Analysis of the influence of sensor motor coordination on the [631685]

Elsevier Editorial System(tm) for Journal of
Biomechanics
Manuscript Draft

Manuscript Number:

Title: Analysis of the influence of sensor motor coordination on the
biomechanical charac teristics of Yurchenko handspring vault

Article Type: Full Length Article (max 3500 words)

Keywords: Video Biomechanical Analysis,Correlative Analysis,Tests,
Technical Execution, Performance.

Corresponding Author: Professor Vladimir Potop,

Corresponding Author's Institution:

First Author: Vladimir Potop

Order of Authors: Vladimir Potop; Marian Cretu; Virgil Ene – Voiculescu;
Carmen Ene – Voiculescu

Abstract: This paper aims to highlight the influence of the sensor motor
coordinat ion on the kinematics and dynamic characteristics of Yurchenko
handspring vault in women artistic gymnastics. To this end, an
experimental study was carried out in the Romanian national team of
women's artistic gymnastics from 2012 to 2014; a number of 7 g ymnasts
aged 14 to 17 years participated in the study. The fulfilment of the
research tasks involved the organization of 3 tests for the evaluation of
sensor-motor coordination. In order to reveal the influence of the
sensor-motor coordination indicators o n the biomechanical characteristics
of Yurchenko handspring vault by means of the method of movement postural
orientation, a video biomechanical analysis was made using Physics
ToolKit and Kinovea programs. By selecting the most efficient
biomechanical ind icators required for the correct execution of the vault,
a linear parametric correlative analysis (Pearson's) was conducted
between the indicators of the sensor -motor coordination, the
biomechanical characteristics of Yurchenko vault and the performances
achieved in the handspring vaults event. The results of the study
highlighted the strong connections at p<0.01, p<0.05 and moderate
connections with values of r= 0.500 – 0.650 approximately level between
these indicators and their influence on the technical execution.

Cover letter

Analysis of the influence of sensor motor coordination on the biomechanical
characteristics of Yurchenko handspring vault

Original Research Article

We hereby declare that there is no duplicate publication elsewhere of any part of this work.
There are no commercial relationships which might lead to a conflict of interests. The typescript
has been read and agreed by all authors.

We hereby declare that all authors were fully involved in the study and preparation of the
manuscript and the material within has not been and will not be submitted for publication
elsewhere.

Authors:
Vladimir Potop
Marian Cretu
Virgil Ene -Voiculescu
Carmen Ene -Voiculescu

Corresponding author:
Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Ecological University of Bucharest,
Vasile Milea str.1 G,
061346, Romania
E-mail address: [anonimizat] Cover Letter

Referee Suggestions

Vasilica Grigore
[anonimizat]

Sergey Yermakov
[anonimizat] *Referee Suggestions

Analysis of the influence of sensor motor coordination on the 1
biomechanical characte ristics of Yurchenko handspring vault 2
3
Vladimir Potop1, Marian Cretu2, Virgil Ene -Voiculescu3, Carmen Ene -Voiculescu4 4
5
1Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Ecological University of Bucharest, Vasile Milea 6
str.1 G, 061346, Romania 7
2 Faculty of Science, Physical Education and Informatics, University of Pitesti, Tg. din Vale 8
str.1, 110040 , Pitesti, Romania 9
3Faculty of Marine Engineering, „Mircea cel Batran” Naval Academy, Fulgerului str.1, 10
Constanta, 900218, Romania 11
4Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, “Ovidius” University, Cpt. Av. Al. Serbanescu 12
str.1, Constanta, 900470, Romania 13
14
Conflict of Interest: 15
The author s report no conflict of interest. 16
17
Word Count: 2 710 18
19
Correspondence Address: 20
Vladimir Potop, PhD, Doctor of Science in PES 21
Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Ecological University of Bucharest, 22
Vasile Milea str.1 G, Bucharest, 061346, Romania 23
Phone : 004.072.132.4867 Email: vladimir_potop@yahoo.com 24
25 *Manuscript
Click here to view linked References

Abstract 26
This paper aims to highlight the influence of the sensor motor coordination on the kinematics 27
and dynamic characteristics of Yurchenko handspring vault in women artistic gymnastics. To 28
this end, an experimental study was carried out in the Romanian national team of women’s 29
artistic gymnastics from 2012 to 2014; a number of 7 gymnasts aged 1 4 to 17 years 30
participated in the study. The fulfilment of the research tasks involved the organization of 3 31
tests for the evaluation of sensor -motor coordination. In order to reveal the influence of the 32
sensor -motor coordination indicators on the biomechanical characteristics of Yurchenko 33
handspring vault by means of the method of movement postural orientation, a video 34
biomechanical analysis was made using Physics ToolKit and Kinovea programs. By selecting 35
the most efficient biomechanical indicators required for the correct execution of the vault, a 36
linear parametric correlative analysis (Pearson’s) was conducted between the indicators of the 37
sensor -motor coordination, the biomechanical characteristics of Yurchenko vault and the 38
performances achieved in the handspring vaults event. The results of the study highlighted 39
the strong connections at p<0.01, p<0.05 and m oderate connections with values of r= 0.500 – 40
0.650 approximately level between these indicators and their influence on the technical 41
execution. 42
43
Keywords: 44
Video biomechanical analysis , correlative analysis, tests, technical execution , performance . 45

