Master, PhD student Anita Lamoshova¹
Associate Professor S.M. Lukina²
Dr.Hab., PhD, Associate Professor Olga Kiselovichova¹
Master, PhD Adriana Krnachova^1
1Comenius University of Bratislava, Faculty of Physical Education and Sports, Slovakia
²Saint Petersburg State University, Saint Petersburg

Objective of the study was to conduct a 3D analysis to identify the kinematic characteristics in the key phases of two different elements in sports aerobics: free illusion to vertical split (FIVS) and free illusion to free vertical split (FIFVS), and compare the differences with the emphasis on the performance technique.
Methods and structure of the study. The elements were performed by a female athlete - a member of the Slovak national team in sport aerobics (age – 21 years, sports experience – 16 years, height – 159 cm, body mass – 52 kg). Two difficulty Group D elements (balance and flexibility) were investigated: free illusion to vertical split and free illusion to free vertical split. The data were recorded and collected via SIMI Motion 3D system, version 8.5, German company SIMI Reality Motion Systems GmbH, by 8 synchronized high-speed infrared cameras. The temporal and spatial variables were recorded: duration of the selected phases of the elements, acceleration and velocity of the leading leg, height of the center of mass. For easier analysis of the elements, we selected 2 phases for each: Phase 1 – "illusion", Phase 2 – "vertical split".
Results and conclusions. The indicators that appeared to be the key ones in terms of the correct performance technique were detected: duration of the phases, angular variables, height of the center of mass, and acceleration and velocity of the leading leg. The results showed the major error in the second phase of free illusion to free vertical split where the minimum requirement (at least 170° between the legs in the split position) was not reached and the female gymnast showed only 161.31° range. Additionally, a mistake in the position of the support leg, which must be perpendicular to the floor during the vertical split, was detected in both elements (FIVS = 83.04°; FIFVS = 77.58°).

Keywords: biomechanical analysis, spatial and temporal characteristics, free illusion to vertical split, free illusion to free vertical split.

References

1. Federation Internationale de Gymnastique (FIG). Aerobic Gymnastics 2017 – 2020 Code of Points. 2017. Available at: http://www.fig-gymnastics.com/publicdir/rules/files/aer/AER_CoP_2017-202...
2. Giugno Y., Napolitano S., Izzo R., Raiola G. Assessment of aerobic gymnastics by video analysis. Science, Movement and Health, 2013, vol.13, no 2, pp. 205-210.
3. Kalichová M., Baláž J., Bedřich P., Zvonař M. Basic biomechanics of physical excercises. Brno: Faculty of Sport Studies, Masaryk University, 2011.
4. Kyselovičová O., Lukina S.M., Lamošová A, Péliová K., Krnáčová A. Relationship of kinematic variables of selected aerobic gymnastic leap (kinematic characteristics of switch split leap). Theory and Practice of Physical Culture, 2019, no 6, pp. 26-29.
5. López J., Vernetta M., De la Cruz J. C. Morphological and functional characteristics of sports aerobics. Apunts. Educación Física y Deportes, 1999, vol. 55, pp. 60-65.
6. Loquet M., Gantcheva G, Halilova D. Constituting a technical knowledge: The example of the «Illusion» in Rhythmic Gymnastics. Science et Motricite, 2009, vol.68, no 3, pp. 9-25.
7. Mezei M., Cristea O. Performance criteria in Aerobic Gymnastics – Impact on the Sportive Training. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2014, vol. 117, pp. 367-373.
8. Prassas S. G. Biomechanical research in gymnastics: what is done, what is needed. In: Prassas S. G., Sanders R. H. Applied Proceedings of the XVII International Symposium on Biomechanics in Sports, Acrobatics, Perth: Cowan University 1999, pp. 1-10.