## 1 Introduction  
Basketball is a high-intensity, intermittent, court-based team sport characterized by rapid and frequent transitions between offensive and defensive roles [1]. The physical demands of basketball include high-intensity actions such as jumping, sprinting, accelerations, decelerations, and changes of direction (COD), frequently performed under decision-making constraints and during technical-tactical actions such as diribbling, defending, shooting, or blocking [2, 3]. Throughout a game, players are required to perform multidirectional high-intensity actions every minute with varying movement patterns, distances, trajectories, frequency, and duration [4]. Notably, these physical demands have increased over time, driven by rule modifications, evolving playing styles, and advancements in the player's physical capabilities [5, 6]. Consequently, understanding the speed and movement patterns demands in basketball is crucial for coaches and strength and conditioning coaches to optimize assessment protocols and prescribe targeted sprint-training programs. Recent scientific literature highlighted the relevance of assessing multidirectional speed performance in basketball players [7]. Previous recommendations for speed assessment in basketball focused on both linear sprint and COD tests [8, 9]. However, the time-motion analyses of elite women's basketball games showed that speed maneuvers include not only linear sprints and COD but also curvilinear sprints (CSs), accounting for approximately 31% of all speed maneuvers [10]. The CS could be defined as the upright running phase of a sprint with the presence of some degree of curvature [11]. The CS presented kinematic and neuromuscular differences in both the inside and outside leg compared to linear sprints (LS) [11; 12; 13]. Specifically, the CS is characterized by shorter flight times, reduced step lengths, longer ground contact times, lower velocity, and greater braking impulse to generate the centripetal forces needed for maintaining the bend [14]. In this regard, [PERSON] et al. [14] analyzed the intra-session reliability and kinematic characteristics of the new CS test using the 3-point line of an official basketball court, reporting high relative and absolute reliability in acceleration, velocity, and sprint time outcomes for young basketball players. However, it is well established that a test's reliability may be influenced by different factors such as biological maturation, speed training experience, or the interval between test-retest measurements [15; 16]. Therefore, further research examining the influence of these factors is warranted. Speed testing is widely used for talent identification during the selection process in youth basketball programs [17]. These identification and selection processes often occur during early to mid-adolescence, a pivotal stage of development where athletic performance can be influenced by relative age and biological maturation [18]. Maturation, characterized by structural changes in muscle mass, strength, neuromuscular coordination, androgenic hormone levels, or stretch-shortening cycle effectiveness [19; 20], is recognized as one of the strongest predictors of game performance in youth basketball. As such, maturity status should be considered when conducting fitness assessments for youth basketball players. Specifically, previous research has shown that more mature players typically exhibit better linear sprint and COD performance [21]. Moreover, studies have documented a nonlinear development in sprinting during a growth spurt due to changes in anthropometric and muscle architecture optimizing the ability to produce force and increase stride frequency and length [22]. Despite the well-documented influence of maturation on speed performance, its specific effects on CSs remain unexplored. To date, only [PERSON] et al. (2020) have examined the evolution of CS performance across age categories (U-15 to U-20) in youth soccer players [23].