Dr. Hab., Professor A.P. Skorodumova¹
I.S. Baranov¹
S.D. Semenova¹
G.G. Zakharov^2
1Federal Scientific Center for Physical Culture and Sports, Moscow
²St. Petersburg Scientific Research Institute of Physical Culture, St. Petersburg

Keywords: women’s tennis, correlation analysis, physical fitness, functionality tests, competitive performance, sport excellence stage, top mastery stage, physical qualities.

Background. Externally estimated individual performance and training workload rates in the women’s and men’s tennis are largely different in many aspects including the match times, each point play times, motor intensity rates etc. In our prior study [5] we found correlations of the key physical qualities test rates with the individual competitive performance rates. Due to the significant gender differences in the externally metered workload rates, it may be incorrect to expect the physical qualities versus competitive performance correlations found for the men’s tennis being the same for the women’s tennis.

Objective of the study was to analyze the physical qualities / functionality versus competitive performance test rates and their correlations for the women’s tennis elite.

Methods and structure of the study. We sampled for the study a few elite women tennis players and tested their functionality and physical qualities by a staged progress test program. Thus the aerobic capacities of the sample were tested by a load-stepping treadmill test till failure, with the load stepped every 2 minutes. The anaerobic alactate capacities were tested by a 6-second top-intensity cycle ergometer test. And the physical fitness of the sample was tested by a standard set of 12 tests traditional for the national tennis sport [5].

Results and discussion. We found the competitive performance rates being highly statistically correlated with the functionality rates (maximal oxygen consumption, oxygen pulse and vital capacity), aerobic capacity (AeT), alactate anaerobic capacity (AnT, rt), three speed test rates (response time, single move speed and acceleration rate) and the speed-strength test rate (standing jump test): see Table 1 hereunder.

Table 1. Mean competitive performance-specific physical fitness / functionality test rates

Competitive performance of the modern tennis elite is highly demanding to every physical quality, with a special priority to those in statistically significant correlations with the competitive performance. Since every physical quality was rated by a few tests under the study, we rated the percentage contributions of every physical quality in the competitive performance by the relevant correlation factors – i.e. the higher is the statistical correlation of the physical qualities and competitive performance, the higher is the physical qualities percentage: see Figure 1 hereunder. The above Table demonstrates that the key role for competitive progress in women’s elite tennis is played (without diminishing the importance of the other qualities) by aerobic capacity as a basis for overall endurance; with speed and speed-strength qualities ranked 2nd and 3rd, respectively, followed by anaerobic capacity, movement coordination and flexibility rates.

Figure 1. Percentage contributions of the physical qualities / functionality test rates to competitive performance rates by the correlation factors

The R. Schonborn study [1] of 1987 (republished by ITF in 2007) gives a special priority to coordination qualities and ranks the physical qualities by their contributions to the competitive performance as follows: coordination 90%; acceleration 80%; response rate 70%; aerobic endurance 55%; anaerobic endurance 50% and speed 50%. Note that aerobic endurance is ranked only fourth on the physical qualities list.

Our study data on the subject may be particularly important in view of these issues being still disputable – as demonstrated, among other things, by the questionnaire survey of the Russian and Chinese tennis coaches (n=134) [1] that ranked the competitive-performance-specific physical qualities as follows: speed 53%; flexibility 21%; strength 12%; endurance 7%; and 7% of the respondents put on top quick-wittedness – that has nothing to do with physical fitness in fact. The survey data reported by Yu Gui [1] showed the majority of the tennis coaches giving special attention to speed qualities in the training systems.

It is beyond doubt that success in modern tennis largely depends on the speed qualities. Fast responses are needed to effectively trace and control the ball direction, speed and landing point to start the striking sequence. The single move speed is critical is some game situations; and the acceleration rate is necessary in the others – the far ball chasing ones, for instance. The movement frequency controls are mobilized to reach the best point for a strike. Every of the above physical qualities may be claimed to win a point, with their contributions to competitive performance being the highest. The tennis games, however, are won ideally by 4 successive points, with every match including at least 12 games. As reported by the relevant statistical reports [3], an average tennis match includes more than 120 points. This means that the speed qualities are claimed for 2-3 match hours and, hence, need to be reinforced by high endurance.

