Anthropometric profiles and body composition of elite Polish senior Greco-Roman wrestlers

ˑ: 

Igor Cieśliński1
1University of Physical Education in Warsaw, Poland; Faculty of Physical Education and Sport in Biala Podlaska, Poland

Keywords: anthropometric features,  Greco-Roman style.

Introduction. Many studies of wrestling present the analyses of factors determining successful performance in the sport, including wrestlers’ anthropometric features that, individually or together with other factors, enable the assessment of athletes’ readiness for competition (Platonov, Nikitienko 2019, Gierczuk 2019).. Studying wrestlers’ anthropometric features and body composition can also be a way of determining the anthropometric characteristics of a model wrestler.  Wrestlers’ anthropometric features and body composition provide valuable measures of their preparedness for competition due to their association with other success factors. For instance, fat-free body mass has been found to be strongly correlated with athletes’ mean power on the Wingate test. An association has also been demonstrated between the performance of lightweight Greco-Roman wrestlers and the sum of skinfolds and arm circumference (Gierczuk 2019). The authors of another study who investigated wrestlers’ anthropometric features in relation to their performance on various tests have reported a significant correlation between percentage body fat and VO2max (aerobic capacity) (Melki, Bouzid, and Fadhloun 2019). The purpose of this study was to determine the anthropometric and body composition profiles of elite Greco-Roman wrestlers taking account of their weight category and sport achievements.

Materials and methods. The study was conducted with 49 Greco-Roman wrestlers divided into lightweight (from 59 to 75 kg) and heavyweight (from 80 to 130 kg) athletes. Athletes in each weight category were additionally divided into those who won medals at the Poland Seniors Championships (successful) and those who took places from 5th to 8th (less successful) (Tab. 1.)

Table 1. Wrestlers’ characteristics (mean(SD))

Group

Weight category

Age (years)

Experience (years)

successful

lightweight

heavyweight

22.36(1.43)

22.36(1.74)

8.45(1.91)

10.45(3.29)

less successful

lightweight

heavyweight

20.54(1.51)

21.51(1.83)

6.63(0.81)

6.75(1.13)

The anthropometric features of the study participants were determined by measuring their height, mass, and BMI, the length of the upper and lower limbs, the width of the shoulders, the width of the pelvis, the resting circumference of the arm, forearm, thigh and calf, as well as the thickness of the pectoral, biceps, subscapular, suprailiac, abdominal, medial calf and chin skinfolds (seven in total)). The hypothesis that in neither of the two weight categories did the values of the selected parameters differentiate successful from less successful wrestlers was tested by one-way ANOVA at a level of significance of p<0.05. Its results for the successful wrestlers were normalised to means and standard deviations of the results obtained for the less successful athletes.. Lastly, a logistic regression model was built using parameters that significantly differentiated successful from less successful wrestlers.

Results. The anthropometric features and body composition proved more important for the successful performance of the lightweight Greco-Roman wrestlers. Although differences in the mean values of the analysed parameters occurred both among lightweight wrestlers and among heavyweight wrestlers, only in the first group the differences were significant. The near significance of arm circumference in the heavyweight wrestlers and a relatively high value of its effect size (omega square) indicated, however, that the parameter can be  important for wrestlers’ ability to win medals regardless of their weight category (tab.2,3; fig. 1,2).

Tab. 2. Comparison of successful and less successful wrestlers (heavyweight)

Variable

Group

P (omega square)

successful

less successful

Body height (cm)

178.27(8.37)

182.08(4.12)

>0.1(-0.04)

Body mass (kg)

90.16(16.69)

87.25(14.46)

>0.1(0.00)

BMI (kg/m2)

28.00(3.52)

26.23(4.43)

>0.1(-0.01)

Fat content (%)

13.65(2.83)

11.78(6.61)

>0.1(-0.04)

Muscle mass (kg)

73.70(11.10)

72.32(6.03)

>0.1(0.07)

Water content (%)

59.55(3.60)

62.12(3.91)

0.07(0.10)

