm 147.1 9.0 160.3 10.4 175.1 8.1 181.1 9.2
Height with outstretched hands, cm 185.4 9.7 202.8 12.5 220.5 9.8 227.3 8.9
Sitting height, cm 75.0 3.0 80.8 4.7 88.0 3.6 89.6 4.8
Leg length, cm 71.6 5.3 79.3 5.1 84.8 4.9 87.0 4.3
Basic Motor Tests
30-m run from standing position, sec. 5.5 0.3 5.1 0.3 4.6 0.3 4.5 0.3
Vertical jump with hands on hip, cm 23.6 4.5 27.9 4.1 32.3 4.6 35.7 6.2
Vertical jump with hands swing, cm 28.7 5.0 33.8 4.0 37.9 5.1 41.6 5.4
Medicine-ball (1 kg) throw with dominant hand
from sitting position, m 4.7 0.9 6.8 1.4 10.6 2.2 12.9 2.2
Handgrip strength of the dominant hand, kg 16.3 6.1 26.9 8.1 42.3 8.0 48.1 11.0
Specific Motor Tests
M. VISNAPUU & T. JÜRIMÄE

4- × 10-m shuttle run, sec. 12.1 0.7 11.4 0.7 10.8 0.5 10.4 0.5
Slalom dribble test, sec. 21.9 2.6 18.8 2.0 16.6 1.1 16.4 1.4
30-m dribbling test, sec. 6.1 0.5 5.5 0.4 5.0 0.3 4.8 0.3
Handball throw with dominant hand from
sitting position, m 9.1 1.9 13.4 3.1 19.1 3.6 21.9 3.3
Vertical jump from dominant leg, cm 20.1 5.5 23.0 3.1 27.9 4.9 31.8 6.1
Handball pass on speed and precision, m/30 sec. 12. 6 3.1 16.7 3.3 19.2 2.9 19.3 4.2
Note.—In anthropometric parameters there were significant differences between pairs of age groups ( p  < .05). From the basic motor tests in
each older age group means were significantly better in 30-m run, vertical jump with arms swing (except between 14- to 15-yr.-olds and 16- to
17-yr.-olds), medicine-ball throw in sitting position, and handgrip strength. In all, used specific motor tests scores of the oldest age group were
significantly better than in the younger ones.
 ANTHROPOMETRICS, MOTOR PERFORMANCE 673

of the dominant hand using a hand dynamometer (Lafayette Instruments,

USA). Hand dominance was the boys’ response to which hand was used
to throw a ball.
For measuring specific motor tasks, several tests were given (Lidor,
et al., 2005; Visnapuu & Jürimäe 2008): 4- × 10-m shuttle run in an indoor
handball court, slalom dribble test during which boys dribbled a handball
around six cones and finished the test with a jump shot on the goal, 30-m
dribbling test, a handball throw with the dominant hand from sitting posi-
tion, a vertical jump from a one-step run-up on dominant leg on a contact
platform (Newtest OY, Finland), and passing the handball on both speed
and precision. The line for the pass was drawn on the floor on 3 m from
the wall. A 40- × 40-cm square was drawn on the wall with the lower board
180 cm from floor. Boys stood behind the line in a comfortable catching
or passing position and passed to the target on the wall with maximum
speed during 30 sec. Two investigators recorded all passes players per-
formed accurately on target.
In every basic or specific motor test there were three attempts and the
best scores was used for each. Before testing, a standardized warm-up (10
to 15 min.) in a group organized by the coach was used (light running,
jumping, and stretching exercises).
The mean values and standard deviations were calculated. Statistical
comparisons between the groups were made using independent t tests.
The association of anthropometric parameters with different basic and
specific motor test scores were calculated using stepwise multiple regres-
sion. Statistical significance was set at p < .05.

