To Dimensional Dynametical Analysis of Set Shot

Among Basketball Players

A
Project presented to the
Netaji Subhash Southern Center, Bangalore
In
Partial fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Diploma in

SPORTS
COACHING IN
BASKETBALL

Submitted By
ABHIMANYU SINGH RAJPUROHIT
Roll No.: 127 - BB - 2K22

Submitted to:
CHIEF COACH SHRI
ASHFAQUE COACH
SHRI VINOD P.G.
ASST. COACH SHRI KARTHIKEYAN
B.V.

DEPARTMENT OF BASKETBALL
SAI NSSC BANGLORE

SESSION: 2022-2023
 DECLARATION

I, ABHIMANYU SINGH RAJPUROHIT certify that the work embodied

in this project is my own bonafide work, carried out by me under the
supervision of Chief Coach Shri ASHFAQUE, Coach Shri Vinod P.G.
and Asst. Coach Shri Karthikeyan B.V. at the Department of SAI NSSC
BANGLORE.

The matter embodied in Dissertation has not been submitted for the award
of any other degree/diploma.

I declare that I have faithfully acknowledged, given credit to and referred to

the research workers wherever their works have been cited in the text and
the body of the project. I further certify that I have not willfully lifted up
some other’s work and cited as my own work.

I understand that any violation will be cause for disciplinary action by the
NIS.

Date: 30-06-2023
Place: BANGALORE Name of the candidate

ABHIMANYU SINGH
RAJPUROHIT
Roll No.: 127 - BB - 2k22
Basketball trainee coach
2022-2023
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that this project entitled “TO DIMENSIONAL

DYNAMETICAL ANALYSIS OF SET SHOT AMONG
BASKETBALL PLAYERS”

Embodies the work carried out by Mr. ABHIMANYU SINGH

RAJPUROHIT himself under our supervision and that is worthy of
consideration for the award of the Diploma of sports coaching.

Mentor’s Signature
SHRI ASHFAQUE
Chief Head Coach Basketball

Joint-Mentor’s Signature Joint-Mentor’s signature’s

SHRI VINOD P.G. SHRI KARTHIKEYAN
B.V.

Coach Basketball Asst. Coach Basketball

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

My sincere gratitude to Ms. Ritu A Pathik, Regional Director I/C, SAI NSSC BANGALORE
for giving me an opportunity to take up this study.

I am also thankful to Mr. Vinod Narayan Assistant Director (Academics) SAI NSSC
BANGLORE for permitting me to undertake this project work.

I take this opportunity to express my profound & sincere gratitude to my supervising

teacher, Chief Coach Shri ASHFAQUE, Coach Shri Vinod P.G. and Asst. Coach
Shri Karthikeyan B.V. Department of Basketball, SAI NSSC BANGALORE for the
valuable guidance & encouragement throughout on the period of study.
I express my sincere gratitude to Department of Basketball SAI NSSC BANGALORE for his
sincere encouragement and the valuable help in completing this study within the stipulated
time.

I greatly indebted to my parents for their moral support at all level.

Above all I thank God Almighty for the blessing showered on me for completing this study
successfully

Place: Bangalore

Date: 30-06-2023 Submitted by:

ABHIMANYU SINGH RAJPUROHIT

Roll No.: 127 - BB - 2k22

Basketball trainee coach
2022-2023
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Sr.No. TITLES PAGE No.

1. INTRODUCTION 1-25
History Of Basketball
Basketball national and international
Basketball in India
Statement of the problem
Objective

2. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 26-32

3. METHODOLOGY 33-53
ANALYSIS OF THE DATA AND RESULT OF 54-92
4. STUDY
5. SUMMARY 93-99

6. BIBLIOGRAPHY 100-106
 A Project Report ON

TO DIMENSIONAL DYNAMETICAL ANALYSIS OF SET SHOT AMONG

BASKETBALL PLAYERS

Submitted to:

Sports Authority of India, NSSC, Bangalore

In the partial fulfillment of the requirements for The

Diploma Course in sports Coaching Basketball

Prepared by:

ABHIMANYU SINGH
RAJPUROHIT
Roll No.: 127 – BB –2K22
DIPLOMA TRAINEE
BASKETBALL
2022-23

1
 INTRODUCTION

The most powerful nations of the world namely USA, Russia, France, Australia,
China etc are strong enough not only in world economics, arm-forces or in science
technology but these are also advanced in the field of sports, therefore it is quite
apparent that to exist strongly on world map nation has to be advance in the field
of sports also. To achieve the same adoption of new techniques and methodology
is highly required in sports sciences and physical education. Kim L. (1993) studied
the kinematical analysis of the flight phase in the long jump. It was found that
many kinematical variables like Knee andelbow joints contributes in gaining
good flight phase in long jump. Mr. Muralitharan’s spin bowling action was
analyzed in the BiomechanicalLaboratory of the school of Human Movement and
Exercise sciences of WesternAustralia. It was also viewed that wrist abduction
was seemed to be the major reason for production of impressive ‘Dusra’.
Motoyasu, Koshiyama and Katsumata (2009) examined the effects of joint
movement on the accuracy of 3- point shooting in basketball and found that the
distance between a ball and the center of the ring showed significant positive
correlations with the ball release velocity, ball release angle, the ankle plantar
flexion angle, hip angular acceleration, knee angular acceleration and ankle
angular acceleration. Ikai M. and Matsumoto Y. (1984) made scientific
investigations on the principles underlying the various techniques used in Judo,
first analyzed the techniques, and made observations on their kinematics, and
further wished to synthesize by adding psychological and physiological
investigations. It was found that in the Hiza- guruma velocity was the lowest with
1.95 m/s. Sciences of applied mechanism are fulfilling these demands of high
technological knowledge for the enhancement of performance in the field of
sports. Physical education reaching new heights and providing equal to
expectations of the demand of this professionbut still lot more is to be done.
Inspite of our hectic efforts in the formation ofthe front line to achieve excellence
in sports, the performance level has not been seen up to the mark. Therefore, in
the latter part of this century, our experts are concentrating on scientific research
to providing adequate information and proper training along with an effective
2
system of providing better human resources for future India.
As we know that for enhancement in game and sport its techniques should
be mastered. For improving the techniques or to work upon it, it is very important
to analyze it, so as to know what are the motor and mechanical variables of the
techniques which must be given due attention for improving that particular
technique. This study had been taken to analyze the technique of set shot while
attempting free throws, so that those effective variables could be known which
contributes to the effectiveness of the technique in male categories. Depending
upon those contributing variables, effective training can be given to players. To
identify a movement as an economic one, it is very essential to analyze the
movement first. Sometimes, it is very difficult for a human eye to analyze all the
movements of various body segments and joints at the same time. So, various
instruments like still camera, video camera, markers etc are used to analyze
various movements. Further the technology moved the analysis processes to
software also. This is a quantitative method which is very accurate but at the same
time it is very costly and time consuming. The role of videography and use of
motion analysing softwares in biomechanical research is getting enriched day by
day. The role of videography or cinematography in biomechanical research
involved from a simple form of recording motion to a sophisticated means of
computer analysis of motor efficiency.

3
 Biomechanics can be defined as ‘the science that examines forces acting
upon and within a biological structure and effects produced by such forces’. The
‘biological structure’ in this context can be wide spread and covers systems of
different levels: cells, tissue, joints, segments, the entire body or even a complex
system consisting of several bodies or the human body in combination with the
surroundings (water, air, equipment, floor etc.). The main focus of applied sport
biomechanics research is primarily directed to the entire human body in the
complex sport discipline or sport specific situation. Among others, biomechanical
research primarily deals with the following issues:
• gaining a better understanding of human posture, locomotion and
movement
• increasing the understanding of the mechanics, structure and function of
biological structures
• establishing biomechanical principles
• studying the biological response of mechanical loading.

The main goals of biomechanical research are to enhance performance in

movement and to improve subject specific comfort in movement and locomotion.
Biomechanical research is characterized by its interdisciplinary approach with
other related fields such as medicine, neuroscience, physics and engineering. The
content of biomechanics can be separated in three main areas with substantial
overlapping: medicine, engineering as well as movement and sport science. The
area of movement and sport science covers important interactions with motor
control, training science, exercise physiology and orthopaedics. Due to the wide
scope of application, sport biomechanics represents one of the main subcategories
of biomechanics. The sportsbiomechanical research primarily covers issues of-
• performance enhancement
• comfort
• injury prevention and
• safety.

4
 As in other scientific disciplines, sports biomechanics can be separated into
basic and applied fields. Basic research deals with aspects to better understand the
mechanics and control mechanisms of human sport movement and to investigate
the response of loading in sport movements on biological structures. The applied
field in sports biomechanics is very wide due to the manifold of characteristics of
movement and locomotion in sports. The most important issues of the applied
research are

• the application of biomechanical knowledge provided from basic research

to sports in general,
• the biomechanical description and analysis of sport movements,
• the development of specific measurement and analysis methodology,
• the development and design of sport equipment,
• the effect of mechanical intervention (e.g. material, surface, equipment) on
movement and motor control.

Due to its specificity, the research of applied sports biomechanics is

confronted with significant and substantial challenges. The specific and partly
very complex circumstances of sport and sport disciplines (e.g. competition area,
surface, material, equipment, partners and/or opponents, etc.) have to be
considered and necessitate the development of appropriate biomechanical
measurement and research methodologies. In close cooperation between
biomechanical research groups and appropriate companies a large number of
measurement devices and software packages have already been developed and are
available on the market. For many very specific research questions and
applications, however, these standard packages often are not adequate and not
sufficient. In these cases innovative and appropriate hardware and software
solutions have to be developed. A large number of sophisticated and useful
solutions to these challenges have already been reported for many sport
disciplines. Worth to mention is that these innovatively developed methods as a
matter of course also have to cover the scientific demands of validity, reliability
and accuracy. Furthermore, the more practical issues like range of usage,
5
transfer, complexity, range of motion to be analyzed, expenditure of time for
data collection and data analysis, handling of the equipment, costs and theamount
of interference of the measuring devices with the athletes have to be considered if
the methodology should be used as a standard tool for training support and
competition preparation. One of the most important challenges in applied sports
biomechanics is to overcome the discrepancy between reliability and validity of
the collected data sets. In general, reliability (accuracy of determining or
measuring the parameter value) and validity (degree to which a test or system
measures what it was designed to measure) are independent from each other. In
applied research fields like sports biomechanics, however, an interaction between
reliability and validity might occur. This conflict often corresponds to the issue
of collecting data in a lab or field situation. Usually, data collected in the lab are
more accurate and reliable, but the validity can be substantially restricted. This
should be explained by an illustrative example. Simulated take-offs in ski jumping
performed on force plates provide veryaccurate and reliable data regarding the
kinematics and dynamics of the take-off movement. It has to be considered,
however, that in the lab situation the mechanical conditions are substantially
different from hill jumps due to the differing friction and aerodynamic force
situation. In simulated take-offs the friction between the boots and the surface is
high and no aerodynamic forces act on the jumper. In hill jumps the conditions
are vice versa (low friction between skis and track, high aerodynamic forces).
Thus, the validity of the collected data might be substantially restricted. This has
to be considered when the data are

6
interpreted with respect to performance and coordination abilities. Data collected
in the field typically provide the opposite situation: high validity, but the accuracy
and reliability might be restricted due to the lack of appropriate measurement
devices. Up to now no measuring system is available, for example, to determine
the ground reaction forces in hill jumps in three dimensions. In competitive sport,
the highest level of validity can only be guaranteed when data are collected during
competitions; however, the regulations hamper the usage of biomechanical
methodology in competitive conditions substantially. To overcome these
problems data can be collected in semi-competitive situations. This can be
performed in field studies providing conditions as close as possibleto competitive
situations, but also by mimicking competitions using simulation and/or imitation
conditions. The ‘golden standard’ is to establish measurement methods and
conditions providing a combination of high validity, reliability and accuracy.
Consequently, sport biomechanists should perform detailed error estimation in
each specific situation of data collection for providing detailed information on
data accuracy. Hence, specifically in complex situations, differentiated error
estimation is challenging due to overlapping of errors from different sources. It
can be distinguished between systematic errors (e.g. image distortion, calibration
errors, placement of markers and electrodes, level of model abstraction) and
random errors (e.g. errors due to signal resolution and sampling frequency,
digitizing errors, cross talk etc.). In general, systematic errors are harmless when
data sets are compared relatively. Although random errors can be severe,
substantial reduction can be achieved by using appropriate

7
filter and/or frequency analysis routines. Careful attention should be given to the
issue of biovariance. As it is well known that repeated movements never can be
performed identically, repeated movements have to be interpreted within a
meaningful range of deviation. Hence, these deviations must not be assessed as
errors. Nevertheless, the range of deviation has to be discussed along with the
optional errors in data acquisition and data analysis. Surprisingly, the report of
accuracy, reliability, error estimation and validity is rather humble in papers
dealing with applied biomechanics topics. These aspects, however, are very
important to prevent researcher, coaches and athletes from misleading or
misinterpretation of collected data.
Biomechanical principles are applied by scientists and professional in a
number of fields in addressing problems related to human health and
performance. Knowledge of basic biomechanical concepts is also essential for the
competent physical education teacher, physical therapist, physician, coach,
personal trainer or exercise instructor. An introductory course in biomechanics
provides foundational understanding of mechanical principles and how they can
be applied in analyzing movements of the human body. The knowledgeable
human movement analyst should be able to answer many basic questions related
to biomechanics like what are the mechanical principles behind variable resistance
exercise machines? What is the safest way to lift a heavy object? Which
movement is more/less economical? At what angle should a ball be thrown for
maximum distance? From what distance and angle is it best toobserve a patient
walk down a ramp or a volleyball player execute a service?

