第31届奥运会蹦床比赛中外优秀男子运动员动作难度与编排对比研究
本文选题:第31届奥运会 + 蹦床比赛 ; 参考:《山西师范大学》2017年硕士论文
【摘要】:中国蹦床男子个人项目的竞技水平在国际上处于领先的地位,但是,国外选手的竞技水平也在不断上升,中国想要继续保持并扩大我们在蹦床项目上的优势,就必须知己知彼并不断创新。本文运用文献资料法、访谈法、录像观察法、数理统计法和对比分析等方法,对第31届奥运会蹦床比赛中外优秀男子运动员在比赛时成套动作的难度选择及编排方面进行了比较研究,为提高我国男子蹦床运动员的竞技水平提供理论参考。研究结果表明:1.预赛规定成套动作难度与编排:规定成套中只计算两个动作难度,其他八个动作均以单周为主,成套难度值范围在3.1-3.5分之间,我国高磊和董栋分别为3.4和3.3分,在难度分上低于俄罗斯Andrey YUDIN和日本Masaki ITO的3.5分,但是我国高磊以较高的完成分和高度分位于第一名。预赛规定成套编排结果表明,除了俄罗斯的两名运动员在预赛规定动作第一个计算难度的动作编排中选择在前两个动作完成,第二个计算难度的动作选择在最后一个动作完成外,我国运动员与其他国家运动员均选择在第九、第十个动作完成,由此可见,预赛第一套动作编排的趋势是将难度大的动作放在成套动作的两端,将最大难度动作放在成套的最后一个动作的较多一些。2.决赛自选成套动作难度与编排:成套难度值范围在16.7-18.4分之间,我国高磊的18.4难度分高于其他国家,日本Ginga MUNETOMO和我国董栋的难度分位于第二、第三,其余选手的难度分则相差不大。决赛自选成套编排结果表明,自选成套的曲线图总体呈U形分布,U形前端难度值较大,在这10个动作编排当中,我国董栋1、2、3、4、10这5个位置的动作难度值较高,我国高磊1、2、3、4、5、10这6个位置的动作难度值较高,而外国运动员则在1、2、3、10这4个位置的动作难度均值较高。我国高磊的动作难度较大,但在成套编排的动作完成和连接方面有些瑕疵。3.空翻难度与编排:预赛规定动作中,单个动作空翻难度值分布在1-1.6分,成套空翻难度值分布在2-2.6分,我国两名运动员和白俄罗斯Uladzislau HANCHAROU、俄罗斯选手Andrey YUDIN的空翻难度值均为2.6分,高于其他国家的运动员;决赛自选动作中,单个动作空翻难度值分布在1-1.6分,成套空翻难度值分布在11.8-13.6分,我国运动员高磊的空翻难度值最高,董栋和日本Ginga MUNETOMO的空翻难度值位于第二,其余国家的运动员空翻难度值要低一些。空翻编排结果表明:中外优秀男子蹦床运动员都是选择前空翻、后空翻(5:5)交替进行的编排方式;在空翻周数方面中外优秀男子运动员大部分都是选择三周动作在前,而两周动作在后的顺序,少数运动员在三周动作之间穿插了两周动作来作为缓冲,我国运动员的空翻周数比其他国家运动员多。4.转体难度与编排:预赛规定动作中,单个动作转体难度值分布在0.1-0.8分,成套转体难度值分布在0.3-1.1分,日本、俄罗斯和新西兰的运动员转体难度值最高,我国运动员的转体难度值低一些;决赛自选动作中,单个动作转体难度值分布在0.1-0.6分,成套转体难度值分布在2.5-3.1分,我国高磊、白俄罗斯运动员和日本的两名运动员的转体难度值最高,我国董栋的转体难度值则低一些。转体编排结果表明:中外优秀男子运动员大部分都是选择540度、360度和180度在前,而720度、900度和1080度在后的顺序,少数运动员会在成套最后三个选择180度或360度的转体动作。转体度数编排各国差异不大,选择都比较相近。5.身体姿势难度与编排:预赛规定动作中,单个动作身体姿势难度分布在0.2-0.3分,成套身体姿势难度值分布在0.2-0.5分,我国高磊和白俄罗斯运动员的身体姿势难度值最高,其次是日本和新西兰的运动员,而俄罗斯运动员和我国董栋的身体姿势难度值则低一些;决赛自选动作中,单个动作身体姿势难度值分布在0-0.3分,成套身体姿势难度值分布在1.7-2.3分,日本运动员Masaki ITO的身体姿势难度值最高,采用屈体和直体的比例也高于其他国家,而我国、白俄罗斯、俄罗斯和新西兰的运动员身体姿势难度值均低一些。身体姿势编排结果表明:中外优秀男子运动员大部分都是选择屈体姿势在前,团身或屈体姿势在中,而直体姿势在后的顺序,少数运动员会在成套选择团身姿势的动作。身体姿势编排各国无较大差异。
[Abstract]:The competitive level of Chinese trampoline men's individual project is in the leading position in the world. However, the competitive level of the foreign players is also rising. China wants to keep and expand our advantages in the trampoline project. It is necessary to know oneself and keep innovating. This paper uses literature, interview, video observation, and mathematical statistics. In order to improve the competitive level of Chinese men's Trampoline Athletes in the thirty-first Olympic trampoline competition, this paper makes a comparative study on the difficulty selection and arrangement of the complete movements of Chinese and foreign excellent men and women in the competition between China and foreign countries in the trampoline competition of the thirty-first Olympic Games. The results show that the 1. pre match stipulates the difficulty and arrangement of complete sets of movements. In the set, only two action difficulty is calculated, the other eight movements are based on a single week, the range of difficulty is between 3.1-3.5 points, Gao Lei and Dong Dong in China are 3.4 and 3.3 respectively, and the difficulty is lower than the 3.5 points