1. Introduc tion 46
Artistic gymnastics has made significant progress in its development, consistent with the 47
changes in the Code of Points 2017 -2020 regarding the content (FIG , 2016 ), construction and 48
composition of the exercises, the current trends of high performance sport and the correct 49
assessment of gymnasts’ efforts based on the knowledge of the biomechanical particularities 50
(Bruggmann , 1994 ; Arkaev and Suchilin, 2004; Prassas et al., 2006 ), the physical training 51
level and the physiological stress of the body (Manolachi , 2018 ). 52
Vaulting is a very dynamic activity; during a competition, the vault, including run -up, will 53
be completed in just a few seconds ( Readhead, 2011). Althoug h the execution of a vault 54
seems to be, at first glance, simpler than any other routine on the other apparatus, however it 55
requires particular skills of the athletes, like (Vieru , 1997 ): spring, speed, strength, 56
coordination and orientation in space, conce ntration and courage. Vaulting is the event with 57
only one basic technical structure, the back handspring and its variants; the difficulty and 58
value of these ones are evaluated according to their length and height of the second flight and 59
also depending on the saltos and twists in different axes (Filipenco et al., 2014 ). 60
Therefore the physical training in gymnastics is mainly focused on the improvement of the 61
technique of movement execution. The purpose is to avoid the following issues (Grigore , 62
2001 ): a po or physical training leads to a faulty technique and to failure in competition; a 63
good technical and physical training which is not supported by proper mental training result 64
in modest performances. Physical training takes two forms (Gaverdovskij , 2014 ; Sm olevskij 65
and Gaverdovskij, 1999 ): general physical training and specific physical training. Thanks to 66
its aesthetical and spectacular features, artistic gymnastics – a sport with complex technique – 67
involves special aptitudes of the athletes who aim at hig h performance. Depending on the 68
share of these skills, we can speak of (Grigore , 2001 ): coordinative capacity (skill), speed, 69
strength, joint mobility and endurance. 70

Athletes’ coordinative capacities differ from one sports branch to another; they are 71
characterized by a complex of predominantly psycho -motor skills and an optimum operation 72
of the sensitive vestibular system which has a great importance for achieving great sports 73
results in various branches of sport and contributes to the more efficient and r apid learning of 74
new movements (Boloban , 2015 ; Dragnea and Bota, 1999 ; Gidu et al., 2010 ). 75
According to Blume (1981), quoted by R. Manno, (1996) the constitutive elements of the 76
coordinative capacity(including the segmental coordination) are: capacity for combining and 77
joining the movements, capacity for spatial -temporal orientation, capacity for kinesthetic 78
differentiation, capacity for balance, capacity for motor reaction, capacity for movements 79
transformation, sense of rhythm. The coordination capacity depends of a series of complex 80
factors that could restrict the performance in certain cases. These ones are (Bota and 81
Prodescu, 1997 ): the optimal tonus of the cerebral cortex and the mobility of the fundamental 82
cortical processes (excitation and inhibitio n), intra and inter -muscular coordination , 83
functional status of the receptors (kinesthetic, tactile, static -dynamic, visual and acoustic 84
analyzers). 85
This paper aims at highlighting the influence of sensor motor coordination on the 86
kinematic and dynamic characteristics of Yurchenko handspring vault in female gymnasts 87
aged 1 4 to 17 years. 88
Hypothesis of the paper. The correlative analysis made between the components of sensor – 89
motor coordination capacity, the indicators of the biomechanical features of sports technique 90
in Yurchenko handspring vault and the performances achieved in competition by the female 91
gymnasts aged 1 4 to 17 years will point out the connection level b etween these indicators and 92
their influence on the technical execution . 93
2. Methods 94
2.1. Participants 95

A number of 7 female gymnasts, whose age was 14 to 17 in 2014, the year of the 96
pedagogical experiment (2012 – 2014), took part in this research. These gymnasts were 97
members of the female national team: 2 gymnasts of 14 years old, one gymnast of 15 years 98
old – Junior I category; 2 athletes aged 16 and 2 athletes aged 17 – senior. The subjects of the 99
study were selected from the team who participated in th e Romanian National 100
Championships of Bucharest – 2014 in the handspring vaults event. 101
2.2. Testing procedures 102
This research was based on the results achieved during the postdoctoral studies of the first 103
author, from 2012 to 2014, dealing with the fundamentals of the learning macro -methods of 104
the young female gymnasts during the basic specialization stage of training in women’s 105
artistic gymnastics (Potop, 2015 ; Potop and Carp, 2017; Potop and Urichianu, 2018 ); it is 106
included in the plan of research for 2018 of the department of Physical Education and Sport, 107
Ecological University of Bucharest, Romania. 108
We used the video computerized analysis by means of ”Kinovea” and ”Physics ToolKit” 109
programs of biomechanical analysis, based on the method of movement postural orientation 110
(Boloban , 2013 ) and assessment of sports technique key elements with complex coordination 111
of movement structure (Gaverdovskji , 2014 ). 112
In order to study the influence of sensor motor coordination development on the 113
biomechanical characteristics in handspring vaults, a number of 10 Yurchenko handspring 114
vaults (3 – Yurchenko stretched saltos YSS, 4 – YSS with 360° twist and 3 – YSS with 720° 115
twist) were analyzed bio -mechanically, in competition conditions, during the Romanian 116
Nation al Championships, Bucharest 2014. 117
The physic structure of the test routines during the research focused on the biomechanical 118
analysis of the key elements of Yurchenko round -off vault with backward salto stretched, 119