TABLE 2
Stepwise Multiple Regression: Basic Motor Tests and Anthropometric Parameters
Dependent Variable Age (yr.) Independent Variable R 2 × 100 F p
30-m run 10–11 Body height 10.92 5.04 .03
14– 15 Sitting height 16.48 8.50 .006
Vertical jump
Hands on hip 14– 15 Sitting height 22.95 12.32 .001
Hands swing 10– 11 Leg length 13.82 3.65 .04
14– 15 Sitting height 23.17 12.46 .001
Medicine ball throw 10– 11 Body height 36.91 20.31 < .001
14– 15 Sitting height 37.31 23.62 < .001
16– 17 Arm span 54.61 25.06 < .001
Handgrip strength 10– 11 Body mass 43.80 26.72 < .001
12– 13 Body mass 27.55 15.45 < .001
14– 15 Sitting height 52.35 21.87 < .001
16– 17 Body mass 43.83 16.60 .001
674 M. VISNAPUU & T. JÜRIMÄE

Results
Not surprisingly, there were significant differences between each pair
of age groups in body height, body mass, Body Mass Index, arm span,
height with upstretched hands, sitting height, and leg length ( p < .05, cf.
Table 1). In successive older age groups, means were significantly better in
the 30-m run, the vertical jump with hands on hip (except between the 14-
to 15-yr.-olds and the 16- to 17-yr.-olds), the vertical jump with arm swing
(except between the 14- to 15-yr.-olds and the 16- to 17-yr.-olds), the medi-
cine ball throw in a sitting position, and handgrip strength. On all of the
specific motor tests, the mean for each older age group was significantly
better than that for the younger group (p = .05 to .001).

TABLE 3
Stepwise Multiple Regression: Specific Motor Tests and Anthropometric Parameters
Dependent Variable Age, yr. Independent Variables R 2 × 100 F p
4- × 10-m shuttle run 10– 11 BMI 12.33 3.32 .05
Body height
14– 15 Sitting height 13.67 7.02 .01
Vertical jump from dominant leg
12– 13 BMI 8.04 4.32 .05
14– 15 Sitting height 13.41 6.89 .02
Handball pass on speed and precision
12– 13 Sitting height 21.56 6.22 .004
Handball throw from sitting position
10– 11 Body height 45.19 28.21 < .001
Height with out-
12– 13
stretched hands 55.05 48.69 < .001
14– 15 Sitting height 41.59 14.53 < .001
16– 17 Arm span 61.17 32.50 < .001

The basic motor tasks were selected as dependent variables and an-
thropometric parameters as independent variables of the stepwise mul-
tiple regression analyses (Table 2). There were relatively few anthropo-
metric parameters which were significantly associated with scores on the
basic motor tasks. It was interesting but expected that sitting height was
significantly associated with scores on all measured basic motor tests for
the 14- to 15-yr.-old group (16.5 to 52.4%, R2 × 100). Only scores on some of
the specific motor tasks were predicted by the anthropometric parameters
(Table 3). The most important of course was sitting height which was also
associated with different test scores by 13.4 to 41.6% (R2 × 100).
Discussion
In the present study, there were relatively few significant associations
for scores on vertical jump tests and the anthropometric parameters. In 14-
 ANTHROPOMETRICS, MOTOR PERFORMANCE 675