of Russian Andrey YUDIN and Japanese Masaki ITO, but China's Gao Lei is in the first place with high completion points and high points. The result of the pre match set arrangement shows that, in addition to the two Russian athletes who have completed the first two movements in the first action arrangement of the first calculation difficulty in the preliminaries, the choice of the second difficult movements in the final action is completed in the final, and the athletes of our country and the other national athletes choose ninth, tenth. It can be seen from this, the trend of the first set of action arrangement is to put the difficult action on both ends of the complete set of movements, the difficulty and arrangement of the most difficult movements in the final action of the complete set of.2. final sets: the range of difficulty of the complete set is between the 16.7-18.4 points, and the 18.4 difficulty of Gao Lei in China. Higher than other countries, the difficulty of Japanese Ginga MUNETOMO and Dong Dong in China is second, third, and the other players have little difference. The result of the final selection complete set shows that the curve map of the self-selected complete set is distributed in the form of U shape, and the difficulty value of the U shape front end is larger. In these 10 movements, the 5 positions of Dong Dong 1,2,3,4,10 in China The difficulty value of action is high. The difficulty value of the 6 positions of Gao Lei 1,2,3,4,5,10 in our country is higher, while the foreign athletes are more difficult in the 4 positions of the 4 positions. In our country, the action difficulty is great, but the difficulty and arrangement of the.3. somersault in the complete set of action completion and connection: the predetermined action of the preliminary match. The difficulty value of single action air somersault is distributed at 1-1.6 points, and the difficulty value of complete somersault is distributed in 2-2.6. The difficulty values of the somersault of two Chinese athletes and Belarus Uladzislau HANCHAROU and the Russian Andrey YUDIN are all 2.6 points higher than those of other countries, and the difficulty value of single action air somersault in 1-1.6 is distributed in 1-1.6 The difficulty value of the whole set of somersault is distributed in 11.8-13.6. The difficulty value of Gao Lei's somersault in our country is the highest, the difficulty value of the somersault of Dong Dong and Ginga MUNETOMO in Japan is second, and the difficulty value of the somersault in the rest of the countries is lower. The result of the air somersault arrangement shows that both Chinese and foreign excellent male trampoline athletes are all the forward somersault and back somersault (5:5). In the week number of empty somersault, most of Chinese and foreign excellent men and Chinese athletes choose three weeks of action in front, and two weeks of action in the post, a few athletes interspersed two weeks of action between three weeks as a buffer, the number of somersault athletes in China is more difficult and compiling