Analysis of the influence of sensorimotor coordinat ion [602285]

Analysis of the influence of sensorimotor coordinat ion
development on the technical execution of Yurchenko
handspring vault
V Potop 1
1 Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Ecological University of Bucharest, str.
VasileMilea 1G, Romania
[anonimizat]
Abstract . This work reveals the influence of the sensorimot or coordination capacity on the
technical execution of Yurchenko handspring vault b y junior gymnasts aged 12 to 15 years.
The following methods were used to achieve the purp ose and objectives of the research:
bibliographic study of the specialty literature; me thod of pedagogical observation of gymnasts’
performances; method of the ascertaining and format ive pedagogical experiment; method of
tests for assessment of the sensorimotor coordinati on capacity; video computerized method of
biomechanical analysis, using the programs as follo ws: Kinovea, Physics ToolKit; movement
postural orientation method for analysing the sport ing technique; statistical-mathematical
method with the help of KyPlot program and the meth od of results graphical representation. A
number of 3 tests of evaluation of sensorimotor coo rdination were applied in this study: test 1 –
”Biriuk” test static balance, test 2 – static-kinem atic stability and test 3 – dynamic-kinematic
stability. The results of the study show the level of sensorimotor coordination capacity of the
junior gymnasts of 12-15 years old, the results of the correlation of physical training indicators
with Yurchenko vault biomechanical characteristics and the performances achieved in
competition. Also, conducting the correlative analy sis between the components of
sensorimotor coordination capacity, the indicators of the biomechanical characteristics of
sports technique in Yurchenko handspring vault and the performances obtained in competition
by the junior gymnasts aged 12 to 15 years highligh ted the connection level between these
indicators and their influence on the technical exe cution.
1. Introduction
Artistic gymnastics has made significant progress i n its development, consistent with the changes
in the Code of Points regarding the content, constr uction and composition of the exercises[FIG,
2017[8], the current trends of high performance spo rt[1] and the correct assessment gymnasts’ efforts
based on the knowledge of the biomechanical particu larities, the physical training level and the
physiological stress of the body [9], [18].
The handspring vaults is the most dynamic, athletic and shortest event in the gymnastics
polyathlon[28] wherethe difficulty and value of the vaults are evaluated according to the height and
length of the flights (especially the second one) a nd the twists in different axes[15].
Therefore one of the main tasks of physical trainin g in gymnastics is to increase the technicity of
movement execution. Physical training takes two for ms [13], [27]: general physical training and
specific physical training. Both of them are meant to avoid the following issues: a poor physical

