# Analysis of the Influence of the Angular Position of the Clean in Kinematics and Kinetics
## 3 Results
An ANOVA was performed to analyze the differences between the variables studied in each situation of study (0\({}^{\circ}\), 2\({}^{\circ}\), 4\({}^{\circ}\), 6\({}^{\circ}\)) and the results obtained with the cleat itself (Table 2). All variables, with the exception of Ankle_Prono_6, Knee_Rot_0, Knee_Rot_2, Knee_Rot_6, Knee_Yawn_0, Knee_Yawn_2, Hip_Flex_4, Hip_Rot_4 and Pelvis_ML_0, showed statistically significant differences (\(p<0.05\)) compared to their values obtained with the cyclist's cleat. It is interesting because a little change in the sagittal plane of the cleat will influence the kinematics of the lower limb with repercussions for the biomechanics and the muscle action. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Variable** & **Minimum** & **Maximum** & **Average** & **St. dev.** \\ \hline Hip\_Rot\_PP & 6\({}^{\circ}\) & 25\({}^{\circ}\) & 12.34\({}^{\circ}\) & 4.47\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Hip\_Rot\_0 & 6\({}^{\circ}\) & 21\({}^{\circ}\) & 13.72\({}^{\circ}\) & 4.08\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Hip\_Rot\_2 & 8\({}^{\circ}\) & 20\({}^{\circ}\) & 13.14\({}^{\circ}\) & 3.91\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Hip\_Rot\_4 & 9\({}^{\circ}\) & 19\({}^{\circ}\) & 13.83\({}^{\circ}\) & 3.13\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Hip\_Rot\_6 & 7\({}^{\circ}\) & 21\({}^{\circ}\) & 13.28\({}^{\circ}\) & 3.65\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Hip\_ABD\_PP & 6\({}^{\circ}\) & 25\({}^{\circ}\) & 13.93\({}^{\circ}\) & 6.57\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Hip\_ABD\_0 & 5\({}^{\circ}\) & 28\({}^{\circ}\) & 15.86\({}^{\circ}\) & 7.02\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Hip\_ABD\_2 & 5\({}^{\circ}\) & 27\({}^{\circ}\) & 14.34\({}^{\circ}\) & 6.14\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Hip\_ABD\_4 & 6\({}^{\circ}\) & 25\({}^{\circ}\) & 15.21\({}^{\circ}\) & 5.90\({}^{\circ}\) \\ \(\mathrm{P}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}\) & 2\({}^{\circ}\) & 13\({}^{\circ}\) & 5.95\({}^{\circ}\) & 2.63\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Pelvis\_AP\_0 & 2\({}^{\circ}\) & 13\({}^{\circ}\) & 5.79\({}^{\circ}\) & 2.55\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Pelvis\_AP\_2 & 3\({}^{\circ}\) & 13\({}^{\circ}\) & 5.90\({}^{\circ}\) & 2.26\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Pelvis\_AP\_4 & 3\({}^{\circ}\) & 12\({}^{\circ}\) & 6.31\({}^{\circ}\) & 2.24\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Pelvis\_AP\_6 & 3\({}^{\circ}\) & 12\({}^{\circ}\) & 6.24\({}^{\circ}\) & 2.37\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Pelvis\_Rot\_PP & 3\({}^{\circ}\) & 10\({}^{\circ}\) & 5.52\({}^{\circ}\) & 2.11\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Pelvis\_Rot\_0 & 3\({}^{\circ}\) & 10\({}^{\circ}\) & 5.97\({}^{\circ}\) & 2.10\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Pelvis\_Rot\_2 & 2\({}^{\circ}\) & 10\({}^{\circ}\) & 5.83\({}^{\circ}\) & 2.02\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Pelvis\_Rot\_4 & 3\({}^{\circ}\) & 11\({}^{\circ}\) & 6.21\({}^{\circ}\) & 2.29\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Pelvis\_Rot\_6 & 3\({}^{\circ}\) & 11\({}^{\circ}\) & 6.21\({}^{\circ}\) & 2.37\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Pelvis\_ML\_PP & 3\({}^{\circ}\) & 10\({}^{\circ}\) & 5.72\({}^{\circ}\) & 2.02\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Pelvis\_ML\_0 & 3\({}^{\circ}\) & 11\({}^{\circ}\) & 6.31\({}^{\circ}\) & 2.09\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Pelvis\_ML\_2 & 3\({}^{\circ}\) & 10\({}^{\circ}\) & 5.66\({}^{\circ}\) & 1.59\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Pelvis\_ML\_4 & 4\({}^{\circ}\) & 11\({}^{\circ}\) & 6.10\({}^{\circ}\) & 1.99\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Pelvis\_ML\_6 & 3\({}^{\circ}\) & 11\({}^{\circ}\) & 5.86\({}^{\circ}\) & 1.94\({}^{\circ}\) \\ AVG\_Power Right\_PP & 35.4 w & 233 w & 122.87 w & 41.76 w \\ AVG\_Power Right\_0 & 66.7 w & 242 w & 132.87 w & 47.57 w \\ AVG\_Power Right\_2 & 62.8 w & 234 w & 137.47 w & 50.01 w \\ AVG\_Power Right\_4 & 62.5 w & 258.3 w & 141.98 w & 52.70 w \\ AVG\_Power Right\_6 & 63.1 w & 290.51 w & 143.20 w & 57.20 w \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: ANOVA of the kinematic variables Ankle flex: ankle flexion; Ankle_ABD: ankle abduction; Knee_flex: knee flexion; knee_rot: knee rotation; Hip_flex: hip flexion; Hip_rot: hip rotation; Hip_ABD: hip abduction; Pelvis_AP: pelvis front-back; Pelvis_Rot: pelvis rotation; pelvis_ML: pelvis mid-lateral.