A STUDY ON NATIONAL MALE THROWERS OF DIFFERENT CATEGORIES –SOMATOTYPE PERSPECTIVE
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2020
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
In sports, body composition measures are widely used to prescribe desirable body weights to optimize competitive performance and to assess the effects of training. Specific events require different body types and weights for maximal performance.In the present study an attempt has been made to study the Somatotypic characteristics of different categories of throwers in India. Discus throwers shows maximum standard deviation of 1.6on comparing with Olympic throwers (2.3 to 3.2) by De Garry,1974; endomorphy was found more in present study throwers (4.32 to 6.39). It shows that our Indian throwers are found fattier with respect to Olympic throwers.On comparing with Olympic throwers (5.9 to 7.1) by De Garry, 1974; mesomorphy was investigated on lower side in present study throwers (4.52 to 6.5). It shows that Olympic throwers are found more muscular skeletal development with respect to Indian throwers. On comparing with Olympic throwers (1.1 to 2.2) by De Garry,1974; ectomorphy was found more in present study throwers (0.77 to 1.78). It shows that Indian throwers are found heavier and shorter with respect to Olympic throwers.
- Bullen, B.A. (1971) overweight. In Encyclopedia of Sport Sciences and Medicine. The Mac. Millar Company, New York.
- Carter, J. E. L. (1970). The somatotype of athletes. A review. Human Biology: 42.535.
- Carter, J.E.L. 1984. Physical Structure of Olympic Athletes, part II, S. Karger, Basel.
- Carter, J.E.L. and Heath ,B.H. 1990. Somatotyping-Development and Applications. Cambridge University Press. 43(3): 29.
- Cureton, T.K. Jr. 1951. Physical Fitness of Champion Athletes, University of Illinois Press, Urbana.
- De Garray, A.L., Levine, L. and Carter, J.E.L.1974. Genetic and Anthropological Studies of Olympic Athletes. Academic Press New York, London.
- Heath, B.H., and Carter, J.E.L. (1967), A modified somatotype method. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 27, 57-74.
- Hirata, K. 1966. Physique and age of Tokyo Olympic Champions. J. Sports Med. Phys. Fit. , 6: 207.
- Malhotra, M.S., Ramaswamy, S.S., Joseph, N.T. and Gupta, J. (1972). Functional capacity and body composition of different classes of Indian athletes. Ind. J. Physiol. Pharmac., 16: 301-308.
- Muthiah,C.M. and Venkateshwarlu, K. 1973. Basic relation and study of age, height and weight of asian track and field athletes. Asian International Golden Albu, of Track and field Statistics,pp 5.
- Parnell,R.W. 1951. Some notes on physique and athletic training with special reference to heart Size. Brit. Med. J.,1:1292.
- Pere, S., Kunnas M. and Telka, A. 1954. Corelation between performance and physique in Finish Athletes. Am. J. Phys. Anthrop., 12,201.
- Ross, W.D., Brown, S.R, Hebbelinck, M. and Paulkner, R.A. 1978. Kinanthropometry, terminology and landmarks. In: Shepard, J & Valllee, H. La (ed). Physical Fitness Assessment Principles, Practices and Applications. Pp 44. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, Illinois.
- Sidhu, L.S. and Wadhan, S.P.S. 1974. Anthropometric variations in throwers and football players. Proc. IVth Annual conference of Indian Assoc. Sports Medicine, pp 55.
- Sodhi, H. S. 1991. Sports Anthropometry, A kinanthropometric Approach, Anova Publications, Mohali.
- Tanner, J.M. 1964. The Physique of the Olympic Athlete. George Allen & Unwin, London.