taking into account the functional structu re and the causes as a whole, characteristic of the 120
translational and rotational motion of body segments around GCG axis (fig. 1) . 121
Figure 1 here 122
2.3. Statistical analysis 123
The correlative analysis was performed in the research final testing between the 124
comp onents of sensor motor coordination capacity, the indicators of the biomechanical 125
features of sports technique in Yurchenko handspring vault and the performances achieved in 126
competition by the female gymnasts aged 1 4 to 17 years. ”KyPlot” program for stati stical 127
calculation and the parametric test linear correlation – Pearson were used (Thomas and 128
Nelson, 1996 ). 129
The issues listed below were analyzed: 130
a) Horizontal variables: 131
– Control tests of sensor motor coordination indicators in terms of static balance (test 1), 132
static -kinematic stability (test 2), and dynamic – kinematic stability (test 3). 133
– Performances obtained in competition – handspring vaults event during the Romanian 134
National Championships of Women’s Artistic Gymnastics, Bucharest, 2014, regarding the 135
difficulty, execution and final score on this apparatus. 136
b) Vertical variables (Biomechanical indicators) : 137
1-4 indicators , biomechanical indicators required by the analysis : IR (kg∙m2) – inertia of 138
rotation, RM (m) – radius of movement of body segments : toes, shoulder and arms. 139
5-9 indicators , angular characteristics of the key elements of sports technique: 140
– in preparatory phase – LP1 – launching body posture 1 (angle between joints of ankle – 141
shoulders ), MP1 – multiplication of body posture 1 (angle between toes – shoulders ), LP2 – 142
launching body posture 2 (angle between hand joint – foot ); 143
– in basic phase : MP2 – multiplication body posture 2 (angle between hip – torso ); 144

– in final phase : CP – concluding body posture, (angle between hip – torso) – landing. 145
10-19 indicators , spatial characteristics of the body segments trajectory (m): LP1 – 146
shoulders, MP1 – maximum height of GCG flight, LP2 – toes, MP2 – maximum height of 147
GCG and CP flight – shoulders. 148
20-29 indicators , kinematic characterist ics of angular velocity (rad/s): LP1 – shoulders, 149
MP1 – arms and toes, LP2 – toes, MP2 – arms, shoulders and toes and CP – arms, shoulders 150
and toes. 151
30-34 indicators , dynamic characteristics of force resultant of GCG movement (N) in all 152
the key elements o f vaults phases. 153
3. Results 154
3.1. Correlations analysis 155
During the correlative analysis we selected 34 biomechanical indicators considered more 156
efficient for highlighting the influence of the correct technical execution of Yurchenko 157
handspring vault. The results of the correlative analysis of the sensor motor c oordination 158
indicators, the performances recorded in competition and the biomechanical indicators of 159
Yurchenko handspring vault point out the following elements (table 1): 160
Table 1 here 161
Figure 2 here 162
Test 1, (fig. 2) presents strong connections at p<0.01 with radius of movement (RM, m) 163
arms r= -.799 and at p<0.05 with radius of movement (RM, m) shoulders, r= -.690; trajectory 164
of shoulders in concluding posture (CP, m) r=.687; with angular velocity of arms in the 1st 165
flight, regarding the multiplication of bo dy posture (MP1, rad/s) r=.665 and the resultant of 166
force in the 2nd flight, regarding the multiplication of body posture (MP2, N) r= -.736. 167
Moderate connections with the radius of toes (RM, m) r= -.536; with the angular velocity of 168
shoulders in launching po sture 1 (LP1, rad/s) r=.532 and toes in the 2nd flight, in terms of 169

multiplication of body posture 2 (MP2, rad/s) r= -.561; with the resultant of force of GCG 170
movement in the launching posture 1 (LP1, N) r=.572 and LP2, (N) r=.563 while the other 171
indicators show insignificant, weak or even non -existing connections at p>0.05. 172
Figure 3 here 173
Test 2, (fig. 3 ) shows moderate connections with the trajectory of shoulders (X, m) r=.619 174
and (Y, m) r= -.523; with the resultant of force in launching posture 2 (LP2, N) r= -.536 while 175
the other indicators show insignificant, weak or even non -existing connections at p>0.05. 176
Figure 4 here 177
Test 3, (fig. 4) presents strong connections at p<0.05 with radius of movement toes (RM, 178
m), r=.690 and RM shoulders r=.724; tr ajectory of shoulders in concluding posture (CP, X, 179
m) r=.711; with the resultant of force of GCG in the 1st flight, in terms of body posture 180
multiplication (MP1, N) r=.702 and MP2 in the 2nd flight r=.652. Moderate connections with 181
IR (kg•m2) r=.544; with RM, (m) arms r=.513; with the angle between hip and torso in the 2nd 182
flight of MP2, (degrees) r= -.515; with LP1 of shoulders (X, m) r= -.628 and Y, (m) r=.595; 183
with the trajectory of GCG inMP1 in the 1st flight X, (m) r= -.618 and Y, (m) r=.609; with the 184
trajectory of GCG in MP2 in the 2nd flight Y, (m) r=.579; with the trajectory of shoulders in 185
CP Y, (m) r=.500 with angular velocity of shoulders in launching posture 1 ( LP1, rad/s) r= – 186
.535 while the other indicators show insignificant, weak or even non -existing connections at 187
p>0.05. 188
Figure 5 here 189
The performances achieved in competition concerning the difficulty of the vaults (fig. 5) 190
have strong connections at p<0.01 with the hip -torso angle in the 1st flight of MP1 (degrees) 191
r=-.821 and the hip -torso angle (degrees) in the concluding posture (CP) r= -.855; at p<0.05 192
with the trajectory of shoulders in CP Y, (m) r= -.687; with the angular velocity of arms in the 193