8
What strategies can an elderly person or a football lineman employ to maximize
stability?
Sport biomechanists have also directed efforts at improving the technique
components of athletic performance. They have learned, for example, that factors
contributing to superior performance in the long jump, high jump and pole vault
include large horizontal velocity going into takeoff and a shortened last step that
facilitates continued elevation of the total-body center of mass. Examples of well
known athletes easily display the importance of biomechanical technology in
improving performance. In 1996 Summer Olympics held at Atlanta, Michael
Johnson used the golden shoes because of Biomechanical reasons. Actually he
was prepared for the 1988 Summer Olympics in Seoul, but developed a stress
fracture of his left fibula before the U.S. Olympic Trials began. He did not qualify
in the 400 meters and he withdrew from the 200 meters. In fact his feet are
different in size. Johnson entered the Olympic finals donning a custom-designed
pair of golden-colored Nike racing spikes made with Zytel. Biomechanists
preferred some specifications in his running spikes. They preferred spikes
weighed 3 ounces (85 g) and the left shoe was a size 10.5 while the right shoe was
a US size 11, to account for Johnson's shorter left foot. Finally he became the first
man to win the 200 m and 400 m in the same Olympics and took 0.34 seconds off
his own 200m world record, which he set two months earlier on the same track at
the Olympic trials. Sport biomechanists have directed efforts at improving
technique components of a player to enhance performance. They have learned,
for example, that factors contributing to

9
superior performance in the long jump, high jump and pole vault include large
horizontal velocity going into takeoff and a shortened last step that facilitates
continued elevation of the total-body center of mass. One example of performance
improvement, partially attributed to biomechanical analysis, is the case of four-
time Olympic Discuss champion Al Oerter. Mechanical analysis of the discus
throw requires precise evaluation of the major mechanical factors affecting the
flight of the discus. These factors are the speed of the discus whenit is released
by the thrower, the projection angle at which the discus is released, the height
above the ground at which the discus is released and the angle of attack. By using
computing simulating techniques, researchers can predict the needed combination
of values for these four variables that will result in a throw of maximum distance
for an athlete. High-speed cameras can record performances in great deal and
when the film or videotape is analyzed, the actualprojection height, velocity and
angle of attack can be compared to the computer- generated values required for
optimal performance. At the age of 43, oerter bettered his best Olympic
performance by 8.2 meters. Although it is difficult to determine the contributions
of motivation and training to such an improvement, some part of oerter’s success
was a result of enhanced technique following biomechanical analysis.
P T Usha finished first in the semi-finals of the 400 metres hurdles in the
1984 Los Angeles Olympics, but faltered in the finals. In almost a repeat
of Milkha Singh's 1960 feat, there was a nail-biting photo finish for the third place.
Usha lost the bronze by 1/100th of a second. She became the first Indian

10
woman (and the fifth Indian) to reach the final of an Olympic event. It shouldnot
be misunderstood if said that had Biomechanical analysis done on these Indian
Athletes, India would not have lost by 1/100th of seconds. If a biomechanical
technology can put some contribution in the performance improvement i.e., 0.34
seconds and 8.2 meters of Olympians. Then, we have to accept that biomechanics
would have improved over Olympians with atleast a few seconds and distance.
Other concerns of sport biomechanists relate to minimizing sport injuries through
both identifying dangerous practices and designing safe equipment and apparel.
In recreational runners, for example, research shows that the most serious risk
factors for overuse injuries are training errors such a sudden increase in running
distance and intensity, running on cambered surfaces and improper footwear. The
complexity of safety-related issues increases when the sport is equipment-
intensive. An area of biomechanical research with implications of both safety and
performance is sport shoe design. Today sport shoe are designed to prevent
excessive loading and related injuries and to enhance performance. Biomechanics
is contributing tothe knowledge base on the full gamut of human movement, from
the gait of the physically challenged child to the technique of the elite athlete.
Because of continuing advances in scientific analysis, the role of biomechanics in
contributing to performance improvements is likely to be increasingly important
in the future.
Kinematics is the study of bodies in motion without regard to the causes
of the motion. It is concerned with the describing and quantifying both the linear

11
and angular positions of the bodies and their time derivatives. Kinematics is the
preferred analytical tool for researchers interested in questions such as, who is
faster? What is the range of motion of a joint? How do two motion patterns differ?
Kinematic analysis may be an end in itself or an intermediate step that enables
subsequent kinetic analysis. The most common method for collecting kinematic
data uses an imaging or motion-caption system to record the motion ofmarkers
affixed to a moving subject, followed by manual or automatic digitizing to obtain
the coordinates of the makers. These coordinates are then processed to obtain the
kinematic variables that describe segmental or joint movements. Biomechanist
interested in improving athletes. It is ideal for the analysis ofsingle movements
or intervals of exercise lasting up to minutes. The most cost- effective method is
qualitative analysis, in which the athletes, coach or sport scientist simply view the
video together and decide immediately how technique could be improved. The
athlete can then attempt any recommended changes and the filmed for a further
round analysis.

Basketball is a team sport in which two teams of 5 active players each try
to score points against one another by placing a ball through a 10 foot high hoop
(the goal) under organized rules. Basketball is one of the most popularand widely
viewed sports in the world. Points are scored by throwing (shooting) the ball
through the basket from above, the team with more points at the end of the game
wins. The ball can be advanced on the court by bouncing it (dribbling) or passing
it between teammates. Disruptive physical contact (foul) is penalized and there
are restrictions on how the ball can be handled (violations).Through

12
time, basketball has developed to involve common techniques of shooting,
passing and dribbling, as well as player’s positions and offensive and defensive
structures. Typically, the tallest members of a team will play center or one of two
forward positions, while shorter players or those who possess the best ball
handling skills and speed, play the guard positions. While competitive basketball
is carefully regulated, numerous variations of basketball have developed for casual
play. In some countries, basketball is also a popular spectator sport. While
competitive basketball is primarily an indoor sport, played on a basketball court,
less regulated variations played in the outdoors have become increasingly popular
among both inner city and rural groups. Dr. James Naismith was instrumental in
establishing college basketball. He coached at the University of
Kansas for six years, before handing the reins to renowned coach Forrest Phog

Allen. Naismith's disciple Amos Alonzo Stagg brought basketball to the University
of Chicago, while Adolph Rupp, a student of Naismith's at Kansas, enjoyed great
success as coach at the Kentucky. On February 9, 1895, the first intercollegiate 5-
on-5 game was played at Hamline University between Hamline and the School
of Agriculture, which was affiliated with University of
Minnesota. The School of Agriculture won in a 9-3 game. In 1901, colleges,
including the University of Chicago, Columbia University, Dartmouth College,
the University of Minnesota, the U.S. Naval Academy, the University of Utah
and Yale University began sponsoring men's games. In 1905, Theodore

Roosevelt formed a governing body for colleges, resulting in the creation of the
Intercollegiate Athletic Association of the United States (IAAUS). In 1910, that

13
ody would change its name to the National Collegiate Athletic Association

(NCAA). In 1892, the University of California and Miss Head's School played the
first women's inter-institutional game. Berenson's freshmen played the sophomore
class in the first women's intercollegiate basketball game at Smith
College, March 21, 1893. The same year, Mount Holyoke and Sophie Newcomb

College (coached by Clara Gregory Baer) women began playing basketball. By

1895, the game had spread to colleges across the country, including Wellesley,
Vassar, and Bryn Mawr. The first intercollegiate women's game was on April 4,
1896.

Shooting is the act of attempting to score points by throwing the ball

through the basket. While methods can vary with players and situations, the most
common technique is outlined as follows: The player faces the basket with feet
about shoulder-width apart, knees slightly bent, and back straight. The player
allows the ball to rest on the fingertips of the dominant hand (the shooting arm)
slightly above the head, with the other hand supporting the side of the ball. To aim
the ball, the player's elbow should be aligned vertically, with the forearm facing
in the direction of the basket. The ball is shot by extending the bended knees and
straightening the shooting arm; the ball rolls off the finger tips while the wrist
completes a full downward flex motion. The shooting arm, fully extended with
the wrist fully bent, and the fingers pointing downward, is held stationary for a
moment following the release of the ball, this is known as a follow-through, which
when properly done, enhances the accuracy of the shot. Generally, the non-
shooting arm is used only to guide the shot, not to power it.

14
Players often try to put a steady backspin on the ball to deaden its impact with
the rim. The ideal trajectory of the shot is somewhat arguable, but generally
coaches recommend a proper arch. Players may shoot directly into the basket or
may use the backboard to redirect the ball into the basket.

The two most common shots that use the above described set up are the
set shot and the jump shot. The set shot is taken from a standing position, with
neither foot leaving the floor, typically used for free throws. The jump shot is
taken while in mid-air, when the ball is released near the top of the jump. This
provides much greater power and range, and it also allows the player to elevate
over the defender. Failure to release the ball before the feet return to the ground is
considered a traveling violation. Another common shot is called the layup. This
shot requires the player to be in motion toward the basket, and to ‘lay’ the ball
‘up’ and into the basket, typically off the backboard (the backboard-free,
underhand version is called a finger roll). The most crowd-pleasing, and typically
highest-percentage accuracy shot is the slam dunk, in which the player jumps very
high, and throws the ball downward, straight through the hoop. Another shot that
is becoming common is the "circus shot". The circus shot is a low-percentage shot
that is flipped, heaved, scooped, or flung toward the hoop while the shooter is off-
balance, airborne, falling down, and/or facing away fromthe basket.

In basketball not only fast skills, but also technical needs, tactics,
agreement, experience and the potential for contest is shown in a game. The ratio
of aerobic to anaerobic in basketball is 1:9; this show that basketball is an

15
anaerobic and high intensity exercise. Because of the high intensity and anaerobic
property of basketball, one has to give best performance with in the short period
of the game. These performances include the shooting action, dribbling skill,
defense etc. When the coach trains athletes they need to improve basketball
player’s power, muscle endurance, and cardiovascular endurance to adapt to the
high intensity exercise. Shooting is the basic way to get in basketballand for this
reason it is the most frequently used technical action (HAY, 1978). The free shot
is distinguished as the most important of all the shooting actions.In 2002 the
international Basketball Federation (FIBA) decided to decrease the shot clock
violation to 24 seconds that required players to improve their fitness level and that
ultimately lead coaches and sport scientists to find new techniques and strategies
to avoid fatigue and to perform the skills efficiently.

In basketball Players have to execute many techniques i.e., throwing,

passing, shooting, dribbling and holding. Shooting is basically divided into two
main techniques that is jump shot and set shot. In the jump shot players lift his
body in the air and then attempt for the basket. Jump shot is mainly used to
avoid any opponent’s direct restriction while shooting, so in jump shot shooter
tries to overcome the resisting height of the opponent. Set shot is the technique
commonly used for a free throw - an unopposed shot awarded after an opposing
foul, and taken from the free-throw line. Set shot is a shot taken at stationary
position or without jumping. Until the invention of the jump shot (1940) the most-
used shot in basketball was the two-handed set shot. Among the greatest executors
of this shot were Bobby McDermott, Eddie Sailor and Dick Kinder.

16
This shot is used when you are standing still and mainly without an opponent. Set
shot is an uncontested shot commonly taken from free throw line, 15 feet
-4.60 meters- distant from the backboard. A successful free throw is worth one
point. It is no compulsion to use set shot in free throws only, set shot can be used
from anywhere in the ground, but now a days the game is so fast and skilled that
hardly a player get opportunity to deliver set shot before a tall opponent. On the
other hand, set shot therefore mainly used for the free throw attempts. Now a day’s
competition level is very high and no one willing to loose a single point and here
raises the importance of set shot technique. While attempting for the free throw
every player use set shot technique only. The main reason for usingset shot in
free throws is the stability and comfort in delivering the skill. The player while
using the set shot also gets optimum opportunity to overcome the tensed
movements of the game and feel some relaxation, as in set shot body requires very
less energy expenditure if compared with jump shot. In set shot the player stands
still and then with the required linear and angular movementattempts for basket
without an opponent. Ultimately all the comfort, less energy expenditure and easy
skilled movement raises the chances of successful attempt, therefore the
importance of set shot can not be avoided. In the set position, player’s feet were
spaced and aligned for balance and comfort and then use that position for attempt.
Set shot is taken without leaving the ground, such as a free throw. The ball should
be 'shot' and not 'thrown', with body balance maintained throughout the shot. Here
are some instructional points to remember whileshooting - Good body balance,
Focus on the basket as the bulls-eye picture in the eye, Concentrate and think the
ball into the target, follow through, rhythm and smoothness of motion. While
attempting the set shot player easily gains the given instructions which assists in
gaining good successful attempts. Therefore set shot attempt is a highly skilled
movement. Importance of set shot raises morewhen the competition becomes
neck to neck level and teams even fight forsingle points

17
Importance of set shot or free throw is obviously high, no matter what the level of
tournament or the players. Free throws are taken by adopting the skill of set shot.
Free throw is an unchallenged shot at the basket. Set shot adopted in free throws
is an undefended shot taken from the free throw line. Players from the two teams
line up alternately on both sides of the free throw
line. Free throw is the privilege given to a player to score one, two, or three
points under rule by unhindered throw for a goal from within the free throw
circle and behind the free throw line. Two hand set shot is mainly considered as
effect as in the running game of basketball set shot is typically used free throw
attempts. Free throw shot is therefore also considered as set shot. When apersonal
foul is called and the penalty is the awarding of free throw(s), the player against
whom the foul was committed shall be designated by the official to attempt the
free throw. It is on the attempting players to choose the technique of shooting, but
the most preferred is set shot. The free throw shooter shall take a position behind
the free throw line and attempt for the goal.
Players of this game need to posses the suitable biomechanical techniques
which may give greater advantage in executing skills. Biomechanists are
interested in improving athletes. It is ideal for the analysis of single movements
or intervals of exercise lasting up to minutes. The most cost- effective method is
qualitative analysis, in which the athletes, coach or sport scientist simply view the
video together and decide immediately how technique could be improved. The
athlete can then attempt any recommended changes and the filmed for a further
round analysis. The C.G. of the body is involved in all consideration of
equilibrium. The position of C.G. of the body is a major factor in determining the
soundness of the stance that is advocated in any technique in any sports in order
to accomplish the desired objective most effectively. Therefore, this factor must
receive more careful attention. Motion pictures and video have been used for years
to study athletic performances.

18
They have provided to be a tremendous assistance to scientific analysis of the
technique employed by athletics in all phases of sports, as well as an effective
means of demonstrating the mechanical principles involve in athletics
competition. The direction of movement, related body movements, sequence of
movements, speed, force, distance, angles, conditions of equilibrium and so far
may bedirectly or indirectly determine the means of analysis of motion. However
in order to obtain accurate results from a cinematographic analysis of an activity,
certain basic principals must be followed. Dr. Thomas K. Cureton, has made a
notable contribution in athletic research through cinematography.
During this technical and advanced century, advances in the sciences of
human motions seem to have been not only due to improvements in
instrumentation, but also to be development of better and more creative methods
of using theses instruments. Fundamental to the study of human motion is
measurement of the displacement of the body and its segments. Today, advances
in kinematics analysis have been greater then in most other aspects of research.
Traditionally, cinematography analysis of relative high speed films has been the
technique used to obtain kinematic data. However, the raw displacement of data
thus acquired usually contains inherent error that can cause large inaccuracies in
the velocities and accelerations determined by direct differentiation. For this
reason, various methods of smoothing the displacement data have been employed.
The two most successful are digital filtering and use of spline function by wood
and Jennings, Zernicke. Methods of three dimensional cinematographic analysis
have been developed and refined during the 1970s to improve the accuracy of
studying complex human motions, but these techniques not yet been implemented
completely according to Miller.

