## 3 Results
### Relationship of Explanatory Variables According to the Practiced Sport  
Analyzing the five EFA factors in each of the sports disciplines, we observed no statistically significant differences in American football, gym, capoeira, and swimming, but we have observed them in Table 6.  
The results showed that the sedentary group has high values in fat mass and skinfolds (\(p<0.020\) and a large effect of 20.6%). Among the sports, those with high values in fat mass were as follows: walking, which also had with low values in bone mass and robustness (\(p<0.001\) and a very large effect of 34.8%); rugby, which had high values in fat mass, skinfolds, and robustness. (\(p<0.001\) and a large effect of 20.8%); volleyball, which also had low values in muscle mass, in addition to bone mass and skinfolds (\(p<0.001\) and a very large effect of 33.2%); and basketball, which showed high values in fat mass, bone mass, and robustness and low values in fat mass (\(p<0.001\) and a large effect of 19%).  
On the other hand, football had low values in fat mass and skinfolds (\(p<0.030\) and a moderate effect of 5.5%) and cycling also had low values in fat mass and muscle mass (\(p<0.001\) and very large effect of 41.2%).  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Sport**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**N**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**F-Fat Mass**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**F-MuscleMass**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**F-Bone Mass**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**F-Skinolds**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**F-Robustness**} & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**ANOVA Repeated Measures**} \\ \cline{5-10}  & & & & & & & & & & \multicolumn{1}{c}{F} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(p\)**-Value**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(\mathbf{R^{2}}\)} \\ \hline Aircraft & 18 & \(-0.53\) & 0.65 & \(-0.15\) & 0.74 & 0.09 & 4.48 ** & 0.003 * & 0.208 \\ Basketball & 27 & 0.52 & \(-0.09\) & 0.57 & \(-0.35\) & 0.65 & 6.08 ** & \(<\)0.001 ** & 0.190 \\ Handball & 33 & 0.06 & 0.04 & \(-0.07\) & \(-0.35\) & 0.76 & 5.92 ** & \(<\)0.001 ** & 0.156 \\ Walking & 32 & 1.16 & 0.06 & \(-0.56\) & 0.14 & \(-0.45\) & 16.56 ** & \(<\)0.001 ** & 0.348 \\ Canoe & 17 & \(-0.76\) & 0.77 & 0.17 & \(-0.72\) & \(-0.25\) & 10.20 ** & \(<\)0.001 ** & 0.389 \\ Cycling & 11 & \(-0.69\) & \(-0.96\) & 0.01 & 0.03 & \(-0.13\) & 7.00 ** & \(<\)0.001 ** & 0.412 \\ Football & 52 & \(-0.44\) & \(-0.20\) & 0.05 & \(-0.31\) & 0.02 & 2.96 * & 0.021 * & 0.055 \\ American football & 15 & 0.65 & 0.37 & 0.87 & 1.40 & 0.06 & 1.97 ** & 0.111 & 0.123 \\ Gym & 16 & \(-0.07\) & \(-0.04\) & \(-0.27\) & \(-0.11\) & 0.03 & 0.34 ** & 0.848 & 0.022 \\ Rugby & 24 & 0.34 & \(-0.15\) & 0.26 & 1.16 & 0.55 & 6.05 ** & \(<\)0.001 ** & 0.208 \\ Running & 40 & \(-0.23\) & \(-0.77\) & 0.22 & 0.25 & \(-0.37\) & 12.12 ** & \(<\)0.001 ** & 0.237 \\ Volleyball & 16 & 0.30 & \(-0.31\) & \(-0.51\) & \(-0.94\) & 0.02 & 7.44 ** & \(<\)0.001 ** & 0.332 \\ Sedentary lifestyle & 24 & 0.49 & \(-0.27\) & 0.13 & 0.60 & \(-0.10\) & 5.97 ** & \(<\)0.001 ** & 0.206 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* NS = not significant;
* = significant; and *
* = highly significant.  
\end{table}
Table 6: Comparative analysis: ANOVA repeated measures. Differences in the factors and explanatory variables between each sport modality.  
Figure 3: Scatter plot of all groups.  
Aisoft had high values in muscle mass and skinfolds and low values in fat mass (\(p<0.01\) and a large effect of 20.8%). Canoe showed high values in muscle mass and low values in fat mass and skinfolds (\(p<0.001\) and a very large effect of 38.9%).  
CrossFit also showed high values in muscle mass and low values in fat mass, bone mass, skinfolds, and robustness. (\(p<0.001\) and a very large effect of 30.1%).  
The sports that showed differences in robustness were running, which had low values in muscle mass and robustness. (\(p<0.001\) and a large effect of 23.7%) and handball, which had high values in robustness and low values in skinfolds (\(p<0.001\) and a large effect of 15.6%).