1st flight of MP1 (rad/s) r=.698; with the resultant of force of GCG movement in LP2, (N) 194
r=.691 and in the 2nd flight of MP2, (N) r= -.716. 195
Figure 6 here 196
In terms of the score for execution (fig. 6), there are strong connections at p<0.05 with the 197
trajectory of GCG in the 2nd flight of MP2 X, (m) r=.727 and of CP X, (m) r=.715; with the 198
angular velocity of toes in the 1st flight of MP1 (rad/s) r=.753 ; the final score (fig. 7) has 199
strong connections at p<0.01 with the angle hip -torso in CP (degrees) r= -.814; with the 200
resultant of force of GCG moveme nt in LP2 (N) r=.786; at p<0.05 with the angular velocity 201
of arms in the 1st flight of MP1 (rad/s) r=.664 and toes in LP2 (rad/s) r=672. 202
Figure 7 here 203
Moderate connections regarding the vaults difficulty with the hip -torso angle in the 2nd 204
flight of MP2 ( degrees) r=.508; with the angular velocity of toes in LP2 (rad/s) r= -.562; with 205
the resultant of force of GCG movement (N) r=.591; score for execution with the toes -arms 206
angle (degrees) r= -.557; final score with the hip -torso angle in the 1st flight of MP1 (degrees) 207
r=-.603; with GCG trajectory in the 1st flight of MP2 – Y (m) r=.509 and shoulders Y (m) r= – 208
.586; with the resultant of force in the 2nd flight of MP2 (N) r= -.530 and of CP (N) r=.576 209
while the other indicators show insignificant, poor or even non -existing connections at 210
p>0.05 (fig. 5-7). 211
4. Discussions 212
According to the Code of Points (CoP) in Women’s Artistic Gymnastics (FIG, 2016) , the 213
handspring vaults are divided into 5 groups and the handspring vaults Yurchenko belongs to 214
group IV ( Round -off (Yurchenko) with/without 3/4 turn (270°) in 1st flight phase – salto bwd 215
with/without turn in 2nd flight phase). The changes of the CoP 2017 -2020 highlight the 216
decrease of the difficulty value of Yurchenko vault by 0.4 points (4.00 p. withstretched salto 217
bwd off, 4.60 p. – with 1/1 turn (360°) off and 5.40 p. – with 2/1 turn (720°) off). 218

Handspring vaults are based on one technical structure and variants thereof, the 219
handspring rollover. Thus, while dealing with the biomechanical issu es of handspring vaults, 220
many authors tried to identify the mechanical variables that govern successful performance of 221
the handspring with full turn vault (Takey , 1998 ), to find the best technique for women’s 222
Yurchenko layout vault through an application o f optimal control theory on a five -segment 223
model consisting of the hand, entire arm, upper trunk, lower trunk and entire leg (Koh et al., 224
2001), to predict an individual’s optimal Yurchenko layout vault by modifying the selected 225
critical mechanical variabl es (Koh et al., 2003). The dynamic optimization technique is 226
feasible for complex movements, using the Yurchenko layout vault (Koh and Jenning, 2003), 227
the parameters of contact with the floor (Seeley and Bressel, 2005), the computer simulation 228
of gymnastic s vault landings (Mills, 2005), the kinematics analysis of the centre of mass in 229
the springboard phase (Penitente et al ., 2007), the development of the velocity for vault runs 230
in artistic gymnastics ( Naundorf et al, 2008). The researchers investigated how the kinematic 231
factors during the horse (table) contact phase influence the post -flight performance in 232
handspring vaulting (Chen et al. , 2009), they tried to point out the biomechanical explanation 233
of judges’ detection of scores relative to the on -board and pre-flight phases of the Yurchenko 234
vault with one twist on table (Penitente et al, 2009). A biomechanical comparison of this type 235
of vault and two associated teaching drills was made (Elliott and Mitchell, 2010), 236
characterizing the normal (Fz) and anterior -posterior (Fx) hand contact forces of female 237
gymnasts performing a handspring vault on the modern vault table (Penitente et al, 2010), the 238
effect of biomechanical variables on the assessment of vaulting in top -level artistic female 239
gymnasts in Wor ld Cup competitions (Farana and Vaverka, 2012). It is important to know the 240
biomechanical characteristics of the technique for elite female gymnasts performing the vault 241
group Round -off, flic -flac on vault table (Kashuba et al. , 2012), to determine which 242
kinematic characteristics may be used as performance indicator(s) for vault ( Jeroen Van der 243

Eb et al ., 2012 ), to analyze the kinematics of springboard phase, to examine springboard and 244
vaulting table position, the kinematic variables of table vault in artis tic gymnastics ( Heinen et 245
al., 2013; Fernandes et al ., 2016), the run -up velocity measurements shown in previous 246
studies and to interpret the data and the possible influences based on the methodologies of the 247
studies ( Fujihara, 2016). It is also necessary to identify the kinematic variables that govern 248
successful performance and judges' scores and to establish correlative relationships of the 249
variables of layout with full twist Yurchenko -type vault in women’s vaulting (Park and Kim, 250
2017). 251
The correlative analysis between the studied indicators regarding the sensor motor 252
coordination development, the performances achieved in handspring vaults events and the 253
biomechanical characteristics of Yurchenko vault reveals strong connections at p<0.01 , 254
p<0.05 and moderate connections with values of r= 0.500 –0.650 approximately. 255
The results of the study provide additional scientific data necessary for the development of 256
the linear and branching algorithmic diagrams used in the learning of Yurchenko han dspring 257
vault, basic element of the macro -methods, while the weak connections of the insignificant 258
differences between indicators contributed to the more efficient selection of the preparatory 259
and aiding exercises meant to improve the technique of executio n (e.g. Boloban and Potop, 260
2015) . 261
These findings, along with the bases of the learning macro -methods, were introduced in 262
the training sessions of the junior female gymnasts of the national team, in the national 263
training centers of Deva, Onesti and Buchare st city and in the artistic gymnastics departments 264
and clubs. They were presented under the form of theoretical and methodical 265
recommendations in the courses given at the Faculties of Physical Education and Sport of 266
Bucharest (deepening courses in differen t sports branches at the Ecological University of 267
Bucharest and course of applied biomechanics – master degree at the National University of 268

