## 3 Results  
### General Descriptive Analysis  
Table 2 shows a descriptive analysis stratified by sex of all the study variables and the results of the \(\chi^{2}\) test to contrast the differences existing between the categories of each criterion (\(\chi^{2}\) goodness-of-fit test). In particular, there were statistically significant differences in the following criteria: team (both sexes), start of play (men), type of offense (both sexes), offensive actions (both sexes), number of passes made during the different plays (both sexes), ending court zone (men), possession (both sexes), ending player (both sexes), type of ending action (both sexes), and result (both sexes). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l l l l} \hline \hline
**Criterion** & **Code** & **Frequency (n = 509)** & **Percentage (\%)** & \(\chi^{2}\) **Goodness-of-Fit Test** \\ \hline \hline  & & **M (n = 366)** & **W (n = 143)** & **M (71.9)** & **W (28.1)** & **Men** & **Women** \\ \hline Team & WIN & 141 & 58 & 38.5 & 40.6 & \(\chi^{2}\) = 66,443 & \(\chi^{2}\) = 28,545 \\  & TIE & 51 & 18 & 13.9 & 12.6 & \(p<0.001\) & \(p<0.001\) \\  & LOS & 174 & 67 & 47.5 & 46.9 & & \\ \hline Start of play & SLOB & 74 & 36 & 20.2 & 25.2 & \(\chi^{2}\)= 32,525 & \(\chi^{2}\) = 5133 \\  & BSL & 162 & 58 & 44.3 & 40.6 & \(p<0.001\) & \(p=0.077\) \\  & PLAY & 130 & 49 & 35.5 & 34.3 & & \\ \hline Type of offense & TRN & 34 & 23 & 9.3 & 16.1 & \(\chi^{2}\) = 242,634 & \(\chi^{2}\) = 65,797 \\  & SO & 332 & 120 & 90.7 & 83.9 & \(p<0.001\) & \(p<0.001\) \\ \hline Offensive actions & 1X1 NOISO & 40 & 23 & 10.9 & 16.1 & \(\chi^{2}\) = 243,672 & \(\chi^{2}\) = 60,035 \\  & 1X1 ISO & 11 & 4 & 3 & 2.8 & \(p<0.001\) & \(p<0.001\) \\  & PR & 49 & 10 & 13.4 & 7.0 & & \\  & COM & 166 & 52 & 45.4 & 36.4 & & \\  & INB & 66 & 31 & 18 & 21.7 & & \\  & TRN & 34 & 23 & 9.3 & 16.1 & & \\ \hline Number of passes used & N0 & 97 & 37 & 26.5 & 25.9 & \(\chi^{2}\) = 81,344 & \(\chi^{2}\) = 29,238 \\  & N1 & 88 & 31 & 24 & 21.7 & \(p<0.001\) & \(p<0.001\) \\  & N2 & 75 & 33 & 20.5 & 23.1 & & \\  & N3 & 57 & 21 & 15.6 & 14.7 & & \\  & N4 & 30 & 7 & 8.2 & 4.9 & & \\  & N5+ & 19 & 14 & 5.2 & 9.8 & & \\ \hline Ending court zone & Q1 & 61 & 31 & 16.7 & 21.7 & \(\chi^{2}\)= 14,328 & \(\chi^{2}\) = 7874 \\  & Q2 & 99 & 40 & 27 & 28.0 & \(p=0.006\) & \(p=0.096\) \\  & Q3 & 66 & 20 & 18 & 14.0 & & \\  & Q4 & 79 & 27 & 21.6 & 18.9 & & \\  & Q5 & 61 & 25 & 16.7 & 17.5 & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Descriptive analysis of the research. Furthermore, we performed a \(\chi^{2}\) test of independence between all the criteria that made up the research and those that the researchers considered most relevant to the study (basket and team) in order to check for the existence of significant differences (see Tables S1 and S2 in the Supplementary Materials). Taking the basket criterion as a reference, the results showed that there were only significant differences in men in the criteria ending court zone and ending player and in women in the criteria number of passes and possession. If we take the team criterion as a reference, in men, there were only significant differences in the criterion type of offense and possession, with no significant differences in any criterion in women. In Figure 3, we observe that, in men, teams that were losing finished a higher number of successful plays (51.1%) compared with teams that were winning (44.7%) or tied (37.3%). In women, a similar trend was observed, although with a decrease in the percentage of successful plays by the losing teams (44.8%). Furthermore, in both groups, fastbreaks showed a higher success rate in scoring, reaching 58.8% in men and 60.9% in women. On the other hand, in Figure 4, in men, there was a decrease in scoring success starting from the third pass, with the best results obtained from two and three passes (52% and 50.9%, respectively). In women, performance declined more significantly starting from the second pass, with the best scoring results occurring in plays with no passes at all (56.8%).