## 4 Discussion  
The results of this study showed that a large amount of the MAT performance could be explained by an athlete's strength and power characteristics; however, the model differs depending on which side it is initiated. Using the adjusted coefficient of determination, 93% of the MAT time initiated to the left first could be explained by a model including left leg peak power during the leg press, left leg hip adductors MIS, and CMJ height. On the other hand, 83% of the MAT time initiated to the right first might be predicted by dominant limb abductors and adductors' MIS. Correlations between the athlete's strength and power characteristics and the MAT initiated to the left and right were similarly significant, except for DJ height which was largely negatively correlated with the MAT initiated to the left first. In contrast, a very large negative correlation was found between right leg hip abductors MIS and MAT initiated to the right first. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Y = MAT LEFT**} \\ \hline
**Variables** & **B** & **Beta** & \(\boldsymbol{p}\) \\ Constant & & 7.927 & 0.001 \({}^{*}\) \\ Leg Press\({}_{\text{LEFT}}\) & \(-0.314\) & \(-0.001\) & 0.038 \({}^{*}\) \\ AD\({}_{\text{LEFT}}\) & \(-0.443\) & \(-0.002\) & 0.002 \({}^{*}\) \\ CMJ JH & \(-0.585\) & \(-0.028\) & 0.005 \({}^{*}\) \\ \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\(R^{2}\) = 0.93} \\ \hline
**Variables** & **B** & **Beta** & \(\boldsymbol{p}\) \\ Constant & & 8.860 & 0.001 \({}^{*}\) \\ AB\({}_{\text{LEFT}}\) & \(-0.498\) & \(-0.002\) & 0.002 \({}^{*}\) \\ AD\({}_{\text{LEFT}}\) & \(-0.290\) & \(-0.001\) & 0.047 \({}^{*}\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \({}^{*}\)\(p<0.01\); B–unstandardized beta (regression) coefficient; Beta–standardized beta (regression) coefficient; R\({}^{2}\)–[PERSON]’s multivariate coefficient of determination; CMJ–countermovement jump.  
\end{table} 
Table 3: Stepwise regression analyses relating left and right MAT with hip maximum isometric strength, Keiser leg press peak power, vertical jumping, and sprint performance values. Studies on the associations between the strength and power characteristics and MAT performance demonstrate equivocal findings. For example, [PERSON] et al. [12] reported no relationship between MAT time, 10 m linear sprint, and CMJ height with arm swing in male team sports players. However, these findings might not transfer to basketball since its game play is more specifically related to the shuffling motions in the MAT than other team sports (i.e., soccer and handball). To our knowledge, this and a study by [PERSON] et al. [16] were the only ones that investigated relationships between MAT time and strength power-related characteristics among basketball players. However, comparing the results obtained in this study and [PERSON] et al. [16] is difficult because the measures of strength and power-related outcomes used varied significantly between studies. Moreover, taking into account registered MAT times, it seems that the players participating in the [PERSON] et al. [16] study were better trained compared to the participants of this study, which may also be a factor modulating the conclusions [24]. Nevertheless, significant knowledge and training clues can be derived from comparing those studies' data. [PERSON] et al. [16] sought relationships between MAT time and absolute and relative peak force in CMJ and standing long jump distance. In contrast, height, peak velocity, and relative peak power during CMJ and DJ were evaluated in the current study. [PERSON] et al. [16] showed a large negative relationship between standing long jump distance and relative peak force during CMJ and MAT time. While the current study found a moderate and large negative relationship between MAT time and tested vertical jumps height (DJ and CMJ). Therefore, it seems that MAT time might be associated with jumping performance.