## 3 Results  
Descriptive statistics for the raw data (kinematic and temporal parameters) in the three modalities of RP are presented in Table 1.  
The Kruskal-Wallis test revealed significant general differences across all three modalities in all the examined variables but tBA (Table 2). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Variable**} & **RPNH** & **RPH** & **RPSM** \\ \hline tHAS (ms) & –155.89 \(\pm\) 28.98 & –207.89 \(\pm\) 42.97 & –242.38 \(\pm\) 39.37 \\ tHA (ms) & –89.89 \(\pm\) 23.44 & –79.44 \(\pm\) 27.88 & –83.21 \(\pm\) 32.53 \\ tHV (ms) & –40.56 \(\pm\) 15.71 & –33.33 \(\pm\) 13.01 & –32.50 \(\pm\) 12.01 \\ tBAS (ms) & –138.11 \(\pm\) 48.21 & –211.33 \(\pm\) 37.88 & –228.21 \(\pm\) 53.13 \\ tBA (ms) & –309.89 \(\pm\) 201.28 & –196.11 \(\pm\) 25.96 & –254.17 \(\pm\) 125.06 \\ tBV (ms) & –87.78 \(\pm\) 64.21 & –44.22 \(\pm\) 36.49 & –55.00 \(\pm\) 38.62 \\ tBRA (ms) & –15.22 \(\pm\) 35.72 & 38.78 \(\pm\) 39.77 & 29.29 \(\pm\) 50.64 \\ HA (g0) & 5.92 \(\pm\) 16.4 & 6.73 \(\pm\) 1.22 & 6.48 \(\pm\) 1.05 \\ HV (m/s) & 3.89 \(\pm\) 0.90 & 6.20 \(\pm\) 0.70 & 6.58 \(\pm\) 0.64 \\ BA (g0) & 0.21 \(\pm\) 0.34 & 0.51 \(\pm\) 0.25 & 0.31 \(\pm\) 0.21 \\ BV (m/s) & 0.10 \(\pm\) 0.10 & 0.97 \(\pm\) 0.41 & 1.18 \(\pm\) 0.20 \\ BRa (deg) & 14.35 \(\pm\) 4.96 & 74.95 \(\pm\) 15.02 & 64.76 \(\pm\) 13.93 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Abbreviations: RPNH—reverse punch no hip included; RPH—reverse punch in motion; t—time of event; H—hand; B—body; A—acceleration in the dominant axis of motion; V—velocity; Ra—rotation angle; S—start.  
\end{table} 
Table 1: MEAN \(\pm\) SD calculated for the kinematic and temporal parameters in different modalities of RP. Further analysis identified partial differences. It can be seen from the data in Table 3 that an increase in HV, BV, BA, and BRa was significantly different (\(p<0.050\)) across the three modalities of execution, with the lowest effect size between RPH and RPSM. As for the HA, significance was not proven between RPH and RPSM alone. Statistical significance was not proven for five temporal variables between RPH and RPSM. In the final step, partial rank correlation was applied, and the results of the analysis are presented in Table 4. A large correlation was found between tHV:ttA, BA:tBA, tBV:tBA, BRa:BV, explaining 57%, 36%, 34%, and 30% of the variance, respectively. The medium correlation coefficients were determined for 17 pairs of variables. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c} \hline  & **tHAS** & **tHA** & **tHV** & **tBAS** & **tBA** & **tBV** \\ \hline Chi–Square & 73.64 & 9.44 & 6.51 & 57.60 & 5.78 & 20.04 \\ df & 2 & 2 & 2 & 2 & 2 \\ Asymptotic Significance & 0.000 & 0.009 & 0.039 & 0.000 & 0.056 & 0.000 \\ \hline  & **tBRa** & **HA** & **HV** & **BA** & **BV** & **BRa** \\ \hline Chi–Square & 38.91 & 12.49 & 87.21 & 37.59 & 95.02 & 91.12 \\ df & 2 & 2 & 2 & 2 & 2 \\ Asymptotic Significance & 0.000 & 0.002 & 0.000 & 0.000 & 0.000 & 0.000 \\ \hline Abbreviations: t—time of an event; H—hand; B—body; A—acceleration in the dominant axis of motion; V—velocity; RA—rotation angle; S—start. & & & & \\ \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: The general differences in the temporal and kinematic parameters of the reverse punch examined across the three modalities of RP.