Depending on every point play time, the competitive performance is secured by anaerobic energy sources with ATP re-synthesis on the run and aerobic mechanism of the ATP re-synthesis in the rest breaks. To have the ATP reserves being effectively restored in short and strictly limited breaks in points and games, tennis players need to develop highest aerobic capacities. This may be the reason why 6 out of 10 test rates significantly correlated with the competitive performance are directly linked to aerobic capacity and efficiency: see the above Table. Therefore, we would disagree with findings of the above coaches’ survey and recommend a special priority in the training systems being given to the aerobic capacity and efficiency improvement elements. By the average age of the tennis elite, speed qualities should reach their peaks and the training systems need to mostly maintain the speed qualities – since the sensitive periods for their improvements progress are far back.

We would agree with R. Schonborn in the belief that an active competitive performance is secured by three energy sources, with the alactate anaerobic source accounting for 70%, lactate anaerobic for 20% and aerobic for 10% [6]. It should be noted that an active play takes less than 20% of a total match time, and 80% of the activity is secured by aerobic sources. As has been found by our studies, anaerobic energy sources account for 16.2% of the physical qualities critical for the competitive performance. R. Schonborn reported the lactate energy sources accounting for 22.2% of the total anaerobic energy sources. This finding actually agrees with the externally metered match workloads including 16.8% of net time on the slow courts and 13.8% on the fast courts, with the energy supply contributed by glycolysis [4].

Every modern training system gives a special priority to the competitive-performance-critical physical qualities and progress tests to profile the physical fitness growth versus the training tools and methods applied [2]. Our studies found the share of glycolysis in anaerobic energy sources being under 1% - that is indicative of the training systems being inefficient for the competitive progress needs, and needs to be revised. We recommend 1-2 training session in every training micro-cycle being focused on the lactate anaerobic endurance improvement elements, methods and tools from the modern general and special physical fitness toolkits. 

Conclusion. The study found the physical fitness / functionality test rates statistically significantly correlated with the competitive performance rates, with percentage contributions of the individual physical qualities/ functionality rates to the competitive performance – and thereby recommend the priority physical training elements for women’s tennis elite. The study also found deficiencies and inefficiencies in the training systems in the competitive progress securing domain, to offer recommendations on how the women’s tennis elite training systems should be revised.

References

1. Gui Yu. Efforts to improve effectiveness of technical training for 10-12 year-old tennis players. PhD diss.. St. Petersburg, 2018. 192 p.
2. Matveyev L.P. Basics of sports training. M.: Fizkultura i sport publ., 1977. 271 p., il.
3. Skorodumova A.P., Baranov I.S., Semenova S.D. Structure of physical and functional fitness of elite female tennis players. Teoriya i praktika fiz. kultury. 2019. No. 12. pp. 38-40.
4. Skorodumova A.P., Golovachev A.I., Eroshkina S.B. et al. Development of model characteristics of physical and functional fitness indices of highly skilled tennis players. M., 2018. 65 p.: Bibliogr.: pp. 33- 35, 59- 61. Dip. in Ministry of Sport of the Russian Federation 30.09.18, # 118051190099.
5. Skorodumova A.P., Trukhachev A.A., Kuznetsova O.V., Baranov I.S. Physical and functional fitness rating tests for tennis players and model characteristics of their fitness. M.: Federal center for sports reserve training publ., 2013. 40 p.
6. Schonborn R. Energy systems in tennis. Coach Education Series Copyright. ITF 2007. ITFCoaching. 21 p.

Corresponding author: rudra54@yandex.ru

Abstract

Objective of the study was to analyze the physical qualities / functionality versus competitive performance test rates and their correlations for the women’s tennis elite.

Methods and structure of the study. We sampled for the study a few elite women tennis players and tested their functionality and physical qualities by a staged progress test program. Thus the aerobic capacities of the sample were tested by a load-stepping treadmill test till failure, with the load stepped every 2 minutes. The anaerobic alactate capacities were tested by a 6-second top-intensity cycle ergometer test. And the physical fitness of the sample was tested by a standard set of 12 tests traditional for the national tennis sport.

Results and conclusions. The study found the physical fitness / functionality test rates statistically significantly correlated with the competitive performance rates, with percentage contributions of the individual physical qualities/ functionality rates to the competitive performance – and thereby recommend the priority physical training elements for women’s tennis elite. The study also found deficiencies and inefficiencies in the training systems in the competitive progress securing domain, to offer recommendations on how the women’s tennis elite training systems should be revised.