training leads to a faulty technique and to failure in competition; a good technical and physical trai ning
which are not supported by proper mental training r esult in modest performances [14].
Athlete’s coordinative abilities are very different and specific for each branch of sport, manifesting
themselves in a complex interaction [22].They desig nate a complex of predominantly psycho-motor
skills involving the ability to learn new movements fast and to adapt quickly and efficiently to vario us
conditions by restructuring the existent motor back ground [11].
According to Blume (1981), quoted by Manno, the coo rdinative abilities are organized in a system,
taking into consideration the inter-conditioning of the components and their finalities. A. Dragnea
andS. Mate-Teodorescu, (2002) identified the follow ing forms: general coordinative abilities, specific
coordinative abilities and coordinative abilities c onditioned by other motor skills [12].
The coordinative capacity can be defined physiologi cally as a complex psycho-motor skill based on
the correlation between the central nervous system and the skeletal muscles during movement. It is
largely dependent on the efficiency of the analyzer s that influence directly the movement guidance:
the static-dynamic (vestibular) analyzer; kinesthet ic analyzer; touch analyzer; sound analyzer; optica l
analyzer [6].
The coordinative skill in artistic gymnastics inclu des a series of ”senses” called psychomotor skills,
namely: sense of balance; sense of orientation in s pace; sense of coordination of the movements made
by various segments involved in motion; sense of co ordination of large muscle groups activity; sense
of decomposition and analysis of movements; sense o f rhythm; sense of assessment of distance,
direction, velocity, amplitude and degree of strain [14].
Because coordination is a natural inherited capacit y, the specific methods to develop it are not
numerous, compared to the case of other bio-motor c apacities. During the phases of coordination
development, the coach must use exercises of progre ssively increasing complexity, various sports
equipment and facilities [5].
In Berstein’s opinion (1991), an optimum operation of the sensitive vestibular system has a great
importance for achieving great sports results in va rious branches of sport. The high sports mastery
andthe increasingly difficult competitive programs make necessary an analysis on how the different
factors influence the vestibular analyzer, which is the influence of the mechanical forces caused by t he
inertial forces in linear and angular accelerations and which are the motor tasks during the regulatio n
of body posture [2], [3].
Handspring vaults are based onone technical structu re and variants thereof, the handspring rollover.
Thus, while dealing with the biomechanical issues o f handspring vaults, many authors [4], [20], [26]
studied the elastic parameters of the springboard, the parameters of contact with the floor, the
handspring and landing parameters, the correlation of the mechanical variables with the score.
As for the Yurchenko vaults, most authors [7], [16] , [17], [19], [21], [23], [25] address the
biomechanical comparison of this type of vault and two associated teaching drills, the optimization of
sports technique key elements based on the biomecha nical analysis, the kinematics of springboard
phase, the e-learning by computer video analysis, t he use of e-training in mathematics modeling of the
biomechanical characteristics etc.
This paper aims to highlight the influence of sensorimotor coordin ation capacity on the technical
execution of Yurchenko handspring vault in junior f emale gymnasts aged 12 to 15 years .
Hypothesis of the paper . The correlative analysis made between the compone nts of sensorimotor
coordination capacity, the indicators of the biomec hanical features of sports technique in Yurchenko
handspring vault and the performances achieved in c ompetition by the junior female gymnasts aged 12
to 15 years will point out the connection level bet ween these indicators and their influence on the
technical execution.
2. Material and methods
The research has carried out from 2012 to 2014, wit h the participation of 7 athletes of 12 -15 years
old, components of Romanian national junior team. T he following research methods were used:
theoretical-methodical reviewof the specialized lit erature, method of tests, computerized videomethod

[10] by means of”Kinovea” and ”Physics ToolKit” programs of biomechanical analysi s[24], method of
movementpostural orientation and assessment of spor ts technique key elements with complex
coordination of movement structure [3], [4]statisti cal method using”KyPlot” program.
A number of 3 tests for the sensorimotor coordinati on assessment were used in this study:
1) Test 1 – “Biriuk” test, static balance, test for maintaining body balance on tiptoe with eyes
closed and arms along the body (at least 15-20 sec. );
2) Test 2 –static-kinematic stability – 5 forward r olls in 5 sec. with 10 in-place jumps with eyes
closed, in the center of a graduated circle (maximu m deviation of 35 cm);
3) Test 3 – dynamic-kinematic stability – standstil l landing, in-depth salto from the higher bar
(uneven bars), assessed by penalties for the execut ion mistakes 0.1 -1.0 points; 3 attempts.
In order to study the influence of sensorimotor coo rdination development on the technical
execution in handspring vaults, a number of 10 Yurc henko handspring vaults(3 Yurchenko stretched
saltos YSS, 4 – YSS with 360° turn and 3 – YSS with 720° turn) were analyzedbio-mechanically, in
competition conditions, during the Romanian Nationa l Championships, Bucharest 2014.
The phasic structure of the test routines during th e research focused on the biomechanical analysis
of key elements of Yurchenko round-off vault with b ackward salto stretched, taking into account the
functional structure and the causes as a whole, cha racteristic of the translational and rotational mot ion
of body segments around GCG axis (fig. 1).