Physical Education and Sport of Bucharest) and in the Center for Coaches’ Training 269
Improvement of the National Univ ersity of Physical Education and Sport of Ukraine. 270
5. Conclusions 271
The computerized video biomechanical analysis consistent with the method of movement 272
postural orientation highlights the improvement of the key elements of Yurchenko 273
handspring vault sport technique in the case of the female gymnasts of 14 – 17 years old on 274
the basis of the angular, spatial, kinematic and dynamic characteristics indicators and the 275
performances obtained in competition. 276
The correlative analysis between the components of the ca pacity for sensor motor 277
coordination, the indicators of the biomechanical characteristics of Yurchenko handspring 278
vault sports technique and the performances obtained in competition by the female gymnasts 279
aged 14 to 17 years showed the connection between t hese indicators and their influence upon 280
the technical execution, fact that validates the hypothesis proposed by the research. 281
Author contributions 282
V.P., M.C., V.E -V., and C. E-V. designed the experiment. V.P., V.E -V., and C.E -V. 283
designed the high level controller and V.P. developed the low level controller. V.P., M.C. 284
performed the biomechanics experiments. V.P., M.C., V.E -V., and C.E -V. analyzed and 285
interpreted the data. V.P., M.C., V.E -V., and C.E -V. prepared the manuscript. All authors 286
provided critical feedback on the manuscript. 287
Acknowledgment 288
We express our gratitude to the Romanian Gymnastics Federation and especially to Mrs. 289
Anca Grigoras Mihailescu – federal coach and to the coaches of the Olympic Team who 290
helped us to conduct thi s research. We specify that this paper is part of a wider research on the 291
References 292
Arkaev LJ, Suchilin NG. Kak gotovit' chempionov. Teorija i tehnologija podgotovki 293

gimnastov vyshej kvalifikacii . Moscow: Fizkul'tura i sport; 2004. 294
Bota C, Prodescu B. Physiology of physical education and sport – ergo-physiology , Râmnicu 295
Vâlcea: Antim Ivireanu Publishing House; 1997. 296
Boloban VN. Sensomotor coordination as the basis of technical preparation . Sci in the 297
Olympic sport. 2015;2:73 -80. http://sportnauka.org.u a/wp – 298
content/uploads/nvos/articles/2015.2_11.pdf . 299
Boloban, VN. Reguljacija pozy tela sportsmena.[Monograph]. Kiev: Olympic Literature; 300
2013. 301
Boloban V, Potop V. Osnovy makrometodiki obuchenija sportivnym uprazhnenijam (na 302
materiale zhenskih vidov gimnastic heskogo mnogobor'ja). Bases of macromethods of 303
sports exercise training (as exemplified in woman's all -around gymnastics). Sci in 304
Olympic sport. 2015;07(4):55 –66. http://sportnauka.org.ua/wp – 305
content/uploads/nvos/articles/2015.4_7.pdf. 306
Bruggmann GP. Biomec hanics of gymnastics techniques, Sport Sci Review . 1994; 3:79–120. 307
Chen HC, Yu, CY, Cheng KB. Computer simulation of the optimal vaulting motion during 308
the horse (table) contact phase. Paper presented at: 27 International Conference on 309
Biomechanics in Sport s; August 17 – 21, 2009; Limerick, Ireland. https://ojs.ub.uni – 310
konstanz.de/cpa/article/view/3077. Accessed octomber 14, 2018. 311
Dragnea A, Bota A. Teoria activitatilor motrice [Theory of motor activity]. Bucharest: 312
Didactic and Pedagogic Publishing House; 19 99. 313
Elliott B, Mitchell J. (2010). A Biomechanical Comparison of the Yurchenko Vault and Two 314
Associated Teaching Drills. Int J Sport Biomech. 2010;7 (1):91 –107. doi: 315
10.1123/ijsb.7.1.91. 316
Farana R, Vaverka F. The effect of biomechanical variables on the asse ssment of vaulting in 317
top-level artistic female gymnasts in world cup competitions. Acta Univ Palacki Olomuc. 318