19
 The use of optoelectronic devices to acquire displacement data is a
particularly promising development that may replace cinematography in the near
future and it will be good to say is slowly becoming popular. Among these new
techniques that have emerged in the recent years are (1) automatic image analysis
in which a television image or a cine film is scanned by computer to determine
the X and Y coordinates of anatomical landmarks and (2) light spot position
measurements, which uses optoelectronic devices such as the selspot to obtain the
information about the three dimensional coordinates of small, active light sources
attached to the human body or the Human Markers. Although considerable
progress has been made in the descriptive (kinematic) analysis of human motion,
the area of kinetics has received relatively limited attention.

20
Miller expressed the belie that future research must expand its concern with the
kinetic and kinematic analysis of human motion. Cinematography and now a day
digital vediography is the most frequently used in sports biomechanics research
for obtaining a record of human movements. These film records are quantitatively
analyzed to obtain linear and angular displacement, time data and segmental
movements. Typically, the basic displacement time, functions of a motion do not
provide sufficient information to describe fully the activity thus these data are
further treated mathematically to determine the respective velocity and
acceleration functions.
The sciences of kinesiology and bio-mechanics have grown from applied
anatomy and mechanics. It is recommended that the coach should take time to
study these sciences. Recently videography has begun to replace conventional
motion picture for teaching and coaching purpose. Since video recordings are
enabling, reusable does not require any developing, it is more economical than
film. The relatively inexpensive portable recorders have significant potential for
instruction. Pictures taken of students performing motor skill can provide them
with further insight into their own actions, a greater appreciation of the mechanics
of sports skill and increased interest in improving their performance. Quantitative
analysis involves digitization of the video images to permit calculation of spatial
and temporal relationships in the movement. Several hardware software packages
are available for the purpose. Simple but effective digitizing is also possible with
minimal extra hardware and software. This procedure is the time consuming and
loses the benefit of immediate feedback to

21
 the athlete, but it allows detailed comparisons of one athlete with another or of
one athlete before and after an intervention. Video has also been used for time
motion or rotational analysis, in which times spent in various modes of activity
or in moving at various speeds are estimated from time and distance
measurements taken from the video. Biomechanics is of fundamental importance
to analyze and evaluate the technique or skill of an athlete with proper application
and implementation of applicable mechanical principles for the enhancement of
performance in sports and games. Various body angles onground and in space,
center of gravity of an athlete in specific positions, velocityof the released object,
angle of release, height of release etc plays an importance role in the performance
hence true mastery comes only after serious study of the mechanical principles
involved. Sport does not simply involve physical activities but components of
physics, mathematics, biology, psychology, sociology and many more. It is
actually engineering, which needs regular updated scientific approaches in all the
factors. Standard video graphic motion analysis is preferably used in
biomechanical analysis process. Special computers capturethe human motion and
then analyze the motion patterns.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The purpose of the study is two dimentional kinematical analysis of set

shot among basketball players.

DELIMITATIONS

1. The study was delimited to the male Basketball players of three different
height groups i.e.,

Group I: Five feet five inches to five feet eight inches (5’5’’ to 5’8’’).
Group II: Five feet nine inches to six feet (5’9” to 6’).
Group III: Six feet one inch to six feet four inches (6’1” to 6’4”).

22
2. The study was delimited to male national and inter-varsity players only.
3. The study was delimited to right- h a n d e d basketball players of 18 to
30years of age.
4. The study was delimited to set shot while performing free throws only.
5. In the study digital video cameras or camcorders was used for the
determination of the technique.
6. The selected Kinematical variables at moment of stance and moment of
release of ball were as follows:
A.i. Angle at right ankle joint.

A.ii. Angle at left ankle joint.

A.iii. Angle at right knee joint.

A.iv. Angle at left knee joint.

A.v. Angle at right shoulder joint.

A.vi. Angle at left shoulder joint.

A.vii. Angle at right hip joint.

A.viii. Angle at left hip joint.

A.ix. Angle at right elbow joint.

A.x. Angle at left elbow joint.

A.xi. Angle at right wrist joint.

A.xii. Angle at left wrist joint.

23
 A.xiii. Angle of release of the ball.

A.xiv.Height of center of gravity of the shooter at moment ofstance.

A.xv. Height of center of gravity of the shooter at moment ofrelease of ball.

A.xvi. Time to perform the course.

A.xvii. Displacement of center of gravity.

LIMITATIONS

1. Non-availability of sophisticated devices was the major limitation of the study.

2. The factors like environment, temperature, atmosphere pressure etc were beyond
the control of the investigator, which might have affected the performance of the
subjects.
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

1. To find out the correlation between the selected kinematical variables and
the performance of the subjects in set shot.
2. To study the significance of difference in selected kinematical variables
among three different height groups while performing set shot.
3. The study was designed to prepare an ideal model for the technique of the
skill of set shot in basketball.

DEFINITIONS AND EXPLANATIONS OF THE TERMS

Kinematics: It is that branch of Biomechanics i.e. concerned with describing

the motion of body. Thus, Kinematics deals with such things as how far a
body moves, and how consistently it moves. It is not concerned at all with

24
what causes a body to move in the way it does. Kinematics analysis motion
in terms of time, displacement, velocity or acceleration.

Videography: It refers to the process of capturing moving images. The term

involves methods of electronic production. It is equivalent of cinema
autography, but with images recorded on electronic media instead of film
stock. The word ‘videography’ consists by combination of two Greek words,
‘video’ and ‘graphy’. The Greek word ‘video’ means ‘I see’ or ‘I apprehend’
and the word ‘graphy’ means, ‘to write’. Videography covers many more
fields than just shooting videos with a camera. It includes digital animation,
gaming, web streaming, video blogging, still slideshows, spatial imaging,
medical imaging and in general the production of most bitmap and vector
based assets.

Set Shot: The two most common shots used in basketball are the set shot and
the jump shot. The set shot is taken from a standing position, with neither
foot leaving the floor, typically used for free throws. Set shot is mainly
attempted from the line of 5.80mtrs for free throw shot in basketball and for
each conversion one point is awarded to the converter. In this study, set shot
is analyzed when attempted as free throw.

Center of Gravity: The center of gravity of any object is that point at which
all of the weight of an object may be concentrated. The center of gravity is
referred as the point of balance of a body and it is either stated or implied that
it is possible for it to be balanced or supported.

25
 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The results of the study would be significant to biomechanists, Sport

scientists, physical education teachers, players and coaches in the following ways:
1. The results may indicate the variables, which might be considered as
factors affecting the performance of basketball players while shooting.
2. The results may provide a model for the technique of skill for analyzing
the performance of the players.
3. Results will be helpful in the preparation of training schedules for
basketball players more effectively.
4. The study may add a new dimension in literature of basketball.

5. The results will be helpful in preparing how effectively and efficiently the
free throw shot has been made.
6. The knowledge of the scientific basis of set shot may help in teaching and
coaching of set shot.

26
 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

The investigator has attempted in this chapter to locate the literature

related to this study. A summary of the writings of recognized authorities and of
previous research provides evidence with what is already known and what is still
unknown and interested. A careful review of research through journals, books,
dissertations, internet and other sources of information in the problem to the
investigation provide the important steps in the planning of any research study.
The relevant studies gained from various sources which the research scholar has
come across are cited below.

Motoyasu, Koshiyama and Katsumata (2009) made an afford to know the effects
of joint movement on the accuracy of 3-point shooting in Basketball. The purpose
of this study was to clarify characteristics of players who possess high accuracy of
a 3-point shot with respect to joint movements and the ball trajectory. 12
experienced male basketball players (9 right-handed and 3 left- handed)
participated in the experiment. The goal of task was to shoot the ball from a line
6.75m from the backboard into the basket. All participants were requested to shoot
the ball through the ring. A high speed camera (sampling frequency: 250Hz, shutter
speed: 1/2000; Nac, HSV-500) was positioned at the right or left side of the
player’s shooting position, perpendicular to the plane of intended ball motion. The
following 8 points were digitized: Right and left humeral line, elbow, wrist, 3rd
metacarpophalangeal, hip, knee and ankle joints, distal end of right and left feet.
The coordinates of the external markers were used to calculate the following
variables: release height, release speed, release angle of the ball, and the angle,
angular velocity and angular acceleration of joints.

27
From the investigation it was found that the distance between a ball and the center
of the ring showed significant positive correlations with the ball release velocity,
ball release angle, the ankle plantar flexion angle, hip angular acceleration, knee
angular acceleration and ankle angular acceleration. That distance also showed
significant negative correlations with the ball release height, vertical jump height,
and the wrist flexion angle. Good shooters wereable to achieve a low release
speed by shooting a ball at the optimal release angle. Good shooters were also
characterized by a lower jump height, a larger wrist flexion angle, and smaller
joint movements of the lower limb compared with poor shooters.
(balance break) and kake (execution) with selected kinematic variables were: in
angular kinematics at the moment of kuzushi left ankle joint (-0.46), right ankle
(0.522), left hip joint (-0.103), right hip joint (-0.40), left shoulder joint (-0.139),
right shoulder joint (0.056), left elbow joint (0.072), right elbow joint (0.154), and
at the moment of tsukuri left ankle joint (0.37), left hip joint (-0.739), right hip
joint (-0.515), left shoulder joint (0.34), right shoulder joint (0.248), left elbow
joint (0.059), right elbow joint (-0.04). In linear kinematics at the moment of
kuzushi the height of CG was 0.236 and at moment of tsukuri &kake height ofCG
was 0.051. There was insignificant value of coefficient of correlation in caseof all
joints. Based on the interpretation of findings it was concluded that the Kinematic
variables namely analysis angles of joints i.e ankle, knee, hip, shoulder, elbow etc
and linear kinematics height of CG have insignificant relationship with the
performance of Harai-Make-Komi, when other mechanical parameters were not
considered.
Abdoddaleh, Asal and Mohammad (2008) conducted a comparative study
of equilibrium between old athletes (active) and no athletes (non-active). This
research was done with the aim of equilibrium studying and comparison of old
athletes (active) group and no athletes (non-active) group. 20 old men who were
65 years old and used to perform physical activity (morning sports) and expanding
leisure time in Iranshahr Park (Iran) and 23 old men no athletes (non- active) were
attended voluntarily as statistical sample. Motor and biomechanical specifications
of the samples like flexibility, reaction time, height, and mean of the thigh and
leg size (research variables) and isotonic equilibrium variables

28
 Bhardwaj R. (2008) conducted a comparative study of kinematic analysis
of vertical jump of boys of different age group. The purpose of the study was to
kinematically analyze and compare the vertical jump performance of boys
belonging to two age groups of 10 to 20 years and 21 to 24 years. Kinematic
analysis employed sequence photography and considered height ofthe centre of
gravity during four phases of vertical jump performance namely standing reach,
crouch, jump & reach and landing as well as its vertical displacement (distance
between standing reach and jump & reach). Centre of gravity in each phase was
located using segmentation method. Along with centre of gravity the angular
modification during four phases of vertical jump performance was considered.
For angular measurements elgon stick figures were developed. To compare the
kinematic variables of the four given phases of vertical jump of the both age
groups t-test was applied and wastested at 0.05 level of significance. Results
revealed that the height of the CG during standing ranged from 1.14m to 1.39m.
The height of the CG during crouch ranged from 1.02m to 1.15m. It was also
found that the displacementof CG during vertical jump ranged from 0.41m to
0.91m The height of the vertical jump ranged from 38cm to 58cm. Results also
revealed that the difference in the means of two age groups with respect to

29
 Chi-Yang, Tsai (2006) conducted a study on the Kinematic analysis of
Basketball three point shoot after high intensity program. The purpose of this
study was to analyze Kinetic and kinematic characteristics of three points
shooting by high speed camera. Basketball players have to finish the high
intensity program which was designed from simulative basketball games. The
high intensity testing program includes dribbling, sprint, jump shooting and three
points shooting. The results of the experiments indicated that elbow, wrist, hip
and ankle joints angle velocities would decrease, expect the knee joint, after the
high intensity programme. The Knee angle of take off was also increased. It
indicated that the upper limb joints angular velocity decreased and player as had
to increase knee joint angular velocity to maintain original power. Time
durations also played influential role in the performance. The times from take off
to ball release also decreased that means that there was a change in the
coordinates in Knee joint and elbow joint. Improvement in the power for the shot
exhibited to be dependent on knee and ankle joint to much extent. After high
intensity program the elbow and Knee joint extension were effective enough and
closed to produce more power for the shot.

30
 Rojas F.J., Cepero and Gutierrez (2000) conducted a study on kinematic
adjustments in the basketball jump shot against an opponent. The aim of
this study was to analyze the adjustments in technique made by a basketball
player when shooting against an opponent. The subjects used were 10 male,
active professional basketball players from the First Division of the Spanish
Basketball League (ACB) who volunteered to take part. All were right-
handed and specialists in mid- and long-distance shooting. The mean age
was 23.36 years with a mean height of 1.95 m and a mean mass of 90.43 kg.
Two video cameras were used at 50 Hz to record the performance of the shots.
The first was placed at a distance of 10 m from where the shot was to be made
with an orientation of 458 to the direction of the shot, and the second was
situated 11 m from the shot with an orientation of 458 to the direction of the shot
and 90 degree to the orientation of the first camera. The cameras were started
approximately 3 seconds prior to the beginning of each shot and were not
switched off until the ball passed through the hoop to ensure the recording of a
sufficient portion of theperformance to permit analysis of release variables.
After positioning the cameras, and before filming the shots, a reference object
was filmed. The reference object was so oriented that the x-axis was in line with
the direction of the shot, the z-axis was perpendicular and horizontal to the
direction of the shot and the y-axis was perpendicular to the plane of the floor. In
the study it is foundthat the release angle of the ball increased significantly in the
presence of an opponent and this helped the player to avoid the possible
interception of the ball by the opponent’s hand. The mean release angle of the
ball in this study was 45 degrees. The velocity of ball release was not
significantly different between the opponent and non-opponent conditions.

In conclusion, it was stated that players attempted to release the ball more
quickly and from a greater height when confronted with an opponent. This
strategy lessens the chance of the opponent intercepting the ball. The greater initial
knee position restricted the ability of the player to jump and therefore player
performed a quicker but less powerful jump, while the more rapid upward
movement of the ball helps to increase the joint angles at shoulder and elbow at
release and this, combined with a more upright trunk, helps the ball to attain a

31
greater height and a more vertical angle of projection. This interpretation was
supported by significant differences and trends in the biomechanical data
collected. The differences in technicalexecution of the skill had implications for
practice.