Fig. 1. Phasic structure of the key elements of Yurchenko v ault sports technique
(Round-off, flic-flac on, stretched salto backwards )

Note: in preparatory phase – launching posture of the bo dy (LP1), flip off of the springboard
(preparatory movement) and multiplication of postur e of the body – the 1 st flight, half back rollover (MP1) and
handspring on apparatus, flip off of the table (LP 2); in basic phase – multiplication of posture of t he body
(MP2), the 2 nd flight that highlights the shape of salto and the momentum of maximum height of GCG (1 ½
stretched salto backwards, 1 ½ stretched salto back wards with 360° and 720° turn); and in final phase –
concluding posture (CP) of the body, moment of land ing damping and freezing(standstill landing)
3. Results
Table 1 shows the results of sensorimotor coordinat ion development in junior gymnasts aged 12-15
years in terms of static balance, static-kinematic stability and standstill landing.
Table 1. Results of sensorimotor coordination development of junior gymnasts aged 12 to 15 (n=7)

Control tests Statistical indicators
mean SD Cv% t /uni0440
IT FT IT FT IT FT
Test 1, (sec) 15.04 19.00 2.26 2.44 15.05 12.86 5.27 <0.01
Test 2, (cm) 23.28 21.57 2.29 0.97 9.83 4.52 1.98 >0.05
Test 3, (points) 9.26 9.47 0.13 0.05 1.37 0.52 4.21 <0.01
Note: SD – standard deviation; Cv% – coefficient of variation; IT – initial testing; FT – final testin g; parametric t-
Test: Paired Comparison for Means

In table 2 and figures 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 are listed the results of the correlation of the sensorimotor
coordination development indicators and the perform ances achieved in handspring vaults events
with the biomechanical characteristics of Yurchenko vault.
Table 2. Correlation of physical training indicators with Yu rchenko vault biomechanical
characteristics and the performances achieved in co mpetition (n =10)

/uni2116 r, Pearson Control tests Results comp.(points)
Biomechanical
indicators Test 1
(sec) Test 2
(cm) Test 3
(points) D. E. Final s core
1 IR (kg·m 2) -.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 – inertia of rotation; RM – radius of move ment; D – difficulty; E – execution; Pearson’s para metric linear
correlation; ** – p<0.01; * – p<0.05
”KyPlot” program for statistical calculation and th e parametric test linear correlation – Pearson
were used. The issues listed below were analyzed:
– Control tests of sensorimotor coordination indicators in terms of static balance (test 1), static-
kinematic stability (test 2), and dynamic-kinematic stability (test 3).
– Performances obtained in competition– handspring vaults even during Romanian National
Championships of Women’s Artistic Gymnastics, Bucha rest, 2014, regarding the difficulty, execution
and final score on this apparatus.
– Biomechanical indicators required by the analysis : inertia of rotation (IR, kg ·m2), radius
ofmovement (RM, m) of body segments.
– Angular characteristics of the key elements of spor ts technique (fig. 1): LP1 – launching body
posture 1 – angle between joints of ankle – shoulde rs; MP1 – multiplication of body posture 1 – angle

between toes – shoulders; LP2 – launching body post ure 2 – angle between hand joint – foot 2; MP2 –
multiplication body posture 2 – angle between hip – torso; CP – concluding body posture, landing–
angle between hip – torso.
– Spatial characteristics of the body segments traj ectory (m): LP1 – shoulders, MP1 –maximum
height of GCG flight, LP2 – toes, MP2 – maximum hei ght of GCG andCP flight– shoulders.
– Kinematiccharacteristics of angular velocity (rad/s): LP1 – shoulders, MP1 – arms and toes, LP2
– toes, MP2 – arms, shoulders and toes and CP – arm s, shoulders and toes.
– Dynamiccharacteristics of force resultant of GCG movement (N) in all the key elements of vaul ts
phases.
Figure 2presents the results of the linear correlat ion between the biomechanical indicators
ofYurchenko handspring vault and the development le vel of the static balance.