Length of lower limbs (cm)

99.39(5.70)

103.63(5.00)

0.09(0.08)

Length of upper limbs (cm)

72.87(4.04)

 76.84(6.37)

>0.1(-0.03)

Shoulder width (cm)

46.81(2.60)

47.33(1.29)

>0.1(-0.04)

Pelvis width (cm)

35.91(2.14)

36.25(2.27)

>0.1(-0.04)

Arm circumference (cm)

34.18(2.73)

31.92(2.62)

0.06(0.12)

Forearm circumference (cm)

28.16(3.36)

27.79(4.37)

>0.1(0.01)

Thigh circumference (cm)

58.46(5.49)

56.17(4.79)

>0.1(-0.04)

Calf circumference (cm)

38.67(3.69)

38.32(3.21) 

>0.1(0.00)

Sum of 7 skinfolds (cm)

65.67(22.55)

76.67(28.36)*

>0.1(-0.04)

*mean(SD)

Tab. 3. Comparison of successful and less successful wrestlers (lightweight)

Variable

groups

P (omega square)

successful

less successful

Body height (cm)

174.64(4.54)

172.36(3.20)

>0.1(0.04)

Body mass (kg)

69.46(4.99)

67.67(5.28)

>0.1(-0.02)

BMI (kg/m2)

22.68(1.63)

22.78(1.90)

>0.1(-0.05)

Fat content (%)

7.91(2.62)

 7.60(2.04)

>0.1(-0.04)

Muscle mass (kg)

 60.57(2.41)

 59.35(3.71)

>0.1(-0.01)

Water content (%)

63.91(3.19)

65.55(2.29)

>0.1(0.04)

Length of lower limbs (cm)

96.60(2.84)

 94.50(2.06)

0.06(0.12)

Length of upper limbs (cm)

69.70(2.34)

70.91(3.54)

>0.1(0.00)

Shoulder width (cm)

42.71(2.58)

44.60(2.43)

0.09(0.09)

Pelvis width (cm)

34.28(1.12)

 34.00(2.26)

>0.1(-0.04)

Arm circumference (cm)

31.28(2.85)

28.77(2.09)

<0.05(0.17)

Forearm circumference (cm)

26.20(1.80)

25.38(1.39)

>0.1(0.02)

Thigh circumference (cm)

53.00(2.94)

53.25(3.52)

>0.1(-0.05)

Calf circumference (cm)

34.95(1.62)

36.73(2.65)

0.07(0.11)

Sum of 7 skinfolds (cm)

47.98(9.14)

59.82(12.51)*

<0.05(0.20)

 

*mean(SD)

Tab. 3.  Results from the logistic regression model (lightweight wrestlers)

Variable

Parameter estimate/std error

t value/p

Arm circumference

-0.46/0.26

-1.73/0.09

Sum of 7 skinfolds (cm)

 0.10/0.05

 1.86/0.07

Adjusted R squared 0.09 /F statistic 0.11

The logistic regression model showed that the analysed variables have some role in a wrestler’s ability to win a medal, but overall it was not significant and its variables explained only 9% of the variance.

Fig. 1 Normalized anthropometric features and body composition (heavyweight wrestlers)

 

Fig. 2. Normalized anthropometric features and body composition (lightweight wrestlers)