S. Dhannanjoy (1990) the purpose of the study was to develop suitable

and feasible criteria for the evaluating different variations of Seoi Nage and to find
out the contributing biomechanical, anthropometric flexibility and motor fitness
factors for effective execution of different variation of Seoi Nage and Ippon seoi.
The subjects were 28 male judoka, who were well experienced and well skilled
and their age ranged between 18 to 30 years. Selected Biomechanical variables
were recorded in pre-determined variation of the shoulder throw, at N.S.N.I.S.,
Patiala by using two dimensional cinematography method. In the study sixteen mm
movie camera was used. After processing the filming were analysed on film
analyzer in the biomechanical laboratory of N.S.N.I.S., Patiala. Following
conclusions were drawn, (i) the angle at the ankle joint found not to be significantly
correlated with total time. (ii) left elbow joint, right knee joint and center of gravity
at the basic stances prefer no correlation with the seoi nage perfecton (iii) angular
velocity at hip formed by right shoulderwhen knee is extended from flexed position
and total right hip in Ippon Seoi Nage should greater to reduce the total time of
performance. (iv) execution time and total time taken in Ippon Seoi Nage were
found to be linearly related to eachother and strong predictor as well. (iv) to reduce
the total time, the time of knee flexion from start of throw should be reduced in
Ippon Seoi Nage. (v) the time of leg extension to belt in vertical was having a
critical effect i.e. little reduction of the same reduces total time greatly in Ippon
Seoi Nage.

The values were compared with western studies. It was observed that increased
body height shifts the C.G. towards the head, whereas, the C.G. is shifted
downward if the height is unaltered but body weight is increased. It also concluded
that age has particular no influence over the change in the C.G.

32
 Higgins F. (1972) studied the mechanical factors that contribute to the
vertical jumping height of four basketball players. The investigation included
analysis of angular measurements of the elbow, shoulder, knee, hip andankle. In
addition to angular measurements the velocities of the arm movement, order of
the position, velocity and acceleration of body parts during the selected jump
were also investigated. Movie picture were taken of 4 professional basketball
players performing vertical jump. Each subject’s best and poorest jump from a
series of seven trials were selected and analyzed. It was found that during the
poorest jump, all the subjects showed lower hyper extension of the arm at the
preparatory position, less shoulder flexion at the point of take-off. At the apex of
jump: the knee, hip and ankles displayed equal or less extension of the point of
take-off while the angle of body lean was equal to or greater at this same point. A
slower rate of arm velocity was displayed prior to take-off while on the other hand
the rate of arm velocity was faster at the point of tale-off. From the study it was
concluded that arm position, velocity and acceleration of hip and knee extension
were important factor in the performance of vertical jump. It is also further
concluded that the range of arm motion assisted in attaining maximum height
during the jump.

33
 METHODOLOGY
In this chapter the selection of subjects, selection of variables, criterion
measures, administration of set shot, reliability of data, filming protocol, analysis
of the film, collection of data and the statistical techniques employed for analysis
of data have been described.

SELECTION OF SUBJECTS

Sixty inter-varsity or national level male basketball players of three

different height groups i.e.
Group I: 5’5’’ to 5’8’’

Group II: 5’9” to 6’

Group III: 6’ 1” to 6’4”

(20 in each group) were selected as subjects for the study. Subjects found
in between any two height groups, were considered under the nearest height group.
Most of them were regular participants in the Inter-varsity and national level
basketball championships. Some of them were national medal holders and even
were in the Indian junior and senior team. The subjects were undergone training
for a considerable period of time. Therefore it was ascertained that subjects
possess reasonable level of technique. The age of the subjects ranged between 18
to 30 years. The subjects were explained about the objective of the study. The data
was obtained with the help of two given positions of any successful attempt:

(a) Moment of stance in set shot.

(b) Moment of release of ball in set shot.

34
SELECTION OF VARIABLES

The researcher had gone through the available literature in detail pertaining
to the game of basketball. Keeping the feasible criteria in mind, especially
availability of instruments and software, the following kinematical variables were
chosen for the two mentioned positions in set shot.
A.xviii. Angle at right ankle joint.

A.xix. Angle at left ankle joint.

A.xx. Angle at right knee joint.

A.xxi. Angle at left knee joint.

A.xxii. Angle at right shoulder joint.

A.xxiii. Angle at left shoulder joint.

A.xxiv. Angle at right hip joint

A.xxv. Angle at left hip joint

A.xxvi. Angle at right elbow joint.

A.xxvii. Angle at left elbow joint.

A.xxviii. Angle at right wrist joint.

A.xxix. Angle at left wrist joint.

A.xxx. Angle of release of the ball.

A.xxxi.

35
 A.xxxii. Height of center of gravity of the shooter at moment of
stance.

A.xxxiii. Height of center of gravity of the shooter at moment of

release of ball.
A.xxxiv. Time to perform the course.

A.xxxv. Displacement of center of gravity

CRITERION MEASURE
The criterion measure for this study was the performance of the subjects in
set shot in basketball.
Total of ten attempts were given to each subject and the successful shots
marked as score out of ten. The performance of each trial was judged accurately
and total score was recorded.
ADMINISTRATION OF SET SHOT

All the selected subjects were asked to perform the set shot from the free
throw line. The performers were well directed and informed about the study and
were well prepared for the study. They were asked to perform the set shot in the
natural way as they actually perform. It was ascertained that subjects possess
reasonable level of technique. Most of the selected subjects were senior national
players. Players were videographed in the indoor and outdoor basketball ground
with systematic filming method as required. The shooter was asked to take a
position behind the free throw line and attempt for the goal. Subjects were asked
to attempt ten shotsand after every attempt the ball was supplied to him for next
attempt.

36
For the purpose of analysis two moments were selected i.e. Moment of stance in
set shotand Moment of release of ball in set shot. The performance of each subject
was obtained as mentioned in criterion measure. Sufficient numbers of practice
trials were also given. Subjects were also asked to go for complete movement of
set shot i.e. from initial position to execution and then follow-through.
RELIABILITY OF DATA

To obtain variable measurements, standard and calibrated equipments like

Digital Video Cameras, Steel tape, stop watches, geometric instruments and
specialized motion analyzing software (Motion pro: advanced coach edition) were
used. All the equipments and software were supplied by standard agencies and
companies and their accuracy was ensured by the experts and suppliers. All the
measurements pertaining to the kinematical variables were taken by the researcher
under the expert’s guidance. Digital video cameras (Sony 2100 series), were
operated by expert professional videographers. So the data collected by using
these instruments and software were considered reliable for the purpose of this
study.

FILMING PROTOCOL
Four Digital Video cameras of sony 2100 series were used in order to
register the technique of set shot while attempting free throw in Basketball. For
the purpose of analysis two moments were selected i.e.
1. Moment of stance in set shot.

2. Moment of release of ball in set shot.

ll the four advanced digital video cameras were used in filming the two
selected moments. Each video camera was specifically placed for more
accurate filming.

37
Figure 01: Highlighting position of cameras for videography while
performing setshot in basketball.

Basketball Court

Camera

38
 Camera ‘C1’ was filming the subject specifically, camera ‘C2’ filmed the
subject and path of the ball, camera ‘C3’ filmed the ring with respect to the
attempted ball and camera ‘C4’ filmed the whole action of set shot with respect to
subject, ball, ring and ground. ‘C4’ camera was mainly responsible for calibration
which assisted in checking the accuracy of the recording. Camera ‘C1’ was placed
at the distance of 11 meters in respect to shooters and was fixed at 1.52 meters
height.

ANALYSIS OF FILM AND COLLECTION OF DATA

Videographic technique was used in this study. The films were analyzed
by using standard motion analyzer software (Motion Pro: Advanced Coach
Edition) approved by Human kinetics. Only two selected moments were analyzed.
Quick snap shots through ‘motion pro’ software for analysis of selected variables
are presented below.

39
Fig. 02: Segmentation of moment of stance in set-shot taken through
Motion Pro software.

40
Fig. 03: Segmentation shot of moment of release of ball in set-shot taken
through Motion Pro software.

41
PROCEDURE OF MECHANICAL ANALYSIS
Mechanics plays a vital role in attaining high technical performance. It
helps in identifying faults in performing the technique very precisely. There are
two methods by which a motor skill can be analyzed i.e. qualitative and
quantitative method. The quantitative method is more valid in case of many
specified skills. The best means to evaluate the technique quantitatively is through
videography and importing those videos into the motion analyzing software.
Software having facilities to analyze the videos in motion and still (quick snap
shot) mode. In the present study videos were recorded and analyzed through
motion analyzer software (Motion Pro: Advanced Coach Edition) to measure time
to perform the course and all related angles. Software assisted Quick snap shot
were used for joint point method in order to locate center of gravity of the subjects
in the selected moments.

Measuring time to perform the course:

To check the time taken by the performer to perform the set shot, ‘set-
timer’ option in the software was used. Time gets started from the moment of
stance and stops at the moment of release of ball by the performer.

42
Fig. 04: Display of elapsed time from mark-in through motion pro software.

43
Measurement of body angles:

On the basis of application of mark beg and mark end technique in the
motion pro software on the selected videos, elgons were developed. In order to
receive the complete segmental diagram ‘angle finding’ option was selected in the
software and marks of demanded joints were connected. After completing the
marking by joining different highlighted marks on the selected body joints
software automatically present the measurements of required angles. Different
segments were drawn to find out different angles of the body. For knee joint,
segment was drawn from heel axis to hip axis through knee axis. For ankle joint,
segment was drawn from pterion to knee axis through heel axis. For shoulder joint,
segment was drawn from hip axis to elbow axis through shoulder axis. For hip
joint, segment was drawn from knee axis to shoulder axis through hip axis. For
elbow joint, segment was drawn to shoulder axis to knuckle III through elbow axis
of respective sides.

44
Fig. 05: Segmentation shot for analysis of selected angles of moment of
stance in set-shot taken through Motion
Pro software.

45
Fig. 06: Segmentation shot for analysis of selected angles of moment of
release of ball in set-shot taken through Motion Pro software.

46
Measurement of angle of release

Angle of release of ball is measured in the motion pro software. After

configuring the basket-ball with the software, software located the center of the
ball and followed the path of the ball by point display method that shows
demanding angle of release, when segmented.

Fig. 07: Point display method to get the direction and angle of released ball.

47
Location of C.G.

On the basis of quick snap shot obtained by the software, researcher

developed stick figures, with the help of which the location of center of gravity
during the moment of stance and moment of release of ball in set shot was
found. The elgons were developed by using the joint-points method and c.g. of
the whole body was found out by using segmental method as follow:
1. Mark on the quick snap, the position of those references point (table-01)
associated with each segment. The position of reference points obscured
by other body parts should be estimated carefully.
2. Constant a stick figure representation of the subject by ruling lines between
appropriate reference points. (The trunk line is obtained by joining the mid
point of the line between the right and left hip joint to the mid point of the
trunk at the level of suprasternal notch).
3. Measure the length of each segment line and divide these various lengths
in the appropriate ratio as divide these various lengths in the appropriate
ratio as indicated in table-02. Mark the point of division (i.e. the center of
gravity of the segments) on their respective lines.
4. Rule two arbitrary axes (OY and OX), one to the left and one below the
stick figure.
5. Prepare a form such as shown in table-03, and in column 1 enter the weight
of the weights of the segments.

48
6. For each segment, measure the perpendicular distance from c.g. to the
line OY, and enter this distance in the appropriate place on the form (table
3, column 2).
7. To find the moments about OY, multiply the weight of each segment by
the distance of its c.g. from the lines and enter these values on the form
(table 3, column 3).
8. Find the sum of moments about OY by adding the contents of column 3 on
the form.
9. Add the content 1. If the procedure outlined has been correctly followed,
all parts of the body have also been taken into account then this total will
be equal to 1. (i.e. sum of the weight of all the body parts, expressed in
terms of the total body weight).
Then, since the moment of the resultant weight about OY is equal to 1
multiplied by some unknown distance X, and since this is equal to the sum of
moments of the segments considered separately, X is equal to the sum found in
step 8.
10. Rule a line O’Y’ parallel to OY and at a distance of X from it. The c.g. of
the subject lies on this line.
11. Repeat steps 5 to 10, taking moments about OX now. The c.g. of the
subjects lies on the O’X’ drawn parallel to OX and at a computed distance
from it.
And finally, because the c.g. lines on O’X’ and O’Y’ and these two lines have
only one point in common (i.e. where they intersect) this is the point where the
c.g. is situated.

49
 Table - 1

Weight of body segments relative to total body weight

Segment Relative Weight

Head
Trunk 0.073
Upper Arm
Forearm 0.507
Hand
Thigh 0.026
Calf
Foot 0.016

0.007

0.103

0.043

0.015

50
 Table – 2
Location of C.G. of body segments

Segment C.G. Location Expressed as % of Total Distance

Between Reference Points

Head

Foot

Trunk

Upper Arm

Forearm

Hand

Thigh

Calf

51
 41.8 % to elbow axis; 58.2 % to wrist axis
46.4 % to vertex;
53.6 % to Chin-neck
intersects

82.0 % to wrist axis; 18.0 % to knuckle III

43.8 % suprasternal
notch; 56.2 % to hip
40.0 % to hip axis; 60.0 % to knee axis
axis

41.8 % to knee axis; 58.2 5 to ankle axis

49.1 % to shoulder
axis; 50.9 % to
elbow axis

44.9 % to heel axis; 55.1 % to tip of long toe

52
 Table - 3
Form for computation of center of gravity

Segment Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Column 5

Segment
Distance Moments Distance Moments
weight
to OY about OY to OX about OX
(cm) (cm)

Head 0.073

Trunk 0.507

Right upper arm 0.026

Right forearm 0.016

Right hand 0.007

Left upper arm 0.026

Left forearm 0.016

Left hand 0.007

Right thigh 0.103

Right calf 0.043

Right foot 0.015

Left thigh 0.013

Left calf 0.043

Left foot 0.015

53
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF DATA

With regard to purpose of the study product moment correlation was

calculated between selected kinematical variables with the performance of
subjects in set shot in basketball. Further to check the impact of the significant
related variables regression was applied. Technique of analysis of variance (One
way ANOVA) was also used to study the significance of difference in selected
kinematic variables among three different height groups with mean comparisons
of different groups through post hoc test while performing set shot. In order to
check the significance, level of significance was set at 0.05.