Fig. 2. Results of the linear correlation between t he biomechanical indicators ofYurchenko
handspring vault and thestatic balance – test 1
Figure 3 shows the results of the linear correlatio n between the biomechanical indicators of
Yurchenko handspring vault and the development leve l of the static-kinematic stability – test 2.

Fig. 3. Results of the linear correlation between t he biomechanical indicators of Yurchenko
handspring vault and the static-kinematic stability – test 2
Figure 4 shows the results of the linear correlatio n between the biomechanical indicators of
Yurchenko handspring vault and the development leve l of the dynamic-kinematic stability – test 3.

Fig. 4. Results of the linear correlation between t he biomechanical indicators of Yurchenko
handspring vault andthedynamic-kinematic stability – test3 -1-0.5 00.5 1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 r
Biomechanical indicators
-1-0.5 00.5 1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 r
Biomechanical indicators
-1-0.5 00.5 1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 r
Biomechanical indicators

In figures 5, 6 and 7 are introduced the results o f the linear correlation between the biomechanical
indicatorsof Yurchenko handspring vault and the per formances achieved in competition in terms of
difficulty, execution and final score on this appar atus.

Fig. 5. Results of the linear correlation between t he biomechanical indicators of Yurchenko
handspring vault and the difficult of the vaults in competition

Fig. 6.Results of the linear correlation between th e biomechanical indicators of Yurchenko
handspring vault and the execution score in competi tion

Fig. 7. Results of the linear correlation between t he biomechanical indicators of Yurchenko
handspring vault and the final score in competition
4. Discussions
According to the Code of Points, the handspring vau lts are divided into 5 groups in women’s
artistic gymnastics[8]; the round-off stretched sal to backward (Yurchenko) belongs to group IV. All -1-0.5 00.5 1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 r
Biomechanical indicators
-1-0.5 00.5 1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 r
Biomechanical indicators
-1-0.5 00.5 1
0 10 20 30 40 r
Biomechanical indicators