than other athletes in other countries. Row: the difficulty value of the single movement is distributed in 0.1-0.8, the difficulty value of the complete turn body is distributed in 0.3-1.1, the difficulty value of the athletes in Japan, Russia and New Zealand is the highest, the difficulty value of the athletes in our country is low; in the final self selection action, the difficulty value of the single movement is distributed in the 0.1-0.6 points, and the complete complete turn The difficulty value of the body is distributed at 2.5-3.1 points. The difficulty value of the two athletes in Gao Lei, China and Japan is the highest, and the difficulty value of Dong Dong's transition is lower in our country. The result of the rotation arrangement shows that most of the excellent men and women in China and foreign countries are before the choice of 540 degrees, 360 degrees and 180 degrees, while the 720, 900 and 1080 degrees are in the rear. In order, a small number of athletes will be in the final three choice of the final three or 360 degrees of 180 or 360 degrees of rotation movement. The change degree arrangement of countries is not very different, the choice is more similar to the similar body posture difficulty and arrangement: in the predetermined movement, the individual body posture difficulty distribution in the 0.2-0.3 points, complete body posture difficulty value distribution in 0.2-0.5, our country The physical posture difficulty of Gao Lei and Belarus athletes is the highest, followed by the Japanese and New Zealand athletes, while the Russian athletes and our country Dong Dong's body posture difficulty value is lower; in the final self selection action, the individual body posture difficulty value is distributed in the 0-0.3 points, the complete body posture difficulty value is distributed in the 1.7-2.3 points, the day is distributed. The physical posture of the athlete Masaki ITO is the most difficult, and the proportion of the body and body is higher than that of other countries, while the athletes of our country, Belarus, Russia and New Zealand are lower in the difficulty of body posture. Or the body position is in the middle, while the straight posture is in the order of the rear. A few athletes will be in the group selection posture.
【学位授予单位】:山西师范大学
【学位级别】:硕士
【学位授予年份】:2017
【分类号】:G838
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 常宝芳;韩华;;中、外优秀女子蹦床运动员动作难度与编排特征的比较研究[J];体育科技文献通报;2016年02期
2 李健;;高度分规则实施前、后世界蹦床网上个人项目比赛成绩变化特征研究[J];中国体育科技;2015年03期
3 何茂贵;韩华;徐刚;;1997~2016年国际蹦床规则变化规律性导向特征研究[J];辽宁体育科技;2015年01期
4 常宝芳;韩华;;当今世界男子蹦床网上个人成套动作的编排特征与趋向——第29届世界蹦床锦标赛分析[J];济宁学院学报;2014年06期
5 刘爱梅;朱礼金;;新规则周期世界优秀女子蹦床运动员技战术特征及我国蹦床训练策略研究[J];山东体育学院学报;2014年04期
6 常宝芳;韩华;;第30届奥运会蹦床比赛女单成套动作编排特征研究[J];济宁学院学报;2013年06期
7 廖元金;赵秋爽;;蹦床评分规则的演变对运动员竞技能力的影响分析[J];福建体育科技;2013年06期
8 张辉;;从竞技蹦床比赛规则的演变探究其技术动作的发展动向[J];南京体育学院学报(社会科学版);2013年05期
9 朱礼金;;训练学视角下蹦床比赛制胜规律的哲学思考与层次解析[J];中国体育科技;2013年05期
10 韩华;郜龙;刘勇;;伦敦奥运周期世界男子自由体操竞争特征研究[J];济宁学院学报;2013年03期
相关博士学位论文 前1条
1 王_揿,
本文编号:2013902
本文链接:https://www.wllwen.com/jiaoyulunwen/tylw/2013902.html