Gymn. 2012;42 (2):49 –57, doi: 10.5507/ag.2012.012. 319
Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique – FIG, Code of Points 2017 -2020, Women’s 320
Artistic Gymna stics. Part III, Apparatus, Section 10 – Handspring vaults; Part IV Tables 321
of elements. Updated 12 to 18 December 2016: 40 -43, VT – Group 4 –2. http://www.fig – 322
gymnastics.com/publicdir/rules/files/en_WAG%20CoP%202017 -2020.pdf. Accessed 323
September 24, 2018. 324
Fernandes SMB, Carrara P, Serr гo JC, Amadio AC, Mochizuki L. Kinematic variables of 325
table vault on artistic gymnastics. Rev Bra Educ Fís Esporte. 2016;30(1):97 –107. 326
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1807 -55092016000100097. 327
Filipenco E, Tomșa N, Buftea V. Gymnastic s, Theoretical and Practical -Methodical Course 328
of Handspring Vaults . Chisinau: USEFS Publishing Hous; 2014. 329
Fujihara T. Revisiting run -up velocity in gymnastics vaulting. Paper presented at: 34 th 330
Intrenational Conference on Biomechanics in Sports. July 18 -22, 2016; Tsukuba, Japan. 331
https://ojs.ub.uni -konstanz.de/cpa/article/view/6881. Accessed September 20, 2018. 332
Gaverdovskij JK. Teorija i metodika sportivnoj gimnastiki . Moscow: Sov. Sport; 2014. 333
Gidu DV, Straton A, Hrițac F. Eye -hand coordination in third form pupils, An Ovid Univ, Sci 334
mov health. 2010;10(suppl. 2):688 –691. 335
Grigore V. Artistic gymnastics – theoretical bases of sports training . Bucharest: Semne; 336
2001. 337
Heinen T, Vinken PM, Velentzas K. Movement Regulation of Handsprings on Vault. Res Q 338
Exercise Sport. 2013;84(1):68 -78. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2013.762300. 339
Jeroen Van der Eb, Marije Filius, Guus Rougoor, Cas Van Niel, Joël de Water, Bert Coolen, 340
Hans d e Koning, Optimal velocity profiles for vault. Paper presented at: 30th 341
International Conference of Biomechanics in Sports. July 02 -06, 2012; Melbourne, 342
Australia. https://ojs.ub.uni -konstanz.de/cpa/article/view/5162. 343

Kashuba V, Khmelnitska I, Krupenya S. Biomechanical Analysis of Skilled Female 344
Gymnasts’ Technique in «Round -off, Flick -Flack» Type on the Vault Table. J Phys 345
Educ Sport. 2012;12(4):431 –435. doi:10.7752/jpes.2012.04064. 346
Kim YK, Cheol -Hee Park CH. Three -dimensional analysis of yurchenko layout with 360° 347
twist in female vaults: modified deterministic model and judges’ scores. Paper presented 348
at: 35th Conference of the International Society of Biomechanics in Sports, June 14 – 18, 349
2017. German Sport University Cologne, Cologne, Germany. https://ds hs- 350
koeln.sciebo.de/index.php/s/CamALh9yXz0k6Vt. Accessed September 20, 2018. 351
Koh M, Jennings L, Elliott B, Lloyd D. Prediction of an optimum technique for the women’s 352
yurchenko layout vault. Paper presented at: 19 International Symposium on 353
Biomechanics in Sports. 2001 . J R. Blackwell, RH. Sanders (Editors). University of San 354
Francisco. https://ojs.ub.uni -konstanz.de/cpa/article/view/3919. Accessed September 18, 355
2018. 356
Koh M, Jennings L, Elliot B, Lioyd D. A Predicted Optimal Performance of the Yurchenko 357
Layout Vault in Women’s Artistic Gymnastics. J Appl Biomech. 2003;19:187 –204. doi: 358
10.1123/jab.19.3.187. 359
Koh M, Jennings, L. Dynamic optimization: inverse analysis for the Yurchenko layout vault 360
in women's artistic gymnastics. J Biomech. 2003;36(8);1177 –1183. 361
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021 -9290(03)00085 -X. 362
Koh M, Jennings L. Strategies in preflight for an optimal Yurchenko layout vault. J Biomech. 363
2007;40(6): 1256 -1261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2006.05.027. 364
Mano R. Les bases de l ’entraînement sportif. Bucharest: MTS -CCPPS, SDP. 1996;371 -374. 365
Manolachi V. Theory and Practice of Women’s Sport (Evaluation, Planning, Direction and 366
Nutrition) . Monograph. Bucharest: Discobolul; 2018. 367
Mills C. Computer simulation of gymnastics vault landings. A Docto ral Thesis. Submitted in 368

partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of Doctor of Philosophy at 369
Loughborough University; 2005. https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/2134/33645. Accessed 370
September 16, 2018. 371
Naundorf F, Brehmer S, Knoll K, Andreas Bronst A, W agner R. (2008). Development of the 372
velocity for vault runs in artistic gymnastics for the last decade. Motor Performance and 373
Control. Paper presented at: 26 International Conference on Biomechanics in Sports. July 374
14 – 18, 2008, Seoul, Korea. https://ojs. ub.uni -konstanz.de/cpa/article/view/1905. 375
Accessed September 16, 2018. 376
Park CH, Kim, YK. Three -dimensional Kinematic Analysis of the Yurchenko Layout with 377
360-degree Twist in Female Vaults: Deterministic Model and Judges' Scores. Kor J 378
Sport Biomech. 2017 ;27(1): 9 -18. http://dx.doi.org/10.5103/KJSB.2017.27.1.9. 379
Prassas S, Kwon YH, Sands W. Biomechanics of artistic gymnastics. J Sport Biomech. 380
2006;5:261 –292. doi: 10.1080/14763140608522878. 381
Penitente G, Merni F, Fantozzi S, Perretta N. Kinematics of the Spr ingboard Phase in 382
Yurchenko -Style Vaults. Paper presented at: 25 International Symposium on 383
Biomechanics in Sports; August 23 – 27, 2007, Ouro Preto – Brazil. https://ojs.ub.uni – 384
konstanz.de/cpa/article/view/389. Accessed September 10, 2018. 385
Penitente G, M erni F, Fantozzi S. On -board and pre -flight mechanical model of yurchenko 386
one twist on vault: implications for performance. Paper presented at: 27 International 387
Conference on Biomechanics in Sports; August 17 – 21, 2009; Limerick, Ireland. 388
https://ojs.ub.u ni-konstanz.de/cpa/article/view/3295. Accessed September 16, 2018. 389
Penitente G, Sands WC, McNeal J, Smith SL, Kimmel W. Investigation of Hand Contact 390
Forces of Female Gymnasts Performing a Handspring Vault. Int J Sports Sci Eng. 391
2010;04(1):15 –24. 392
http://w ww.worldacademicunion.com/journal/SSCI/sscivol04no01paper02.pdf. Accessed 393