handspring vaults have one thing in common, determi ned by the phases that compose their full
development, namely: running, hurdle onto springboa rd, first flight, support with hands on table
(handspring), second flight and landing[13], [28].
The comparative analysisof physical training of the female gymnasts aged 12-15 years was made
by calculating the most usual statistical indicator s and the significance of the differences between the
means of the initial and final testing of the resea rch (2012 and 2014) using the t – Student parametric
method.
The sensorimotor coordination of the 12-15 years ol d gymnasts was assessed through 3 testswhich
highlighted thefollowing values (table 1, n=7):
Test 1, Biriuk” –static balance test, has a mean of 15.04 secininitial testing and an increase by 3.96
secin final testing (19.0 sec), the coefficient of variation (Cv%)–moderate,namely 15.05% and 12.86%,
significant differences between tests atp ˂0.01 (t=5.27);
Test 2, static-kinematic stability, has a mean of 2 3.28 cm in initial testing and a decrease
(improvement) by1.71 cm in final testing (21.57 cm) , Cv%–high, namely 9.83% and 4.52%,
insignificant differences between tests at p>0.05 ( t=1.98);
Test 3, dynamic-kinematic stability, has a mean of 9.26pointsin initial testing and an improvement
by0.21 pointsin final testing (9.47 points), Cv%–hi gh, namely 1.37% and 0.52%, significant
differences between tests at p ˂0.01 (t=4.21).
In the correlative analysis there were selected 34 biomechanical indicatorsconsidered more
important in highlighting the influence of the corr ect technical execution of Yurchenko handspring
vault. The data of the indicators of the kinematic and dynamic characteristics of Yurchenko
handspring vault were processed by means of Physic s Toolkit and Kinovea video computerized
analysis programs in conformity with the analysis m ethod of the technique of movement postural
orientation [3].
The results of the correlative analysis of the sens orimotor coordination indicators, the performances
recorded in competition and the biomechanical indic ators of Yurchenko handspring vaultpoint out the
following elements(table 2):
– Test 1 presents strong connections at p<0.01 with radius of movement (RM, m) arms r=-.690 and
at p<0.05 with radius of movement (RM, m) shoulders , r=-.690; trajectory of shoulders in concluding
posture (CP, m) r=.687; with angular velocity of ar ms in the 1 st flight, regarding the multiplication of
body posture (MP1, rad/s) r=.665 and the resultant of force in the 2 nd flight, regarding the
multiplication of body posture (MP2, N) r=-.736.Mod erate connections with theradius of toes (RM, m)
r=-.536; withthe angular velocity of shoulders in l aunching posture 1 (LP1, rad/s) r=.532 and toes in
the 2nd flight, regarding the multiplication of body postu re 2 (MP2, rad/s) r=-.561; with the resultant of
forceof GCG movement in the launching posture 1 (LP 1, N) r=.572 and LP2, (N) r=.563 while the
other indicators show insignificant weak or even no n-existing connections at p>0.05.
– Test 2shows moderate connectionswith the trajecto ry of shoulders (X, m) r=.619 and (Y, m) r=-
.523; with the resultant of force in launching post ure 2 (LP2, N) r=-.536 while the other indicators
show insignificant weak or even non-existing connec tions at p>0.05.
– Test 3 presents strong connections at p<0.05 with radius of movement toes (RM, m), r=.690 and
RM shoulders r=.724; trajectory of shoulders in con cluding posture (CP, X, m) r=.711; with the
resultant of force of GCG in the 1 st flight, in terms of body posture multiplication (M P1, N) r=.702
andMP2 in the 2 nd flight r=.652.Moderate connections withIR (kg•m 2) r=.544; with RM, (m) arms
r=.513; with the anglebetween hip and torsoin the 2nd flight of MP2, (degrees) r=-.515; with LP1 of
shoulders (X, m) r=-.628 and Y, (m) r=.595; with th e trajectory of GCG inMP1 in the 1 st flight X, (m)
r=-.618 and Y, (m) r=.609; with the trajectory of G CG in MP2 in the 2 nd flight Y, (m) r=.579 and the
trajectory of shoulders in CP Y, (m) r=.500 while t he other indicators show insignificant weak or even
non-existing connections at p>0.05.
– The performances achieved in competitionconcernin g the difficulty of the vaults have strong
connections at p<0.01 with the anglehip-torso in th e 1 st flight of MP1 (degrees) r=-.821 and the
anglehip-torso (degrees) in the concluding posture (CP) r=-.855; at p<0.05with the trajectory of