to 15-yr.-old players, sitting height was more important for vertical jump
with hands on the hip by 23.0% ( p < .001) or vertical jump with arm swing
by 23.2% ( p < .001), and vertical jump from the dominant leg by 13.4%
( p < .01). A relatively low association of anthropometric parameters on ex-
plosive strength of the lower limbs in this study was consistent with ear-
lier findings (Bencke, Damsgaard, Saekmose, Jørgensen, & Klausen, 2002).
Several researchers have reported significant relations of anthropometric
parameters with anaerobic peak power (Blimkie, Roache, Hay, & Bar-Or,
1988; Van Praagh, Fellmann, Bedu, Falgairette, & Coudert, 1990). Howev-
er, it is well-known that the legs’ explosive strength peak coincides with
peak height velocity (Van Praagh, et al., 1990).
Short distance runs of 20 to 30 m are fundamental in team handball,
as during a fast break or while returning to defense after a ball loss (Lidor,
et al., 2005). Kotzamanidis (2006) reported that anthropometric parameters
were not correlated significantly with any running phases (0–10 m, 10–20
m, 20–30 m, 0–30 m) during a 30-m run by prepubertal boys. In the pres-
ent study, body height was singularly effective for the 30-m run for 10.9%
( p < .03) for the age group 10–11 years, while in the 14- to 15-yr. age group,
sitting height was important for 16.5%, (p < .006).
In handball, the players predominantly use only one arm so one might
presume training would induce different effects on arm strength (Bencke,
et al., 2002). The higher association of scores on throwing tests with the
dominant hand and the anthropometric parameters could be explained as
better technical performance (Van den Tillaar & Ettema, 2004). This would
make possible better advantage from body composition, especially the
several body-height dimensions. In the multiple-regression analysis, the
relations of the medicine ball throw with anthropometric parameters was
highest for the age group 12–13 years. Height with upstretched hands, to-
gether with body mass, were important for the medicine ball throw by
61.8% ( p < .000).
The major finding of this study, then, was that the anthropometric pa-
rameters are relatively poor predictors for scores on basic and specific mo-
tor abilities tasks in handball which require agility, explosive strength of
lower limbs, precision, movement speed, and handball-specific skills. At
the same time, anthropometric parameters were significantly related to
scores on general and handball-specific throwing tests and static strength
of upper limbs in young handball players of different age groups.
REFERENCES
Bencke, J., Damsgaard, R., Saekmose, A., Jørgensen, K., & Klausen, K. (2002) An-
aerobic power and muscle strength characteristics of 11-year-old elite boys and
girls from gymnastics, team handball, tennis and swimming. Scandinavian Journal
of Medicine & Science in Sports, 12, 171-178.
676 M. VISNAPUU & T. JÜRIMÄE

Blimkie, C. J., Roache, P., Hay, J. T., & Bar-Or, O. (1988) Anaerobic power of arms
in teenage boys and girls: relationship to lean tissue. European Journal of Applied
Physiology and Occupational Physiology, 57, 677-683.
Gorostiaga, E. M., Granados, C., Ibanez, J., & Izquierdo, M. (2005) Differences in
physical fitness and throwing velocity among elite and amateur male handball
players. International Journal of Sport Medicine, 26, 225-232.
Hoffman, J. R., Epstein, S., Einbinder, M., & Weinstein, Y. (2000) A comparison be-
tween the Wingate Anaerobic Power Test to both vertical jump and line drill tests
in basketball players. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 14, 261-264.
Kotzamanidis, C. (2006) Effect of plyometric training on running performance and
vertical jumping in prepubertal boys. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research,
20, 441-445.
Lidor, R., Falk, B., Arnon, M., Cohen, Y., Segal, G., & Lander, Y. (2005) Measure-
ment of talent in team handball: the questionable use of motor and physical tests.
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 19, 318-325.
Ostojic, S. M., Mazic, M., & Dikic, N. (2006) Profiling in basketball: physical and
physiological characteristics of elite players. Journal of Strength and Conditioning
Research, 20, 740-744.
Reilly, T., Williams, A. M., Nevill, A., & Franks, A. (2000) A multidisciplinary ap-
proach to talent identification in soccer. Journal of Sport Sciences, 18, 695-702.
Ronglan, L. T., Raastad, T., & Borgesen, A. (2006) Neuromuscular fatigue and re-
covery in elite female handball players. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Sci-
ence in Sports, 16, 267-273.
Van den Tillaar, R., & Ettema, G. (2004) Effect of body size and gender in overarm
throwing performance. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 91, 413-418.
Van Praagh, E., Fellmann, N., Bedu, G., Falgairette, G., & Coudert, J. (1990) Gender
difference in the relationship of anaerobic power to body composition in children.
Pediatric Exercise Science, 2, 336-348.
Visnapuu, M., & Jürimäe, T. (2008) The influence of basic body and hand anthropom-
etry on the results of different throwing tests in young handball and basketball
players. Anthropologischer Anzeiger, 66, 225-236.
Young, W. B., McDowell, M. H., & Bentley, J. S. (2001) Specificity of sprint and agility
training methods. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 15, 315-319.

Accepted March 9, 2009.