Discussion. The importance of anthropometric features and body composition in modelling the successful Greco-Roman wrestler is highlighted in many studies that differ from ours in the research approach. High standard deviations obtained in the study of the anthropometric features of the elite Azerbaijani wrestlers (Rahmani, Mirzaei, et al. 2019) for athletes’ height and BMI indicate that its authors excluded weight categories from the analysis. Even so, their findings are consistent with ours in that they too point to a high proportion of fat-free body mass and a low percentage of fat in the participants. Similar findings (especially regarding athletes’ fat mass content) were reported by researchers studying the Italian national wrestling team (Zaccagni 2012), who estimated that the male wrestlers’ fat mass percentage was at the minimum level of ca. 5%, i.e. less than in our study. The results obtained by the Colombian authors (Ramirez-Velez et al. 2014) are similar to ours for most parameters analysed (mainly circumferences and linear dimensions). The authors of a case study comparing the anthropometric and body-composition parameters between a four-time world champion in Greco-Roman wrestling and other wrestlers in the same weight category (B. Mirzaei et al. 2011) did not find them to be significantly different. The findings of this study are similar to ours only with respect to the heavyweight wrestlers, because the lightweight wrestlers in our study proved to differ significantly in the values of several parameters. The authors of another study (Casals et al. 2017) observed that wrestlers’ anthropometric features and body composition are specific to their weight category. The observation is entirely consistent with our findings, which also show that the anthropometric features are more important for the success of the lightweight wrestlers. The knowledge of this is of vital importance and should be made use of in the early stages of developing training programmes for athletes (including wrestlers). It is important to note that the significance of the above findings goes beyond wrestling as they also extend to other combat sports (see, for instance, Reale et al. 2019).

Conclusions. The wrestlers’ anthropometric features and body composition contribute to a very limited extent to their ability to win medals, mostly in the lightweight categories.

In studying athletes’ anthropometric parameters, the main focus should be on their relationship with other success factors (physiological, fitness, and technical).

References

  1. Casals Cristina, José María López-Gullón, Tatjana Trivic, Patrik Drid. 2017. “Somatotypes and Anthropometric Profile of Elite Serbian Greco-Roman Wrestlers.” Applicable Research in Wrestling, 128.
  2. Gierczu Dariusz. 2019. “Somatyczne I Sprawnościowe Uwarunkowania Wyniku Sportowego Wysoko Kwalifikowanych Zapaśniczek i Zapaśników.” Akademia Wychowania Fizycznego W Warszawie. Filia w Białej Podlaskiej.
  3. Melki Hasan, Mohamed S Bouzid, Mourad Fadhloun. 2019. “Correlation Between Morphological and Functional Variables During a Specific Wrestling Test for Tunisian Cadet Greco-Roman Wrestlers.” Journal of Physical Education and Sport 19. Universitatea din Pitesti: 1282–7.
  4. Mirzaei Bahman, David G Curby, Ioannis Barbas, Navid Lotfi. 2011. “Anthropometric and Physical Fitness Traits of Four-Time World Greco-Roman Wrestling Champion in Relation to National Norms: A Case Study.” Journal of Human Sport and Exercise 6  (2). Universidad de Alicante. Área de Educación Física y Deporte.
  5. Ramirez-Velez Robinson, Rodrigo Argothyd, Jose Francisco Meneses-Echavez, Maria Beatriz Sanchez-Puccini, Carlos Alejandro Lopez-Alban, and Daniel Dylan Cohen. 2014. “Anthropometric Characteristics and Physical Performance of Colombian Elite Male Wrestlers.” Asian Journal of Sports Medicine 5  (4). Kowsar Medical Institute.
  6. Reale Reid, Louise M Burke, Gregory R Cox, and Gary Slater. 2019. “Body Composition of Elite Olympic Combat Sport Athletes.” European Journal of Sport Science, no. just-accepted. Taylor & Francis: 1–34.
  7. Zaccagni Luciana. 2012. “Anthropometric Characteristics and Body Composition of Italian National Wrestlers.” European Journal of Sport Science 12  (2). Taylor & Francis: 145–51.
  8. Platonov Vladimir, Nikitienko Aleksei 2019 “Agility and coordination testing in hand-to-hand combat sports” Pol. J. Sport Tourism 26 (2), 7-13.

Abstract

Many findings indicate that anthropometric features and body composition can play an important role in assessing important aspects of competition preparedness in Greco-Roman wrestlers. The purpose of this study was to develop the anthropometric and body composition profiles of elite Greco-Roman wrestlers with respect to their weight category and the level of performance. In studying anthropometric variables, their relationship with other factors (physiological, fitness, and technical) that can determine the athlete’s success should be considered most of all.