## 3 Results  
The KMO values of 0.807 and 0.84 for the two groups indicate that the data set is suitable for PCA. The Bartlett test showed a significant level \(\alpha\leq 0.001\), confirming that the variables were correlated in the population (Table 2A,B). The PCA reduced fifteen observed variables to four principal components, which explained 84 to 87% of the variance for both groups. The PCA model for Group 1 (Table 3) shows that the variables in the sprint run test had the highest loading (correlations) with the first principal component (C1). The second principal component (C2) was highly correlated with the variables of the repeated vertical jump test. The third principal component (C3) was highly correlated with the results of the skating sprint variables and C4 was highly correlated with the results of the standing long jump and triple jump (right/left leg) tests. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{3}{c}{(**A**)} \\ \hline Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure of sampling adequacy. & 0.84 \\ \hline [PERSON]’s test of sphericity & Approx. chi-square & 1652.04 \\ \hline  & Degree of freedom & 105 \\ \hline  & Significance & \(\leq\)0.001 \\ \hline  & (**B**) & \\ Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure of sampling adequacy. & 0.807 \\ \hline [PERSON]’s test of sphericity & Approx. chi-square & 1501.018 \\ \hline  & Degree of freedom & 105 \\ \hline  & Significance & \(\leq\)0.001 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: (**A**) Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) and [PERSON]’s test Group 1. (**B**) Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) and [PERSON]’s test Group 2. In the PCA model for Group 2 (Table 4), the same components were recognized, but the order of the components differed. C1 was highly correlated with the skating sprint test variables, C2 maintained the same order and was highly correlated with the variables from the repeated vertical jump test, C3 was highly correlated with the results of the standing long jump and triple hop jump (right/left leg) tests. The high factor loadings on the fourth principal component (C4) were demonstrated by the results of the running sprint test. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l} \hline \hline
**Test** & **Variables** & **1** & **2** & **3** & **4** \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{l}{Skating sprint test} & S\_v\_2.s (m/s) & **0.929** & 0.306 & \(-\)0.495 \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{l}{S\_v\_3.s (m/s)} & **0.9** & 0.394 & \(-\)0.508 \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{l}{S\_v\_1.s (m/s)} & **0.873** & & \(-\)0.331 \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{l}{Repeated vertical jump test} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{RSI} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{0.982} & \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{l}{Pact (W/kg)} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{0.979} & \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{l}{h (m)} & 0.455 & 0.774 & 0.421 & \(-\)0.467 \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{l}{tc (s)} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{\(-\)**0.768**} & \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{l}{Jumps in horizontal direction} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{TJL (m)} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{0.941} & \(-\)0.439 \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{l}{TJR (m)} & 0.309 & **0.911** & \(-\)0.417 \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{l}{SJ (m)} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{0.899} & \(-\)0.464 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: PCA components loadings of the leg strength variables after Oblimin rotation with Kaiser normalization for advance novice and junior (Group 2).