KINEMTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN BASKETBALL SHOOTING AT THREE DISTANCES

different dirtancas should br useful bfomtion to c~acbea, tcacban, anl playan. fba br for the btexmhnta of suearr b coqandd bg the natPrr of rboating dch rllm for lMdless colbinaticas of #~mtal contributions in conjunction vith amrolls projetion iuylu and velocities vhich can result in shots vhich directly or indirectly fall t. the basketa (Wdron, 1982, p. 95). lhrtin suggests using a loverent analysis approach to descrik gccd shooting skill and advocates th use of timatic variables. Yates and Bolt (1982)- cruind kineratic ebaractaristics of 10- and 20-foot jump shots but did not report bow the 10-foot sbot differed from the 20-foot &at. In general they found that th ball uas relcased vhile the body was roving upward in a predoriFantly vertical path and that the body, sbouldcr, elbow, wrist, and band all contributed to hall projection. In tvo studies of free throw sbmting, elite, mle bashtball players were described in tells of kinesatic variables, Byes dned ball velocity and the contribution that cacb body sagwt mde to ball velocity. Within this elite group of subjects tbsre was little variability of the ball velocity at release. fb also fwnd that early in the propulsion *re, the lover body war tbc rain contritutor: at the and of tbr propulsion phase, the forearnls contribution increased, and finally, just before release, the hard provided the mjor contribution. Tsarouchas, Kalararas, Giavroglou and h'assas (1990) analyzed elite free throw sbooters as well. Based on one successful shot fro8 each subject, they concluded that tbe trajectory of the ball prior to and after release approxirated the same linear path. Corbining the results of byes and Tsarouchas e: al., it appears that coordination my be an iPportant element in qocd shooting. With shwtinq, certain characteristics are tbought to exist within consistently successful shooters, although individual variation among noncmial elements is wwn. For example, Budson (1985b) mapred elite and good free throw shooters and founl little variability within elite shters on the kineaatic variabies which distinguished skillfulness. %re was, bowever, greater variability on characteristics vbich ware inconclusive predictors of skillfulness. In another study of free throw shooting, Wson (198%) examined nrcessful Sktj relative to lmsuccessful shots. Within the elite shooters, there vere m trends to separate the made from the missed shots. She concluded that these players ere usirq individual strategies of adjustment and that a use study approach should be employed in future studies of higuy skilled shocters. Tsarouchas et al. also found that there ere individual differences within good shooters in that some had a elova elbow tdiqw while others used a 'higha efbou tachnip in their shooting form. Nthouqh free throw studies provide inforation about vhat may be iqortant to success in shootisiq froo 1.6 8, there is limited infomtim about kinematic variables which are associated with suxess at otter distances. Bence, the purpose of this study mas to analyze field goals taken fro8 three different distances. Specifically, do kimtic characteristics increase systemtically as distance iron the goal increases? Whet, do wre successful shooters differ fro8 less successful shooters in terns of kine~atics?