54
 ANALYSIS OF THE DATA AND RESULTS OF
THE STUDY

The purpose of the study was two dimentional kinematical analysis of set
shot among basketball players. Various Kinematical variables chosen for the two
mentioned positions in set shot were angle at right ankle joint, angle at left ankle
joint, angle at right hip joint, angle at left hip joint, angle at right knee joint, angle
at left knee joint, angle at right shoulder joint, angle at left shoulder joint, angle at
right elbow joint, angle at left elbow joint, angle at right wrist joint, angle at left
wrist joint, angle of release of the ball, height of center of gravity of the shooter
at moment stance, height of center of gravity of the shooter at moment of release
of ball, time to perform the course and displacement ofcenter of gravity. The
data were collected on sixty basketball players of three different height groups
following the standard procedure. The criterion measure for this study was the
performance of the subjects in set shot in basketball.

55
Relationship of kinematical variables with the performance in set shot at the
moment of stance and release
In the present study Product moment correlation was used to find out the
relationship of the selected Kinematical variables with the performance of
Basketball players in set shot. Further to find out the impact of the significant
variables on the performance, regression was also run in SPSS. In order to check
the significance, level of significance was set at 0.05.
Table-4

Showing coefficient of correlation of selected kinematical variables with the

performance in set shot
at the moment of stance (N=60)

Sl.No. Variables Coefficient of

Correlation
1 Angle at right ankle joint. 0.022
2 Angle at left ankle joint. 0.021
3 Angle at right knee joint. 0.093
4 Angle at left knee joint. 0.091
5 Angle at right shoulder joint. -0.086
6 Angle at left shoulder joint. -0.020
7 Angle at right hip joint 0.067
8 Angle at left hip joint 0.070
9 Angle at right elbow joint. -0.053
10 Angle at left elbow joint. -0.071
11 Angle at right wrist joint. 0.083
12 Angle at left wrist joint. 0.205
13 Height of center of gravity of the shooter -0.074
at moment stance.

56
Note: All values are not significant at 0.05 level
Tabulated value : .250 of 58 df at .05 level
In table 4 the values of coefficient of correlation of selected kinematical
variables i.e. angle at right ankle joint (0.022), angle at left ankle joint (0.021),
angle at right knee joint (0.093), angle at left knee joint (0.091), angle at right
shoulder joint (-0.086), angle at left shoulder joint (-0.020), angle at right hip joint
(0.067), angle at left hip joint (0.070), angle at right elbow joint (-0.053), angle at
left elbow joint (-0.071), angle at right wrist joint (0.083), angle at left wrist joint
(0.205) and height of center of gravity of the shooter (-0.074) with theperformance
in set shot of different height groups in basketball at the moment of stance are
presented.
Since the obtained values of coefficient of correlation for 58 degree of
freedom shown in table-4, were less than the required value (.250) for 0.05 level
of significance, therefore the selected variables have shown no significant
relationship with the performance in set shot of different height groups in
basketball at the moment of stance. In the present case this can be stated that there
is no significant relationship between the selected kinematic variables and the
performance in set shot of different height groups in basketball. Therefore it can
be explained that these variables put no impact on the performance in set shot of
different height groups in basketball at the moment of stance.

57
 Table - 5

Showing coefficient of correlation of selected kinematical variables with the

performance in set shot
at the moment of release of ball (N=60)

Sl.No. Variables Coefficient of

Correlation
1 Angle at right ankle joint. 0.382**
2 Angle at left ankle joint. 0.379**
3 Angle at right knee joint. 0.375**
4 Angle at left knee joint. 0.360**
5 Angle at right shoulder joint. 0.306*
6 Angle at left shoulder joint. -0.054
7 Angle at right hip joint 0.162
8 Angle at left hip joint 0.166
9 Angle at right elbow joint. 0.012
10 Angle at left elbow joint. -0.039
11 Angle at right wrist joint. 0.348**
12 Angle at left wrist joint. 0.184
13 Angle of release of the ball. 0.538**

14 Height of center of gravity of the shooter at 0.013

moment of release of ball.

Note: ** - Significant at 0.01 level

* - Significant at 0.05 level
Tabulated value : .250 of 58 df at .05 level

58
 In table 5 the values of coefficient of correlation of selected kinematical
variables i.e. angle at right ankle joint (0.382), angle at left ankle joint (0.379),
angle at right knee joint (0.375), angle at left knee joint (0.360), angle at right
shoulder joint (0.306), angle at left shoulder joint (-0.054), angle at right hip
joint (0.162), angle at left hip joint (0.166), angle at right elbow joint (0.012),
angle at left elbow joint (-0.039), angle at right wrist joint (0.348), angle at left
wrist joint (0.184), angle of release of the ball (0.538) and height of center of
gravity of the shooter at moment of release of ball (0.013) with the performance
in set shot of different height groups in basketball at the moment of release are
presented. Out of the fourteen selected variables the values of coefficient of
correlation of the seven variables namely angle at right ankle joint, angle at left
ankle joint, angle at right Knee joint, angle at left Knee joint, angle at right
shoulder joint, angle at right wrist joint and angle of release of the ball found
significantly related with the performance in set shot at the moment of release.
However, all the significant variables at the moment of release have shown
positive correlation with the performance in set shot of different height groups in
basketball. Rest of the selected variables namely angle at left shoulder joint, angle
at right hip joint, angle at left hip joint, angle at right elbow joint, angle at left
elbow joint, angle at left wrist joint and height of center of gravity of the shooter
at moment of release of ball were found not significantly related with the
performance in set shot of different height groups in basketball at the moment of
release of the ball.

59
 Table 5 reveals that the obtained values of coefficient of correlation of
angle at right ankle joint (0.382), angle at right ankle joint (0.382), angle at left
ankle joint (0.379), angle at right knee joint (0.375), angle at left knee joint
(0.360), angle at right wrist joint (0.348) and angle of release of ball (0.538) were
significant at .01 level. Whereas the obtained value of coefficient of correlation of
angle at right shoulder joint (.306) has shown .05 level of significance. Therefore,
these variables have shown significant relationship with the performance in set
shot in basketball at the moment of release of ball. It was found that these
significant variables at moment of release of ball were inpositive relationship with
the performance of set shot and therefore it can be explained that these significant
variables put impact on the performance in set shot of different height groups in
basketball at the moment of release of ball.
As shown in table 5 the values of coefficient of correlation of angle at left
shoulder joint (-0.054), angle at right hip joint (0.162), angle at left hip joint
(0.166), angle at right elbow joint (0.012), angle at left elbow joint (-0.039), angle
at left wrist joint (0.184) and height of center of gravity of the shooter at moment
of release of ball (0.013) for 58 degree of freedom were not more than the required
value (.250) for 0.05 level of significance, therefore the selected variables have
shown no significant relationship with the performance in set shotin basketball at
moment of release of ball. In the present case this can be stated that there is no
significant relationship between the selected kinematic variables and the
performance of set shot of different height group players in basketball. Therefore
it can be explained that these insignificant variables put no impact on

60
the performance in set shot of different height groups in basketball at the
moment of release of ball.
Table - 6

Showing coefficient of correlation of time to perform the course and

displacement of center of gravity with the Performance in set shot (N=60)

Sl.No. Variables Coefficient of

Correlation
1 Time to perform the course -.261*

2 Displacement of center of gravity 0.090

Note: * - Significant at 0.05 level

Tabulated value : .250 of 58 df at .05 level

In table 6 the values of coefficient of correlation of selected kinematic

variables i.e. time to perform the course of set shot (-.261) and displacement
of center of gravity from the moment of stance to the moment of release of ball
(0.090) with the performance in set shot of different height group players in
basketball is presented.
As shown in table 6 the obtained value of coefficient of correlation of the
time to perform the course for 58 degree of freedom (-.261) is more than the
required value (.250) for 0.05 level of significance, therefore the selected variable
have shown significantly low relationship with the performance in set shot in
basketball. However, the selected variable has shown negative correlationwith the
performance in set shot. In the present case this can be stated that there is
significant relationship between the time to perform the course and the
performance in set shot of different height group players in basketball. Whereas
the obtained value of coefficient of correlation of the variable displacement of

61
center of gravity for 58 degree of freedom (0.090) is less than the required value
(.250) for 0.05 level of significance, therefore the selected variable have shown
no significant relationship with the performance in set shot in basketball. In the
present case this can be stated that there is no significant relationship between
the selected kinematical variable i.e. displacement of center of gravity with the
performance in set shot of different height groups in basketball and therefore, the
selected variable puts no impact on the performance.
Impact of each significantly related kinematical variable on the performance
in set shot
The impact of the all the significant selected kinematical variables on the
performance in set shot were examined individually with the help of Regression,
taking individual kinematical variable as independent and performance as
dependent variable.
Table - 7

Showing regression analysis of angle at right ankle joint (ARAJ) as

independent variable and performance as dependent variable

Model R R square Adjusted R square Standardized Sig.

Coefficients
Beta
ARAJ .382 .146 .131 .382 .003**

Constant: Angle at right ankle joint.

Dependent Variable: Performance.
** Sig. at 0.01 level

The above model summary depicts R at .382 and R square at .146. This
indicates that 15% variation in the performance was being caused by right ankle
joint. The Beta coefficient has arrived at .382 (significance at .01 level), so it
signifies that angle at right ankle joint affects performance.

62
 Table - 8

Showing regression analysis of angle at left ankle joint (ALAJ) as

independent variable and performance as dependent variable

Model R R square Adjusted R Standardized Sig.

Coefficients
square
Beta
ALAJ .379 .144 .129 .379 .003**

Constant: Angle at left ankle joint.

Dependent Variable: Performance.
** Sig. at 0.01 level

Table 8 shows that the R existed at .379 and R square at .144. This
highlights that 14% variation in the performance was being caused by angle at left
ankle joint. The value of Beta coefficient has arrived at .379 (significance at .01
level), so it signifies that angle at left ankle joint affects performance.
Table - 9

Showing regression analysis of angle at right knee joint (ARKJ) as

independent variable and performance as dependent variable

Model R R square Adjusted R Standardized Sig.

Coefficients
square
Beta
ARKJ .375 .141 .126 .375 .003**

Constant: Angle at right knee joint.

Dependent Variable: Performance.
** Sig. at 0.01 level

In the table 9, R exists at .375 and R square at .141. This Indicates that 14%
variation in the performance was being caused by angle at right knee joint. The
63
value of Beta coefficient has arrived at .375 (significance at .01 level), so it
signifies that angle at right knee joint affects performance.

Table – 10

Showing regression analysis of angle at left knee joint (ALKJ) as

independent variable and performance as dependent variable

Model R R square Adjusted R Standardized Sig.

square Coefficients
Beta
ALKJ .360 .130 .115 .360 .005**

Constant: Angle at left knee joint.

Dependent Variable: Performance.
** Sig. at 0.01 level

The above model summary depicts R at .360 and R square at .130.

Indicating that 13% variation in the performance was being caused by angle at left
knee joint. The value of Beta coefficient has arrived at .360 (significance at . 01
level), so it signifies that angle at left knee joint affects performance.

64
 Table-11

Showing regression analysis of angle at right shoulder joint (ARSJ) as

independent variable and performance as dependent variable

Model R R square Adjusted R Standardized Sig.

Coefficients
square
Beta
ARSJ .306 .094 .078 .306 .017*

Constant: Angle at right shoulder joint.

Dependent Variable: Performance.
* Sig. at 0.05 level
Table 11 shows R at .306 and R square at .094. This highlight that 9%
variation in the performance was being caused by angle at right shoulder joint.
The value of Beta coefficient has arrived at .306 (significance at .05 level), so it
signifies that angle at right shoulder joint affects performance.
Table -12
Showing regression analysis of angle at right wrist joint (ARWJ) as
independent variable and performance as dependent variable

Model R R square Adjusted R Standardized Sig.

Coefficients
square
Beta
ARWJ .348 .121 .106 .348 .005**

Constant: Angle at right wrist joint.

Dependent Variable: Performance.
** Sig. at 0.01 level

The above model summary depicts R at .348 and R square at .121.

Indicating that 12% variation in the performance was being caused by Angle at
right wrist joint. The value of Beta coefficient has arrived at .348 (significance at
.01 level), so it signifies that Angle at right wrist joint affects performance.

65
 Table - 13
Showing regression analysis of angle of release of the ball (ARB) as
independent variable and performance as dependent variable

Model R R square Adjusted R Standardized Sig.

Coefficients
square
Beta
ARBH .538 .289 .277 .538 .000**

Constant: Angle at release of ball.

Dependent Variable: Performance.
** Sig. at 0.01 level
Above table depicts R at .538 and R square at .289. This Indicates that 29%
variation in the performance was being caused by angle of release of the ball. The
value of Beta coefficient has arrived at .538 (significance at .01 level), so it
signifies that angle of release of the ball affects performance.

Table - 14

Showing Regression analysis of time to perform the course (TPC) as

independent variable and performance
as dependent variable

Model R R square Adjusted R Standardized Sig.

Coefficients

66
 square Beta
TPC .261 .068 .052 -.261 .044*

Constant: Time to perform the course.

Dependent Variable: Performance.
* Sig. at 0.05 level

Table 14 depicts R at .261 and R square at .068. Indicating that 7%

variation in the performance was being caused by time to perform the course. The
value of Beta coefficient has arrived at -.261 (significant at .05 level), so it
signifies that time to perform the course affects performance.

67
Regression model and prediction equation

Table - 15

Multiple Regression analysis of selected kinematical variables and

performance of Set-Shot in Basketball

Dependent Selected Regression R R Contributed Standardized

Variable Independent Coefficient Square percentage in Coefficients
Variables for performance
entered step wise
Multiple Regression
analysis
ARB .292 .538a .289 29% .507
Performance ARB,ARWJ .095 .625b .391 39% .300
of Set Shot ARB,ARWJ,ARSJ 45%
.165 .675c .455 .255

a. Predictors: (constant), ARBH=Angle of release of ball

b. Predictors: (constant), ARBH, ARWJ=Angle at right wrist joint at moment of
release
c. Predictors: (constant), ARBH, ARWJ, ARSJ=Angle at right shoulder joint at
moment of release.
d. Dependent variable: Performance
e. Constant=Y= -47.123
f. Std. Error= 9.845.

In order to examine collective effect of kinematic variables on the

performance, Multiple Regression was performed with step-wise method (Table
15) through SPSS. Generated model included three kinematical variables and
deleted rest of the variables. The model summary reveals the R and R square
values at .675 and .455 indicating that about forty five per cent of the variation
in dependent variable is caused by three independent variables namely angle of
release of the ball (ARB), angle at right wrist joint at moment of release (ARWJ)
and angle at right shoulder joint at moment of release (ARSJ).
Table 15 illustrates the Multiple Regression analysis performed to develop
equation for the prediction of performance in set shot on the basis of X1,

68
X2 and X3 kinematical variables and the resulted multiple regression equation in
score form is:
Y= A+B1X1+ B2X2+ B3X3

Y= -47.123+.292X1+.095X2+.165X3

Where, Y is predicted performance score in set shot

X1= Angle of release of the ball (ARB).
X2= Angle at right wrist joint at moment of release (ARWJ).
and X3= Angle at right shoulder joint at moment of release (ARSJ).