September 20, 2018. 394
Potop V. Osnovy makrometodiki obuchenija sportivnym uprazhnenijam – na materiale 395
zhenskoj sportivnoj gimnastiki [Bases of Macro -methods for Sports Exercises Lear ning 396
(material from Women’s Artistic Gymnastics)] . Monograph, Kiev: Education Literature 397
Center; 2015. 398
Potop V , Carp I. Analysis of the Influence of Sensorimotor Coordination Development on 399
Floor Acrobatic Training in Women’s Artistic Gymnastics. In C. Ignatescu, A. Sandu and 400
T. Ciulei (eds.), Rethinking Social Action. Core Values in Practice; 6-9 April 2017; 401
Sucea va, Romania: LUMEN Proceedings. 402
https://doi.org/10.18662/lumproc.rsacvp2017.58. Accessed September 8, 2018. 403
Potop V, Urichianu ST. Analysis of Physical Training Influence on the Technical Execution 404
of Yurchenko Handspring Vault . In V. Manolachi, C.M. Rus, S. Rusnac (eds.), Paper 405
presented at: New Approaches in Social and Humanistic Sciences; June 8 -10, 2017; Iasi, 406
Romania: LUMEN Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.18662/lumproc.nashs2017.34. 407
Accessed September 10, 2018. 408
Readhead L. Gymnastics: Skills, Techniq ue, Training . The Crowood Press; 2011. 409
Seeley MK, Bressel E. A Comparison of Upper -Extremity Reaction Forces between the 410
Yurchenko Vault and Floor Exercise. J Sports Sci Med . 2005;4(2):85 –94. 411
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24431965. 412
Smolevskij VM, Gaverdovskij JK. Sportivnaja gimnastika . Kiev: Olimpijskaja literature; 413
1999. 414
Takey Y. Three -Dimensional Analysis of Handspring with Full Turn Vault: Deterministic 415
Model, Coaches' Beliefs, and Judges' Scores. J Appl Biomech. 1998;14(2):190 –210. 416
https://doi.org/10.1123/jab.14.2.190. 417
Thomas, J.R., Nelson, J.K. Research Methods in Physical Activity (2nd ed.). Human Kinetics; 418

1996. 419
Vieru N. Handbook of sports gymnastics . Bucharest: Driada Publishing House; 1997. 420

Table 1 Correlation of sensor motor coordination development indicators with Yurchenko 421
vault biomechanical characteristics and the performances achieved in competition (n =10) . 422

№ r, Pearson Control tests Results comp.(points)
Biomechanical
indicators Test 1
(sec) Test 2
(cm) Test 3
(points) D. E. Final
score
1 IR (kg·m2) -.127 -.461 .544 .352 .221 .379
2 RM,
(m)
toes -.536 -.368 *.690 -.382 .177 -.218
3 should *-.690 -.189 *.724 -.483 .257 -.259
4 arms **-.799 .144 .513 -.372 .068 -.260
5
KE,
(deg)

LP1 -.238 -.143 -.118 .394 -.557 .049
6 MP1 -.333 .189 .118 **-.821 .088 -.603
7 LP2 .123 -.117 -.452 .309 -.213 .143
8 MP2 .458 -.002 -.515 .508 -.139 .334
9 CP -.409 .201 .073 **-.855 -.306 **-.814
10 LP1 should,
m x .133 .619 -.628 .003 .051 .026
11 y -.112 -.523 .595 .294 .181 .315
12 MP1 GCG,
m x -.155 .285 -.618 .311 -.244 .129
13 y -.056 -.103 .609 -.219 .288 -.037
14 LP2 toes,
m x .051 .469 -.270 -.171 .399 .053
15 y -.044 -.414 .494 .398 .063 .341
16 MP2 GCG,
m x .091 -.025 .434 -.221 *.727 .166
17 y .078 -.396 .579 .436 .358 .509
18 CP should,
m x .156 -.301 *.711 .138 *.715 .442
19 y *.687 .078 .500 *-.687 -.101 -.586
20 LP1 should rad/s .532 .284 -.535 .465 -.176 .283
21 MP1 arms rad/s *.665 -.319 -.393 *.698 .250 *.664
22 toes rad/s .351 -.060 .256 -.126 *.753 .253
23 LP2 toes rad/s -.275 .185 -.404 -.562 -.495 *.672
24 MP2 arms rad/s .079 -.187 -.371 .028 -.446 -.186
25 should rad/s -.429 .283 .148 -.374 -.156 -.366
26 toes rad/s -.561 .417 .310 -.369 .221 -.187
27 CP arms rad/s .228 -.089 -.253 -.178 -.344 -.301
28 should rad/s .458 -.024 -.169 .387 .038 .322
29 toes rad/s .466 .084 -.427 .377 -.066 .265
30 LP1 N .572 -.323 -.031 .478 .449 .585
31 MP1 N -.464 -.284 *.702 -.486 .091 -.339
32 LP2 GCG N .563 -.536 .042 *.691 .523 **.786
33 MP2 N *-.736 .081 *.652 *-.716 .067 -.530
34 CP N .276 -.091 .019 .591 .239 .576
Note . IR (kg∙m2) – inertia of rotation, RM (m) – radius of movement of body segments, KE – key elements ; LP1 423
– launching body posture 1, MP1 – multiplication of body posture 1, LP2 – launching body posture 2, MP2 – 424
multiplication body posture 2, CP – concluding body posture, landing ; test 1 – static balance (sec); test 2 – static – 425
kinematic stability (cm); test 3 – dynamic -kinematic stability (points); D. – difficulty; E. – execution; comp. – 426
competition; 1-4 indicators: biomechanical indicators required by the analysis; 5 -9 indicators: angular 427
characteristics of the key elements of sports technique ( deg.- degrees); 10 -19 indicators: spatial characteristics 428
of the body segments trajectory (m); 20 -29 indicators: kinematic characteristics of angular velocity (rad/s); 30 – 429
34 indicators: dynamic characteristics of force resultant of GCG movement (N). Parametric test linear 430
correl ation Pearson’s; df = 8; **p<0.01, r=.764; *p<0.05, r=.631. 431

