## 4 Discussion
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**ANOVA** & **DF** & **F** & **Sig. (\(p\) Value)** & \(\eta_{p}\)\({}^{2}\) \\ \hline Main Effect & 2 & 133.543 & \textless{}0.001\({}^{*}\) & 0.812 \\ Post Hoc & & & & \\ Comparisons & F & Mean diff. [95\% CI] & \(p\) & Corrected \(p\) & Cohen’s d \\ \hline BA-TR & \(-18.2\) & \(-1.650\) [\(-1.879\); \(-1.421\)] & \textless{}0.001 \({}^{*}\) & \textless{}0.001 \({}^{*}\) & \(-3.220\) \\ BA-UN & \(-0.805\) & \(-0.106\) [\(-0.440\); \(0.228\)] & 0.427 & 1 & \(-0.142\) \\ TR-UN & \(-13.1\) & \(-1.650\) [\(-2.095\); \(-1.417\)] & \textless{}0.001 \({}^{*}\) & \textless{}0.001 \({}^{*}\) & \(-2.318\) \\ \hline \end{tabular} ANOVA means analysis of the variance; DF means degree of freedom; \(\eta_{p}\)\({}^{2}\) means partial eta squared; corrected \(p\) means that \(p\) value has been corrected following [PERSON]’s procedures; * significant difference values at \(p<0.05\).  
\end{table} 
Table 3: ANOVA table and post hoc outcomes are depicted. compared to the protocol in which only handball shooting drills were performed [27]. In 2021, [PERSON] et al. studied the acute effects of combining dynamic stretching and vibration foam rolling warm-up on lower-limb muscle performance in female collegiate handball players, comparing two different warm-up protocols versus a generic running warm-up. The dynamic stretching combined with vibration foam rolling exercises was shown to be a better warm-up protocol compared to the traditional one [22]. Based on similar results, [PERSON] and colleagues suggested replacing the conventional warm-up protocols with a handball warm-up program based on dynamic balance exercises [34]. The results of this investigation also agree with those from [PERSON] and colleagues, and with those from [PERSON] and colleagues, who found it more beneficial to conclude the warm-up process with some dynamic exercises like small-sided games [27; 35]. Regarding the possible mechanism underlying the apparent better effect of the dynamic warm-up compared to the more static one, [PERSON] and colleagues and [PERSON] and colleagues observed again that dynamic exercises are better than static ones during the warm-up phase and argued that a dynamic preload stimulus can induce a better post-activation potentiation effect, thereby improving jumping and agility performance in handball [18; 36]. Indeed, it has been demonstrated that both isometric and dynamic exercises have the potential to elicit post-activation potentiation, but their effectiveness may vary depending on other factors such as the specific muscle group targeted, the intensity and duration of the exercise, and individual athlete characteristics [37]. Additionally, isometric exercises can create higher levels of muscle tension and neural activation, thus potentially leading to higher potentiation effects. Dynamic exercises, on the other hand, can also induce post-activation potentiation by recruiting many muscle fibers and stimulating the nervous system [38]. Therefore, the choice between isometric and dynamic exercises may depend on other various factors including the athlete's training goals, the sport-specific requirements, and individual preferences. In handball, it is reasonable that dynamic exercises may be often favored for improving performance in athletes that are subsequently engaged in frequent jumping and direction changes during the game. The adoption of different warm-up procedures, especially in elite athletes, therefore has to be decided based also on individual preferences and personal routines. The strengths of this study are the ecological setting and the testing of the effect of these warm-up protocols on high-level athletes. The difficulty of working in real-world field settings with high-level athletes has resulted in very few studies conducted and published. Finally, some limitations should be acknowledged. Firstly, the sample size was relatively small. Furthermore, the sample was limited to males, with no females included.