Height wise Analysis of Kinematical Variables

In the present study the investigator employed one-Way Analysis of

Variance to study the significance of difference in selected kinematical variables
among three different height groups while performing set shot at moment of
stance and moment of release. Further to find out the significant difference
between pair of means among the three groups post hoc test was run on SPSS.

69
 Table - 16

Showing F values of selected kinematical variables of three different height

groups at the moment of stance

Sources of SS Df MS F
Variance
Angle at right ankle SS Between 1460.1 2 730.050
joint (ARAJ) SS with in 2164.7 57 37.978
19.223**
Angle at left ankle SS Between 1460.1 2 730.050
joint (ALAJ)
SS with in 2164.7 57 37.978
19.223**
Angle at right knee SS Between 7153.200 2 3576.6
joint (ARKJ) SS with in 3781.650 57 66.345
53.909**
Angle at left knee SS Between 7127.433 2 3563.7
joint (ALKJ) SS with in 3795.150 57 66.582
53.524**
Angle at right SS Between 16.633 2 8.317
shoulder joint
SS with in 60.100 57 1.054 7.888**
(ARSJ)
Angle at left shoulder SS Between 1.233 2 .617
joint (ALSJ) SS with in 109.100 57 1.914
.322
Angle at right hip SS Between 132.933 2 66.467
joint
SS with in 2545.250 57 44.654 1.488
(ARHJ)
Angle at left hip joint SS Between 100.233 2 50.117

SS with in 2521.500 57 44.237

(ALHJ) 1.113

Angle at right elbow SS Between 2031.633 2 1015.81

joint (AREJ) SS with in 20917.30 57 366.970
2.768
Angle at left elbow SS Between 1193.233 2 596.617
joint (ALEJ) SS with in 22060.95 57 387.034
1.542
Angle at right wrist SS Between 433.633 2 216.817
joint (ARWJ) SS with in 4363.300 57 76.549
2.832

70
Angle at left wrist SS Between 3522.900 2 1761.450

joint (ALWJ) SS with in 6836.500 57 119.939 14.686**

Height of c.g. SS Between 1440.120 2 720.060

(HCGms) SS with in 1539.537 57 27.009
26.660**

Note: ** - Significant at 0.01 level

* - Significant at 0.05 level
Tabulated value 3.15

Table 16 shows that the value of F-ratio for the angle at right ankle joint,
angle at left ankle joint, angle at right knee joint, angle at left knee joint, angle at
right shoulder joint, angle at left shoulder joint, angle at right hip joint, angle at
left hip joint, angle at right elbow joint, angle at left elbow joint, angle at right
wrist joint, angle at left wrist joint and height of center of gravity of the shooter
of three different height groups in the moment of stance while performing set shot.
Review of table 16 shows that the values of F-ratio of the angle at right
ankle joint, angle at left ankle joint, angle at right knee joint, angle at left knee
joint, angle at right shoulder joint, angle at left wrist joint and height of center of
gravity of the shooter of three different height groups in moment stance while
performing set shot were significant at .01 level. In other words, it can be
stated that there are significant differences among three different height
groups at moment of stance in following kinematical variables namely
angle at right ankle joint, angle at left ankle joint, angle at right knee joint, angle
at left knee joint, angle at right shoulder joint, angle at leftwrist joint and height
of center of gravity of the shooter.

71
 Table 16 also showed that the values of F ratio of the angle at left shoulder
joint, angle at right hip joint, angle at left hip joint, angle at right elbow joint, angle
at left elbow joint and angle at right wrist joint of three different height groups in
moment stance while performing set shot were insignificant at . 05 level.
Therefore, it can be stated that there are insignificant differences among
three different height groups at moment of stance in following
kinematical variables namely angle at left shoulder joint, angle at right hip
joint, angle at left hip joint, angle at right elbow joint, angle at left elbow joint and
angle at right wrist joint. To know which group means were different, Post hoc
test was run.

72
 Table – 17

Showing multiple comparison of different height groups in angle at right

and left ankle joint at the moment of stance

Group Group MD
(s) (j)
Angle at right ankle I II 2.70000
joint
III 11.55000**
II I -2.70000

III 8.85000**
III I -11.55000**

II -8.85000**
Angle at left ankle joint I II 2.70000

III 11.55000**
II I -2.70000

III 8.85000**
III I -11.55000**

II -8.85000**

Note: ** - Significant at 0.01 level

Height groups: I=5’5’’ to 5’8’’, II=5’9” to 6’, III=6’1” to 6’4”

Table 17 shows that there was a significant difference between two pair of
means: a. 5’5’’ to 5’8’’ and 6’1” to 6’4”, p=.000 (<0.01); b. 5’9” to 6’ and 6’1” to
6’4”, p=.000 (<0.01). It means that the third height group players i.e. 6’1” to
6’4” were significantly different from the other two height group players in angle
at right and left ankle joint at the moment of stance in set shot.

73
 Table - 18

Showing multiple comparison of different height groups in angle at right

and left knee joint at the moment of stance

Group Group MD
(s) (j)
Angle at right knee I II 14.70000**
joint 26.70000**
III
II I -14.70000**

III 12.0000**
III I -26.70000**

II -12.0000**
Angle at left knee joint I II 14.70000**

III 26.650000**
II I -14.70000**

III 11.95000**
III I -26.65000**

II -11.95000**

Note: ** - Significant at 0.01 level

Height groups: I=5’5’’ to 5’8’’, II=5’9” to 6’, III=6’1” to 6’4”

Table 18 reveals that all the three group means were significantly different
from one another: a. 5’5’’ to 5’8’’ and 5’9” to 6’, p=.000 (<0.01); b.
5’9” to 6’ and 6’1” to 6’4”, p=.000 (<0.01); c. 5’5’’ to 5’8’’ and 6’1” to 6’4”,

p=.000 (<0.01). It means that all the three height group players were significantly

74
different in angle at right and left knee joint at the moment of stance in set shot.

Table – 19

Showing multiple comparison of different height groups in angle at right

shoulder joint at the moment of stance

Group Group MD
(s) (j)
Angle at right shoulder I II -1.25000**

joint III -.90000*

II I 1.25000**

III .35000
III I .90000*

II -.35000

Note: ** - Significant at 0.01 level,*- Significant at 0.05 level.

eight groups: I=5’5’’ to 5’8’’, II=5’9” to 6’, III=6’1” to 6’4”

Table 19 shows that there was a significant difference between two pair of
means in angle at right shoulder joint: a. 5’5’’ to 5’8’’ and 5’9” to 6’, p=.000
(<0.01); b. 5’5” to 5’8’’ and 6’1” to 6’4”, p=.027 (<0.05). This indicates that first
height group players i.e. 5’5’’ to 5’8’’ were significantly different from the other
two height group players in angle at right shoulder joint at the moment of stance
in set shot.

75
 Table – 20

Showing multiple comparison of different height groups in angle at left

wrist joint and height of center of gravity at the moment of stance

Group Group MD
(s) (j)
Angle at left wrist joint I II -17.85000**

III -13.95000**
II I 17.85000**

III 3.90000

76
 III I 13.95000**

II -3.90000
height of center of I II -9.46500**
gravity III -11.12150**
II I 9.46500**

III -1.65650
III I 11.12150**

II 1.65650

Note: ** - Significant at 0.01 level.

Height groups: I=5’5’’ to 5’8’’, II=5’9” to 6’, III=6’1” to 6’4”

Table 20 reveals that that there was a significant difference between two
pair of means: a. 5’5’’ to 5’8’’ and 5’9” to 6’, p=.000 (<0.01); b. 5’5” to 5’8’’ and
6’1” to 6’4”, p=.001 (<0.01). This also indicates that first height group players
i.e. 5’5’’ to 5’8’’ were significantly different from the other two height group
players in angle at left wrist joint and height of the c.g. at the moment of stance in
set shot.
Table - 21

Showing F values of selected kinematical variables of three different height

groups at the moment of release of ball.

Sources of SS Df MS F
Variance
Angle at right ankle SS Between 361.733 2 180.867
joint (ARAJ)
SS with in 2320.200 57 40.705 4.443*
Angle at left ankle SS Between 350.633 2 175.317
joint (ALAJ)
SS with in 2324.350 57 40.778 4.299*
Angle at right knee SS Between 130.833 2 65.417
joint (ARKJ)
SS with in 1846.150 57 32.389 2.020

77
Angle at left knee SS Between 90.133 2 45.067
joint (ALKJ) SS with in 2088.850 57 36.646 1.230

Angle at right SS Between 126.033 2 63.017

shoulder joint (ARSJ)
SS with in 929.700 57 16.311 3.864*
Angle at left shoulder SS Between 159.600 2 79.800
joint (ALSJ)
SS with in 773.250 57 13.566 5.882**
Angle at right hip SS Between 195.700 2 97.850
joint (ARHJ)
SS with in 35271.150 57 61.880 1.581
Angle at left hip joint SS Between 186.133 2 93.067
(ALHJ)
SS with in 3548.850 57 62.261 1.495
Angle at right elbow SS Between 691.300 2 345.650
joint (AREJ)
SS with in 4329.550 57 75.957 4.551*

78
Angle at left elbow SS Between 3797.433 2 1898.717
joint (ALEJ)
SS with in 4013.300 57 70.409 26.967**
Angle at right wrist SS Between 1148.233 2 574.117
joint (ARWJ)
SS with in 3237.700 57 56.802 10.107**
Angle at left wrist SS Between 933.100 2 466.550
joint (ALWJ)
SS with in 2620.300 57 45.970 10.149**
Angle of release of SS Between 93.333 2 46.667
ball (ARB)
SS with in 1250.400 57 21.937 2.127
Height of c.g. SS Between 5017.348 2 2508.674 231.536**
(HCGmr) SS with in 617.591 57 10.835

Note: ** - Significant at 0.01 level

* - Significant at 0.05 level
Tabulated value 3.15

Table 21 shows that the value F-ratio of the angle at right ankle joint, angle
at left ankle joint, angle at right knee joint, angle at left knee joint, angle at right
shoulder joint, angle at left shoulder joint, angle at right hip joint, angle at left hip
joint, angle at right elbow joint, angle at left elbow joint, angle at right wrist joint,
angle at left wrist joint, angle of release of the ball and height of center of gravity
of the shooter of three different height groups in the moment of release of ball
while performing set shot.

79
 Table 21 shows that the values of F-ratio of angle at left shoulder joint,
angle at left elbow joint, angle at right wrist joint, angle at left wrist joint and
height of center of gravity of the shooter of three different height groups in the
moment of release of ball while performing set shot were significant at .01 level.
Whereas the angle at right ankle joint, angle at left ankle joint, angle at right
shoulder joint and angle at right elbow joint of three different height groups in the
moment of release of ball while performing set shot were significant at .05 level.
It can be stated that there are significant differences among three
different height groups at the moment of release in following
kinematical variables namely the angle at right ankle joint, angle at left ankle
joint, angle at right shoulder joint, angle at left shoulder joint and angle at right
elbow joint angle at left elbow joint, angle at right wrist joint, angle at left wrist
joint and the height of center of gravity of the shooter.
The Table 21 also shows that the values of F ratio of the angle of right knee
joint, angle of left knee joint, angle at right hip joint, angle at left hip joint and the
angle of release of ball of three different height groups in the moment of release
while performing set shot were not significant at .05 level. Therefore, it can be
stated that there are insignificant differences among three different
height groups at moment of stance in following kinematical variables
namely the angle of right knee joint, angle of left knee joint, angle at right hip
joint, angle at left hip joint and the angle of release of ball. To know which group
means were different, Post hoc test was run.

80
 Table – 22
Showing multiple comparison of different height groups in angle at right
ankle joint at the moment of release

Group Group MD
(s) (j)
Angle at right ankle I II .90000
joint III 5.60000*
II I -.90000
III 4.70000
III I -5.60000*
II -4.70000

Note: * - Significant at 0.05 level

Height groups: I=5’5’’ to 5’8’’, II=5’9” to 6’, III=6’1” to 6’4”

Above table showed that there was significant difference between a pair
of means: a. 5’5” to 5’8’’ and 6’1” to 6’4”, p=.027 (<0.05). This indicates that
first height group players i.e. 5’5’’ to 5’8’’ were significantly different from the
third height group players i.e. 6’1” to 6’4” in angle at right ankle joint at the moment
of release in set shot.
Table - 23
Showing multiple comparison of different height groups in angle at left
ankle joint at the moment of release

Group Group MD
(s) (j)
Angle at left ankle joint I II .85000
III 5.50000*
II I -.850000
III 4.650000
III I -5.50000*
II -4.650000

81
Note: * - Significant at 0.05 level
Height groups: I=5’5’’ to 5’8’’, II=5’9” to 6’, III=6’1” to 6’4”

Table 23 shows that there was significant difference between a pair of

means: a. 5’5” to 5’8’’ and 6’1” to 6’4”, p=.031 (<0.05). This shows that first
height group players i.e. 5’5’’ to 5’8’’ were significantly different from the third
height group players i.e. 6’1” to 6’4” in angle at left ankle joint also at the moment
of release in set shot.
Table – 24

Showing multiple comparison of different height groups in angle at right

shoulder joint at the moment of release

Group Group MD
(s) (j)
Angle at right shoulder I II -3.45000*
joint III -2.45000
II I 3.45000*

III 1.00000
III I 2.45000

II -1.00000

Note: * - Significant at 0.05 level

Height groups: I=5’5’’ to 5’8’’, II=5’9” to 6’, III=6’1” to 6’4”

Table 24 reveals that there was significant difference between a pair of means:

a. 5’5’’ to 5’8’’ and 5’9” to 6’, p=.032 (<0.05). This shows that first height group
players i.e. 5’5’’ to 5’8’’ were significantly different from the second height group
players i.e. 5’9” to 6’ in angle at right shoulder joint at the moment of release in set
shot.

82
 Table – 25

Showing multiple comparison of different height groups in angle at left

shoulder joint at the moment of release

Group Group MD
(s) (j)
Angle at left shoulder I II -3.60000*
joint III -.30000
II I 3.60000*
III 3.30000*
III I .30000
II -3.30000*

Note: * - Significant at 0.05 level

Height groups: I=5’5’’ to 5’8’’, II=5’9” to 6’, III=6’1” to 6’4”

Table 25 shows that there was significant difference between two pair of
means: a. 5’5’’ to 5’8’’ and 5’9” to 6’, p=.012 (<0.05) b. 5’9” to 6’ and 6’ 1” to
6’4”, p=.023 (<0.05). This proves that second height group players i.e. 5’9” to 6’
were significantly different from the other two height group players in angle at
left shoulder joint at the moment of release in set shot.