1 2 3 4 5
Figure 1. Phasic structure of the key elements of Yurchenko vault sports technique
(Round -off, flic -flac on, stretched salt backwards)
Note. in preparatory phase : 1) LP1 – launching posture of the body 1, flip off of the springboard
(preparatory movement) and 2) MP1 – multiplication of posture of the body 1 – the 1st flight, half back
rollover and 3) LP2 – handspring on apparatus , flip off of the table; in basic phase : 4) MP2 –
multiplication of posture o f the body 2, the 2nd flight that highlights the shape of salt and the momentum
of maximum height of GCG (1 ½ stretched salt backwards, 1 ½ stretched salt backwards with 360° and
720° turn); and in final phase : 5) CP – concluding posture of the body, momen t of landing damping and
freezing (standstill landing).
Figure
Click here to download Figure: Figure 1.docx

-1-0.8-0.6-0.4-0.200.20.40.60.8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35r, Pearson
Biomechanical indicators
Figure 2 . Results of the linear correlation between the biomechanical indicators of Yurchenko
handspring vault and the static balance – test 1
Note: Biomechanical indicator (n=34) – table 1, 1-4 indicators: biomechanical indicators required by the
analysis; 5 -9 indicators: angular characteristics of the key elements of sports technique (degrees); 10 -19
indicators: spatial characteristics of the body segments trajectory (m); 20 -29 indicators: kinematic characteristics
of an gular velocity (rad/s); 30 -34 indicators: dynamic characteristics of force resultant of GCG movement (N).
Parametric test linear correlation Pearson’s; df=8; **p<0.01, r=.764; *p<0.05, r=.631.

-0,6-0,4-0,200,20,40,60,8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35r, Pearson
Biomechanical indicators

Figure 3 . Results of the linear correlation between the biomechanical indicators of Yurchenko
handspring vault and the static -kinematic stability – test 2;
Note: biomechanical indicators – table 1 and fig. 2 . Parametric test linear correlation Pearson’s; df=8; **p< 0.01,
r=.764; *p<0.05, r=.631.

Figure
Click here to download Figure: Figures 2-7.docx

-0,8-0,6-0,4-0,200,20,40,60,8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35r, Pearson
Biomechanical indicators
Figure 4 . Results of the linear correlation between the biomechanical indicators of Yurchenko
handspring vault and the dynamic -kinematic stability – test 3;
Note: biomechanical indicators – table 1 and fig. 2 . Parametric test linear correlation Pearson’s; df=8; **p<0.01,
r=.764; *p<0.05, r=.631.

-1-0,8-0,6-0,4-0,200,20,40,60,8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35r, Pearson
Biomechanical indicators

Figure 5 . Results of the linear correlation between the biomechanical indicators of Yurchenko
handspring vault and the difficult of the vaults in competition;
Note: biomechanical indicators – table 1 and fig. 2 . Parametric test linear correlation Pearson’s; df=8; **p<0.01,
r=.764; *p<0.05, r=.631.

-0,8-0,6-0,4-0,200,20,40,60,81
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35r, Pearson
Biomechanical indicators
Figure 6. Results of the linear correlation between the biomechanical indicators of Yurchenko
handspring vault and the execution score in competition;
Note: biomechanical indicators – table 1 and fig. 2 . Parametric test linear correlation Pearson’s; df=8; **p<0.01,
r=.764; *p<0.05, r=.631.

-1-0,8-0,6-0,4-0,200,20,40,60,81
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35r, Pearson
Biomechanical indicators

Figure 7 . Results of the linear correlation between the biomechanical indicators of Yurchenko
handspring vault and the final sc ore in competition .
Note: biomechanical indicators – table 1 and fig. 2 . Parametric test linear correlation Pearson’s; df=8; **p<0.01,
r=.764; *p<0.05, r=.631.

Supplementary Material
Click here to download Supplementary Material: Figures.docx

Supplementary Material
Click here to download Supplementary Material: Tables.docx

Confliect of I nterest Statement
The authors report no conflict of interest.

Vladimir Potop,
Marian Cretu,
Virgil Ene -Voiculescu,
Carmen Ene -Voiculescu
*Conflict of Interest Statement

This file could not be included in the PDF because the file type is not supported.Example – Supplementary material – SS_YSS 360.avi

This file could not be included in the PDF because the file type is not supported.Example – Supplementary material – SS_YSS 720.avi