shouldersin CP Z, (m) r=-.687; with the angular vel ocity of arms in the 1 st flight of MP1 (rad/s)
r=.698; with the resultant of force of GCG movement in LP2, (N) r=.691 and in the 2 nd flight of MP2,
(N) r=-.716. In terms of the score for execution, t here are strong connectionsat p<0.05 with the
trajectory of GCG in the 2 nd flight of MP2 X, (m) r=.727 and of CP X, (m) r=.71 5; with the angular
velocity of toes in the 1 st flightof MP1 (rad/s) r=.753; the final score has s trong connections at p<0.01
with the angle hip-torso in CP (degrees) r=-.814; w ith the resultant of force of GCG movementin LP2
(N) r=.786; at p<0.05 with the angular velocity of arms in the 1 st flight of MP1 (rad/s) r=.664 andtoes
in LP2 (rad/s) r=672. Moderate connections regardin g the vaults difficultywith the hip-torso anglein
the 2 nd flight of MP2 (degrees) r=.508; with the angular v elocity of toes in LP2 (rad/s) r=-.562; with
the resultant of force of GCG movement (N) r=.591; score for execution with the toes-arms angle
(degrees) r=-.557; final scorewith the hip-torso an gle in the 1st flight of MP1 (degrees) r=-.603; with
GCG trajectory in the 1 st flight of MP2 – Y (m) r=.509 andshoulders Y (m) r= -.586; with the resultant
of force in the 2 nd flight of MP2 (N) r=-.530 and of CP (N) r=.576 whi le the other indicators show
insignificant weak or even non-existing connections at p>0.05.
These significant differences reveal the influence of sensorimotor coordination on the improvement
of the key elements of Yurchenko handspring vault s port techniquebased on the biomechanical
indicators in conformity with the performances obt ained in competition and of the implementation of
the learning macro-methods in junior gymnasts’ trai ning[24].
5. Conclusions
The results of the study demonstrate the improvemen t of sensoriomotor coordination development
by increasing the duration of maintaining the stati c balance, decreasing the deviation in the static-
kinematic stability and bettering the standstill la nding and the dynamic-kinematic stability.
The computerized video biomechanical analysisconsis tent with the method of movementpostural
orientation highlights the improvement of the key e lements of Yurchenko handspring vault sport
technique in the case of the junior female gymnasts of 12-15 years old on the basis of thekinematic
and dynamic characteristics indicators and the perf ormances achieved in competition.
The results of the linear correlative analysis poin t out strong connections between the sensorimotor
coordination indicators, the performances obtained in the handspring vaults eventand the
biomechanical indicators.
The correlative analysis between the components of the capacity for sensorimotor coordination, the
indicators of the biomechanical characteristics of Yurchenko handspring vault sports technique and the
performances obtained in competition by the junior gymnasts aged 12 to 15 years showed the
connection between these indicators and their influ ence upon the technical execution, fact that
validates the hypothesis proposed by the research.
6. Acknowledgment
This case study is an advanced stage of the pedagog ical experiment of the post-doctoral thesis; it is
included in the research plan in the field of Natio nal University of Physical Education and Sport of
Ukraine, with the subject matters: 2.11, 2.32 and i n the plan of research for 2017-2018 of the Faculty
of Physical Education and Sport, Ecological Univers ity of Bucharest. We express our gratitude to the
Romanian Gymnastics Federation and especially to Mi ssis AncaGrigorasMihailescu – federal coach
and to the coaches of the Olympic Team of Izvorani who helped us to conduct this research, also to the
scientificsupervisorProfessor Victor Bolobanfor his help and support in completing the post-doctoral
studies.