83
 Table - 26

Showing multiple comparison of different height groups in angle at right

and left elbow joint at the moment of release

Group Group MD
(s) (j)
Angle at right elbow I II 7.25000*
joint III 7.15000*
II I -7.2500*

III -.10000
III I -7.15000*

II .10000
Angle at left elbow I II 14.95000**
joint III 18.30000**
II I -14.95000**
III 3.35000
III I -18.30000**
II -3.35000

Note: ** - Significant at 0.01 level.

Height groups: I=5’5’’ to 5’8’’, II=5’9” to 6’, III=6’1” to 6’4”

Table 26 shows that there was significant difference between two pair of
means at angle of right elbow joint: a. 5’5’’ to 5’8’’ and 5’9” to 6’, p=.038 (<0.05);
b. 5’5’’ to 5’8’’ and 6’1” to 6’4”, p=.042 (<0.05).Above table also reveals that
there was significant difference between same two pair of means at angle at left
elbow joint: a. 5’5’’ to 5’8’’ and 5’9” to 6’, p=.000 (<0.01); b. 5’5’’ to 5’8’’ and
6’ 1” to 6’4”, p=.000 (<0.01).Therefore, it can be said that first height group
players i.e. 5’5’’ to 5’8’’ were significantly different from the other two height
group players in angle at left and right elbow joint at the moment of release in set
shot.
84
 Table - 27

Showing multiple comparison of different height groups in angle at right

and left wrist joint at the moment of release.

Group Group MD
(s) (j)
Angle at right wrist joint I II -4.85000

III 5.85000
II I 4.85000

III 10.70000**
III I -5.85000

II -10.70000**
Angle at left wrist joint I II -4.45000
III 5.20000
II I 4.45000
III 9.65000**
III I -5.20000
II -9.65000**

Note: ** - Significant at 0.01 level.

Height groups: I=5’5’’ to 5’8’’, II=5’9” to 6’, III=6’1” to 6’4”

Above table reveals that there was significant difference between a pair of
means in angle at right and left wrist joint: a. 5’9” to 6’ and 6’ 1” to 6’4”, p=.000
(<0.01). This shows that second height group players i.e. 5’9” to 6’ were
significantly different from the 3rd height group players i.e. 6’1” to 6’4” in angle at
right and left wrist joint at the moment of release in set shot.

85
 Table – 28
Showing multiple comparison of different height groups in height of center
of gravity at the moment of release.

Group Group MD
(s) (j)
Height groups in height I II -15.87600**
of center of gravity III -21.62250**
II I 15.87600**

III -5.74650**

III I 21.62250**

II 5.74650**

Note: * - Significant at 0.05 level

Height groups: I=5’5’’ to 5’8’’, II=5’9” to 6’, III=6’1” to 6’4”

Table 28 shows that all the three group means were significantly different
from one another: p=.000 (<0.01). It means that all the three height groupplayers
were significantly different in height of center of gravity at the moment of release
in set shot.

86
 Table-29

Showing F value of time to perform the course and displacement of center of gravity of
three different height groups while performing set shot in basketball.

Sources of SS Df MS F
Variance
Time to SS Between
3.386 2 1.693
perform the
SS with in 1.021
course (TPC) 94.486 57 1.658
Displacement SS Between
1120.713 2 560.357
of center of
SS with in 16.304**
gravity (DCG) 1959.024 57 34.369

Note: ** - Significant at 0.01 level

Tabulated value 3.15
Table 29 shows that the value of F-ratio of time to perform the course and
displacement of center of gravity of three different height groups while
performing set shot in basketball. Above table depicts that the value of F-ratio
for the time to perform the course of three different height groups while
performing set shot was insignificant at .05 level. It means that there was no
significant difference in the time to perform the course of three different height
group players while performing set shot. Table 29 also shows that the value of F-
ratio for the displacement of center of gravity of three different height groups
while performing set shot was significant at .01 level. It indicates that there was
significant difference in the displacement of center of gravity of three different
height groups while performing set shot.

87
 Table – 30

Showing multiple comparison of different height groups in displacement of

center of gravity

Group Group MD
(s) (j)
Displacement of center of I II -6.41250**
gravity
III -10.50100**
II I 6.41250**

III -4.08850
III I 10.50100**

II 4.08850

Note: * - Significant at 0.05 level

Height groups: I=5’5’’ to 5’8’’, II=5’9” to 6’, III=6’1” to 6’4”

Table 30 shows that there was significant difference between two pair of
means: a. 5’5’’ to 5’8’’ and 5’9” to 6’, p=.004 (<0.01); b. 5’5’’ to 5’8’’ and 6’ 1”
to 6’4”, p=.000 (<0.01). This also indicates that first height group players i.e. 5’5’’
to 5’8’’ were significantly different from the other two height group players in
displacement of center of gravity.
Discussion of the Findings

The results of the study have shown that none of the kinematical variables

i.e. angle at right ankle joint, angle at left ankle joint, angle at right knee joint,
angle at left knee joint, angle at right shoulder joint, angle at left shoulder joint,
angle at right hip joint, angle at left hip joint, angle at right elbow joint, angle at
left elbow joint, angle at right wrist joint, angle at left wrist joint and height of

88
center of gravity of the shooter exhibited significant relationship with the
performance of set shot at moment of stance. Though it is generally assumed that
the stance plays an important role in good execution of any skill, but in this
investigation it was found that kinematical variables at the moment of stance of
set shot put no impact on the performance. It was also found that the kinematical
variables i.e. angle at left shoulder joint, angle at right hip joint, angle at left hip
joint, angle at right elbow joint, angle at left elbow joint, angle at left wrist joint
and height of center of gravity of the shooter at moment of release of ball have
no significant relationship with the performance of set shot at moment of release
of the ball. It was also found that the displacement of center of gravity of the
shooter have no relationship with the performance of set shot in basketball.
Previous study with the purpose to investigate the pattern of motion of the striking
arm and muscular/joint activities responsible for it during the arm swing phase of
the volleyball spike (Soo Chung, 1998) also showed that the elbow muscles and
joint contains no significant value in strengthening respective arm rotation and
performance directly. Previous research to develop suitable and feasible criteria
for the evaluating different variations of seoi nage and to find out the contributing
biomechanical, anthropometric flexibility and motor fitness factors for effective
execution of different variation of seoi nage (S. Dhananjoy, 1990) also shown that
(i) left elbow joint, right knee joint and center of gravityat the basic stances prefer
no correlation with the seoi nage perfecton and (ii) the angle at the ankle joint
found not to be significantly correlated with total time as it was less effective too.

89
 The results of the study have shown that some of the selected kinematical
variables i.e. angle at right ankle joint, angle at left ankle joint, angle at right knee
joint, angle at left knee joint, angle at right shoulder joint, angle at right wrist joint
and angle of release of the ball exhibited a significant relationship with the
performance of set shot at moment of release. The significant relation between
ankle joint (right and left) at the moment of release in set shot and performance
may be because of the fact that ankle joint also contributes in bearing body weight
during execution of any skill. 15% and 14% of contributionin the performance at
the moment of release was made by right and left ankle joint respectively. It was
also found that these significant variables as like right and left ankle joint at the
moment of release in set shot had impact on the performance at different rates.
Optimum movement in the knee joint contributes in gaining balanced movement
during execution of skills that leads to good performance. In this study 14% and
13% variation in the performance was beingcaused by the angle formed at right
and left knee joint respectively at themoment of release. Optimum duration of
time to perform any skill is highly recommended (Hay, 1978), so in this study also
7% variation in the performancewas being caused by time to perform the course.
Angle of release of the ball decides its path that plays important role in accuracy.
It was found that 29% of variation in the performance was being caused by angle
of release of the ball. At the time of execution angle of release of the ball also
depends on the related wrist action. Therefore as like angle of release of ball,
angle at right wrist joint also found significant with 12 percent contribution in the
performance at moment of release of ball.

90
 In Previous research on the kinematic analysis of Basketball three point
shoot after high intensity program (Chi-Yang, 2006) found that Improvement in
the power for the shot exhibited to be dependent on knee and ankle joint to much
extent. Previous research on kinematical analysis of the flight phase in the long
jump (Kim L., 1993) also confirmed that many kinematical variables like knee
and elbow joint contributes in gaining good flight phase in long jump. Mr.
Muralitharan’s spin bowling action was analyzed in the biomechanicallaboratory
of the school of Human movement and exercise sciences of Wester Australia (The
Hindu, 2004) and it was finalized by the experts that wristabduction seemed to be
the major reason for production of impressive ‘Dusra’. In another previous
research study on the relationship of kinematic variables with the performance of
standing broad jump (Ruhal A.S. and Ruhal G.S, 2009) it was found that the angle
at knee joints and angle at ankle joints were significantly related with the
performance in broad jump. In the same study it was also found that the time taken
to perform the broad jump was not significantly related with the performance in
broad jump. In the present study it was found forty five percent of the variation
in dependent variable was causedby three independent variables only namely
angle of release of the ball (ARB), angle at right wrist joint at moment of release
(ARWJ) and angle at right shoulder joint at moment of release (ARSJ). In the
present study during the course of set shot target was fixed at certain height and
above the releasing point.

91
It was found that angle at left shoulder joint, angle at right hip joint, angle at left
hip joint, angle at right elbow joint, angle at left elbow joint and angle at right
wrist joint of three different height groups at moment stance were not significantly
different. At the moment of release angle at right knee joint, angleat left knee
joint, angle at right hip joint, angle at left hip joint and angle of release of ball of
three height groups were not found significantly different. Timeto perform the
course also showed no significant difference among the three different height
groups. It was analyzed that 7% of contribution in the performance of set shot was
caused by time to perform the course but when we consider players of different
heights, time period among different height players may not be different in
performing the skill of set shot. The study further showedthat all the three groups
were significantly different in angle of right and left knee joint at moment of
stance and height of center of gravity at moment of release. Since the three
groups were of different height, it was obvious thatheight of their c.g must be
different when executing the ball without leaving the floor. Different height group
players bend their body at different rates from the ankle and knee joints in order
to get suitable position for the stance. As third group players were more heighted
than the rest of the two groups, therefore they were in the requirement to bend
their ankle and knee joint differently from the less heighted players. In the study
third group (6’1” to 6’4”) was found significantly different from the other two
groups in angle of right and left ankle joint at moment of stance. Present study
exhibited that first group (5’5’’ to 5’8’’)was significantly different from the other
two groups in angle of right shoulder

92
joint, left wrist joint and height of center of gravity at moment of stance. It was
found that first and third group was significantly different in angle of right and
left ankle joint at moment of release of ball. In the angles of right and left shoulder
joint at the moment of release of the ball first and second group was found
significantly different. It is generally found that short height playershaving less
arm length as compared to tall players and the difference of first group from the
third group was about four feet, which increased the chances of significant
differences. It was found that in the angles of right and left elbow joint at moment
of release of ball first group was significantly different from other two groups.
First height group was also found significantly different from other two groups in
displacement of center of gravity of the shooter. The present study also exhibited
that second and third group was significantly different in angle at right and left
wrist joint during moment of release of ball.

93
 SUMMARY
The purpose of the study was two dimentional kinematical analysis of set
shot among basketball players. Sixty inter-varsity or national level male basketball
players of three different height groups i.e. 5’5’’ to 5’8’’, 5’9” to 6’ and 6’ 1” to
6’4” (20 in each group) were selected as subjects for the study. The age of the
subjects ranged between 18 to 30 years. The subjects were explained about the
objective of the study. The data was obtained from two given positions of any
successful attempt: i. Moment of stance in set shot and ii. Moment of release of
ball in set shot. kinematical variables chosen for the two mentioned positions in
set shot were angle at right ankle joint, angle at left anklejoint, angle at right knee
joint, angle at left knee joint, angle of right hip joint, angle of left hip joint, angle
at right shoulder joint, angle at left shoulder joint, angle at right elbow joint, angle
at left elbow joint, angle at right wrist joint, angle at left wrist joint, angle of
release of the ball, height of center of gravity of the shooter at moment stance,
height of center of gravity of the shooter at moment of release of ball, time to
perform the course and displacement ofcenter of gravity. Total ten attempts
were given to each subject and the successful shots marked as score out of ten as
criterion measure of performance in the study. Four Digital Video cameras Sony
2100 series were used in order to register the technique of set shot while
attempting free throw in Basketball. The films were analyzed by using standard
motion analyzer. Only two selectedmoments were analyzed.

94
The purpose of the study was further extended to find out the correlation between
the selected kinematical variables and theperformance of the subjects in set shot
and to study the significance of differencein selected kinematic variables among
three different height groups while performing set shot. With regard to purpose of
the study techniques of product moment correlation, regression, one way ANOVA
and post hoc were applied. Level of significance was fixed at 0.05.
The study revealed that the selected variables have no significant
relationship with the performance in set shot in basketball at moment of stance.
Results also found that the variables i.e. angle at left shoulder joint, angle at right
hip joint, angle at left hip joint, angle at right elbow joint, angle at left elbow joint,
angle at left wrist joint and height of center of gravity of the shooter at moment of
release of ball have no significant relationship with the performance in set shot in
basketball at the moment of release of ball. The obtained value of coefficient of
correlation of the displacement of center of gravity too exhibitedno significant
relationship with the performance of set shot of different height group players in
basketball. The results revealed that some variables i.e.angle at right ankle
joint, angle at left ankle joint, angle at right knee joint, angle at left knee joint,
angle at right shoulder joint, angle at right wrist joint and angle of release of the
ball have significant relationship with the performance in set shot in basketball
at moment of release and put impact on performance of set shot.

95
 Height wise analyses of kinematical variables revealed that angle at right
ankle joint, angle at left ankle joint, angle at right knee joint, angle at left knee
joint, angle at right shoulder joint, angle at left wrist joint and height of center of
gravity of the shooter at moment of stance were significantly different. Whereas
angle at left shoulder joint, angle at right hip joint, angle at left hip joint, angle at
right elbow joint, angle at left elbow joint and angle at right wrist joint were found
not significant at moment of stance in relation to height differences among three
different height groups. The study revealed that height groups in angle at right
ankle joint, angle at left ankle joint, angle at right shoulder joint, angle at left
shoulder joint, angle at right elbow joint, angle at left elbow joint, angle at right
wrist joint, angle at left wrist joint and height of center of gravity of the shooter at
moment of release were significantly different. The obtained F value of the
displacement of center of gravity too exhibited significant difference among
different height group players in basketball. Whereas angle of release of ball,
angle at right knee joint, angle at left knee joint, angle at right hip joint and angle
at left hip joint were found not significantly different during moment of release of
ball. Study of height wise analysis of time to perform the course also showed no
significant difference among three different height groups. It was found that all
the three groups were significantly different in angle of right and left knee joint at
moment of stance and height of center of gravity at moment of release. In the
study third group (6’1” to 6’4”) was found significantly different from the other
two groups in angle of right and left ankle joint at moment of stance. First group
(5’5’’ to 5’8’’) was found significantly different from the other two groups in
angle of right shoulder joint, left wrist joint and height of center of gravity at
moment of stance. Study exhibited that first and third group was significantly
different in angle of right ant left ankle joint at moment of release of ball. In the
angles of right and left shoulder joint at moment of release of ball first and second
group (5’9” to 6’) was found significantly different.

96
It was also found that in the angles of right and left elbow joint at moment of
release of ball first group was significantly different from other two groups. First
group was also found significantly different from other two groups in
displacement of center of gravity of the shooter. Second and third group was found
significantly different in angle at right and left wrist joint during moment of
release of ball.
CONCLUSIONS

Based on the analysis and within the limitations of the study following
conclusions were drawn:
1. It was observed that there was no significant relationship between selected
biomechanical variables at the moment of stance and the performance of
set shot of different height group players in basketball. Therefore, these
selected variables at moment of stance put no impact on the performance
of set shot.
2. There was no significant relationship between the variables i.e. angle at left
shoulder joint, angle at right hip joint, angle at left hip joint, angle at the
right elbow joint, angle at left elbow joint, angle at left wrist joint, height
of center of gravity of the shooter at moment of release of ball and the
performance of set shot of different height group players in basketball.
Therefore, these selected variables at moment of release of ball put no
impact on the performance of set shot.
3. Some of the selected biomechanical variable i.e. angle at right ankle joint,
angle at left ankle joint, angle at right knee joint, angle at left knee joint,
angle at right shoulder joint, angle at right wrist joint and angle of release
of the ball at moment of release of the ball were found significantly related
with the performance of set shot of different height group players in
basketball and therefore, these selected variables at moment of release of
ball put there impact on the performance of set shot.
4. Significant relationship was observed between time to perform the course
and the performance of set shot of different height group players in
basketball. Therefore, selected variable puts impact on the performance of

97
 set shot.
5. There is no significant relationship found between the displacement of
center of gravity and the performance of set shot of different height group
players in basketball and therefore, the selected variable puts no impact
on the performance of set shot.
6. Angle of release of the ball made highest impact (29%) in the performance.
7. Time to perform the course had lowest impact (7%) in the performance.
8. Multiple regression analysis revealed that predictions regarding
performance in set shot can be made, by developing multiple regression
equations on the basis of selected kinematical variables.
9. Collective impact of angle of release of the ball, angle at right wrist joint
at moment of release and angle at right shoulder joint at moment of release
in performance was about forty five percent.
10. Significant difference among different height groups were found in
angle at right ankle joint, angle at left ankle joint, angle at right knee
joint, angle at left knee joint, angle at right shoulder joint, angle at left wrist
joint and height of center of gravity of the shooter at moment of stance.
11. Third group (6’1” to 6’4”) was significantly different from the other two
groups in angle at right and left ankle joint at the moment of stance in set
shot.
12. Angle of knee joint (right and left) at the moment of stance was
significantly different among three groups.
13. First group (5’5’’ to 5’8’’) was significantly different from the other two
groups in angle at right shoulder joint, angle at left wrist joint and height
of the c.g. at the moment of stance in set shot.
14. No significant difference among different height groups were found in
angle at left shoulder joint, angle at right hip joint, angle at left hip joint,
angle at right elbow joint, angle at left elbow joint and angle at right wrist
joint at moment of stance.

98
15. Significant difference among different height groups were found in angle
at right ankle joint, angle at left ankle joint, angle at right shoulder joint,
angle at left shoulder joint, angle at right elbow joint, angle at left elbow
joint, angle at right wrist joint and angle at left wrist joint at moment of
release of ball.
16. Height of center of gravity during the moment of release in set shot of all
the three groups was significantly different from one another.
17. A significant difference was found between first (5’5’’ to 5’8’’) and third
group (6’1” to 6’4”) at the angle of right and left ankle joint during the
moment of release in set shot.
18. A significant difference was found between first (5’5’’ to 5’8’’) and second
group (5’9” to 6’) at the angle of right shoulder joint during the moment of
release.
19. Left shoulder joint angle at the moment of release in set shot was
significantly different in second group (5’9” to 6’) from the other two groups.
20. Significant difference was found in first group (5’5’’ to 5’8’’) from the
other two groups at the angle of left and right elbow joint during the
moment of release.
21. A significant difference was found between second group (5’9” to 6’) and
third group (6’1” to 6’4”) at the angle of right and left wrist joint during the
moment of release.
22. At the angle of release of ball, right knee joint, left knee joint, right hip
joint and left hip joint during the moment of release of ball no significant
difference among the groups were found.
23. Displacement of center of gravity was significantly different in first group
(5’5’’ to 5’8’’) from the other two groups.
24. Time to perform the course was not significantly different among three
groups.

99
RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the conclusions drawn in this study the following

recommendations have been made:
1. Similar Studies can also be conducted on female basketball players.

2. The study may be undertaken with large number of variables like

velocity, equilibrium as the factors contributing to performance.
3.

4. Similar study may be under taken to analyze the other techniques of

basketball and other games.
5. Similar study may be conducted by using more sophisticated equipments
of different level.
6. This study can be conducted on national and international teams.

100
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

Clarke, H. (1976). Application of Measurement to Health and Physical Education,

5th ed., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc.
Clarke, YH. Harrison and Clarke, David H. (1972). Advanced Statistics with
Applications to Physical Education, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall,
Inc.

Degaray, A.L., Levine, L. and Carter, J.E.L. (1974). Genetic and Anthropological
Studies of Olympic Athletes, New York: Academic Press Inc.

Fidelus, K. (1978). Applied Biomechanics in Sport: Basic Book of Sports

Medicine, Olympic Solidarity of the International Olympic Committee.

Fleishman, Edwin A. (1964). The Structure and Measurement of Physical Fitness,

Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice Hall, Inc.

Grieve, D.W. (1975). Techniques for the Analysis of Human Movement, London:
an Associated Company of Henry Kimpton Ltd.

Gupta, S.C. (2009). Fundamentals of Statistics, ed. Indra Gupta, Delhi: Himalaya
Publishing House.

Harnian, H.H. (1960). Modern Factor Analysis Chicago, University of Chicago

Press.

Harter, R.A. and Bates, B.T. (1985). Kinematic and Temporal Characteristics of
Judo Hip Throws-Biomechanics in Sports, ed. Terauds, J. and Barham J.N.,
California: Academic Publishers.

Hay, James G. (1978). The Bio-mechanics of Sports Techniques, Englewood

Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall Inc.

101
Hebbeflinck, M. and Ross, W.D. (1974). Kinanthropometry and Bio- mechanics,
Biomechanics IV, Ed. Nelson, Richard C. and Morehouse, Chauncey A.,
Baltimore: University Park Press.

Nelson M. (1973). Biomechanics of Sports, Great Britain: London, Henry

Kimpton.

Sahu, K. (2004). Statistics in Psychology & Education, 1st ed., New Delhi:
Kalyani Publishers.

Sharma, R.N. (2003). Statistics Techniques in Educational Research, 1st ed.,

Delhi: Surjeet Publications.

Tittel, Kurt (1978). Sports Anthropometry - Basic Book of Sports Medicine,

Olympic Solidarity of the International Olympic Committee.

Zatziorskyk, V.M. (1974). Studies of Motion and Motor Abilities of Sportsmen,

Biomechanics IV ed. Morehouse, C.A., Baltimore University Park Press.

JOURNALS AND PERIODICALS

Aboub, M.A. (1963). “A Biomechanical Model for the Upper Extremity Using
Optimizational Structure of Kinesiology”, Journal of Physical Education.

Anndrews, J.G. (1985). “Strength Curves for Multiple - Joint Single Degree of
Freedom Exercises”, Journal of Biomechanics.

Aydin, Bergün and Mensure (2009). “Kinematic Analysis of Over Arm

Movements for Different Sports”, Journal of Kinsiology.
Beach, Clark Richard (1984). “Kinematic Analysis of Spatial and Temporal Errors
in Rapid Timing Tasks”, Dissertation Abstract International.

Boyson, J.P. (1977). “Interactive Computer Graphics in the Study of Human Body
Planner Motion under Free Fall Conditions”, Journal of Biomechanics.

102
Cook, E.B. and Wherry, R.J. (1950). “A Statistical Evaluation of Physical Fitness
Tools”, Research Quarterly.

Dapena, Jesus (1985). “Systematic Error in Three-Dimensional Coordinates

within a Large Object - Space when Using DLT & NLT Methods of Three
Dimensional Cinematography”, Journal of Biomechanics.

Deol, N.S., S. Mandeep and Gill, M. (2009). “Physical Education for Special
People: A Kinematical Analysis”, HPE Forum Bi-annual Professional
Journal.
Greenwald, Rosca and Morra (2009). “Assessment of Influence of Contemporary
Knee Design on High Flexion”, Human Mov. Sci.

Guimaraes R. and Cliquet (2009). “Kinematic Analysis of the Knee when

Climbing up/down Stairs in Patellofemoral Instability”, Acta. Ortop. Bras.
Harnvey, W.R. (1985). “A Comparison of One and Two Camera Procedure for
the Bio-Mechanical Analysis of Human Performance”, Dissertation
Abstracts International.

Higgins F. (1972). “Analysis of Mechanical Factors that Contribute to the Vertical

Jumping Height of Four Basketball Players”, Sports Review.

Kaiser, H.F. (1958). “The Varimax Criterion for Analytic Rotation in Factor
Analysis”, Psychometria.
Kim L. (1993). “Kinematical Analysis of the Flight Phase in the Long Jump”,

Journal of Biomechanics.

Lusin, G.F. (1979). Gajdosik, R.L. and Miller, K.E., “Goniometry: A Review of
the Literature”, Athletic Training.

Martin, Thomas P. and Stull, Alan G. (1969). “Effects of Various Knee Angle and
Foot Spacing Combinations on Performance of the Vertical Jump.”
Research Quarterl.

103
Matsumoto, Y. (1978). “Analysis of the Kuzushi in the Nagewaza”, Bulletin of
the Association for the Scientific Studies on Judo.

Matasumoto, Y. (1963). “Studies on Judo Techniques with Respect to

Distribution on Body Weight”, Bulletin of the Association for the Scientific
Studies on Judo.

Miller, D.I. (1979). “Modeling in Biomechanics: Overview”, Medicine and

Science in Sports.

Miller, D.I. (1978). “Biomechanics of Running what should the Future Hold”,

Canadian Journal of Applied Sport Sciences.

Motoyasu, Koshiyama and Katsumata (2009). “Effects of Joint Movement

on the Accuracy of 3-point Shooting in Basketball”, Journal of Sports
Sciences.

Pezzack, J.C. (1977). “An Assessment of Derivation Determining Techniques

used for Motion Analysis”, Journal of Biomechanics.

Plagenhoef, Stanley C. (1966). “Methods for Obtaining Kinetic Data to Analyse

Human Motions”, Research Quarterly.

Rashed S. (1980). “Biomechanical Cinematographic Analysis of Selected Full

Twisting Movement in Gymnastics”, Research Quarterly.

Ray, G.G. and Sen, R.N. (1983). “Determination of Whole Body Centre of
Gravity in Indians”, Journal of Applied Physiology.

Rojas F.J., Cepero and Gutierrez (2000). “Kinematic Adjustments in the

Basketball Jump Shot Against An Opponent”, Annual Ergonomics.

104
Scureton, T.K. and Sterling, L.F. (1964). “Factor Analysis of Cardiovescular Test
Variables”, Journal of Sports Medicine.

Shaw, Dhananjoy (1990). “A Comparative Study of Ippon Seoi and Morote Seoi
Nage - A Biomechanical Approach,” NIS Scientific Journal.

Shaw, Dhananjoy (1989). “Inter-Relationship between Physical Characteristics

and Partial Timings in different Phases of Morote Seoi Nage”, NIS
Scientific Journal.

Sira, David Ben (1978). “A Simple Procedure for Event Marking when Filming
with One or Two cameras”, Research Quarterly.

S. Mandeep (2010). “Evaluation and Improvement of Sports Techniques through

Biomechanical Updated Analyzing Technology”, University News -
Special Issue, Association of Indian University.

NEWS PAPER

Elliot Bruce (2004). “Bowling Report - Mr. Muttiah Muralitharan”, The Hindu,
May 07, 2004, late ed.

WEB SITE

http://www.basketballteacher.com/index/skill-shot.htm
http://www.growtall.com/improve-your-setshot.htm
http://en.mimi.hu/basketball/shot.htmls

105
 MISCELLANEOUS

Abdoddaleh, Asal and Mohammad (2008). “Equilibrium Studying and

Comparison Old Athletes and No Athletes”, Abstract Book: III

International Congress on Sports Medicine, Exercise Science, Physical
Education and Yoga Sciences.

Bezodis E. (2008). “Understanding Elite Sprint Start Performance through an

Analysis of Joint Kinematics”, ISBS Conference Proceeding.

Bhardwaj R. (2008). “Kinematic Analysis of Vertical Jump of Boys of Different

Age Group”, Abstracts - National Conference on Holistic Approach to
Health and Fitness.

Chi-Yang, Tsai (2006). “The Kinematic Analysis of Basketball Three Point Shoot
after High Intensity Program”, XXIV ISBS Symposium.

Flesishman, E.A., Kremer, E.J. and Soup, G.W. (1961). “The Dimensions of
Physical Fitness-programe”, Department of Industrial Administration and
Psychology.

Rao, V.S.S.M. (1982). “New Frontiers of Identifying Top Sportsmen” Abstracts:

International Congress of Sports Sciences.

Ruhal A.S. and Ruhal G.S. (2009). “Relationship of Kinematic Variables with
Analysing the Selected Techniques in Combative Sports - A Biomechanical Study,”
Abstract of Papers, Asian Conference on Sports Medicine.

106
Shaw, Dhananjoy (1989). “Prediction of Dynamic Movement Amplitude (HIP)
by Selected Static Goniometric Measurements”, Proceedings of the 76th
Session of the Indian Science Congress.

S. Mandeep (2010). “Biomechanical Applications in Sports and Performance -

Putting Value of Science in Sports”, Abstracts - 5th JK Science Congress.

107