Title Analysis of the influence of sensorimotor
coordination development on the technical
execution of Yurchenko handspring vault
References
[1] Arkaev LJ, Suchilin NG. How to create champions. Th eory and technology of training. Top-
class gymnasts. Moscow: Fizkul'tura i sport; 2004.
[2] Boloban V.N. Sensory-motor coordination as basis fo r technical training. Science in the
Olympic sport. Kiev, 2, 2006: 96-102.
[3] Boloban VN. Regulation of athlete’s body posture. M onograph. Kiev: Olympic Literature;
2013.
[4] Boloban V, Potop V. Bases of macromethods of sports exercise training (as exemplified in
woman’s all-around gymnastics). Science in Olympic sport. 2015 December 07; 4: 55-66.
[5] Bompa, TO. Periodization: Theory and Methodology of Training. Bucharest: Ex Ponto
Publishing House; 2002.
[6] Bota C., Prodescu, B. Physiology of physical educat ion and sport – ergo-physiology. ”Antim
Ivireanu” Publishing House, Râmnicu Vâlcea; 1997.
[7] Bruggmann G.P., Biomechanics of gymnastics techniqu es, Sport Science Review, vol 3, 1994;
79-120.
[8] Code of Points 2017-2020, Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique (FIG), Women’s Artistic
Gymnastics, Part III, Apparatus, Section 10 – Hands pring vaults; Part IV Tables of elements, 2017:
40-43
[9] Cre țu M, Sim ăn II, B ărbuceanu M. Biomechanics of back giant on uneven ba rs. Pite ști:
Publishing House of Pite ști University; 2004
[10] Dorgan V. Biotechnological Progress and Performance Sport: Tendencies, Laws, Prognoses.
Science of Physical Culture. Chisinau, USEFS; 2011, 8(2): 27-32.
[11] Dragnea A., Bota A. Theory of motor activity. Bucha rest: Didactic and Pedagogic Publishing
House; 1999.
[12] Dragnea A, Teodorescu-Mate S. Theory of Sport. FEST Publishing House; 2002.
[13] Gaverdovskij JK.Theory and Methods of Artistic Gymn astics: text book in 2 v. Moscow: Sov.
Sport; vol. 1, 2014.
[14] Grigore V. Artistic gymnastics – theoretical bases of sports training. Bucharest: Semne; 2001.
[15] Filipenco E, Tom șa N, Buftea V. Gymnastics. Theoretical and Practica l-Methodical Course of
Handspring Vaults. Chisinau: USEFS; 2014
[16] Kashuba V, Khmelnitska I, Krupenya S. Biomechanical Analysis of Skilled Female Gymnasts’
Technique in «Round-off, Flick-Flack» Type on the V ault Table. Journal of Physical Education and
Sport (JPES); 2012, 12(4): 431-435.
[17] Koh M, Jenning L, Elliot B, Lioyd DA. Predicted Opt imal Performance of the Yurchenko
Layout Vault in Women’s Artistic Gymnastics. Journa l of Applied Biomechanics; 2003, 19: 187-204.
[18] Manolachi V. Experimental argumentation of developm ent of force and force-velocity abilities
of judo players in the context of coaching process. Journal of Physical Education and Sport. (JPES),

2015, 15(3): 582-584.
[19] Penitente G, Merni F, Fantozzi S, Perretta N. Kinem atics of the Springboard Phase in
Yurchenko-Style Vaults. XXV ISBS Symposium 2007, Ou ro Preto – Brazil, pp. 36-39.
[20] Penitente G, Sands WC, McNeal J, Smith SL, Kimmel W . Investigation of Hand Contact Forces
of Female Gymnasts Performing a Handspring Vault. I nternational Journal of Sports Science and
Engineering (IJSSE); 2010, 04(1): 15-24.
[21] Prassas S, Kwon YH, Sands W. Biomechanics of artist ic gymnastics. Journal of Sport
Biomechanics; 2006, 5: 261-292.
[22] Platonov V.N. System of training athletes in Olympi c sports. General theory and its practical
applications. Kiev: Olympic Literature Publishing H ouse; 2004.
[23] Potop V. E-learning by computer video analysis the key elements of sports technique of
Yurchenko vault in women's artistic gymnastics. The International Scientific Conference eLearning
and Software for Education; Bucharest: "Carol I" Na tionalDefenceUniversity. 2013, Vol. 3: 151-158
[24] Potop V. Bases of Macro-methods for Sports Exercise s Learning (material from Women’s
Artistic Gymnastics). Monograph, Kiev: EducationLit eratureCenter; 2015.
[25] Potop V, Mihail ă J-M, Urichianu A. Using e-training in mathematics modelling of the
biomechanical characteristics of Yurchenko vault. T he International Scientific Conference eLearning
and Software for Education; Bucharest: "Carol I" Na tionalDefenceUniversity. 2015, Vol. 3: 298-305.
[26] Readhead L. Gymnastics: Skills, Technique, Training . The Crowood Press. 2011.
[27] Smolevskij VM, Gaverdovskij JK. Artistic gymnastics , Kiev: Olimpijskaja literature; 1999:
112-121.
[28] Vieru, N. Handbook of sports gymnastics. Bucharest: “Driada” Publishing House; 1997.