Comparison in Physical Fitness between Senior High School First Level Volleyball Libero Defensive Players and the Other Roles of Players

• Main Authors: Lin Chien Cheng, 林建成
• Other Authors: Lin, Chu- mao
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2003
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/68989986818204604526

碩士 === 國立臺灣師範大學 === 體育學系在職進修碩士班 === 91 === The purpose of this study was to investigate the differences between volleyball libero defensive players and the other roles of players in height, weight, and physical fitness. The subjects were 8 libero defensive players, 7 setter players, 16 ace attack players, 14 quick attack players, and 8 opposite attack players （a total of 53 players）of the best 8 male teams that played in the Finals Of Senior High School First Level Volleyball League Games in 2003. They were tested by 7 test items for specialized physical fitness about volleyball. The specialized physical fitness and the test items are as follows： Velocity （30-meter dash）, Jumping capacity （vertical jumping ; approaching jumping）, Agility （9-mter × 3 agility run）, Flexibility （the sit-and-reach flexibility measurement）, The power and strength of upper-limb （badminton throw）, Cardiorespiratory endurance capacity （800-meter run）. The data were then analyzed by t-test, and the following conclusions were made： 1. Differences in height and weight： In height, there was no significant difference between libero defensive players and setter players； but there were significant differences between libero defensive players and the other roles of players（p＜.05）. In weight, there was significant difference between libero defensive players and quick attack players （p＜.05）； but there were no significant differences between libero defensive players and the other roles of players. 2. Differences between libero defensive players and setter players in physical fitness： There was significant difference in approaching jumping between libero defensive players and setter players （p＜.05）. Libero defensive players could jump higher than setter players. But there were no significant differences in the other test items. 3. Differences between libero defensive players and ace attack players in physical fitness： There were no significant differences in all the test items. 4. Differences between libero defensive players and quick attack players in physical fitness： Libero defensive players were better than quick attack players in 9-meter × 3 agility run and the sit-and-reach flexibility measurement, and there were significant differences （p＜.05）. There were no significant differences in the other test items. 5. Differences between libero defensive players and opposite attack players in physical fitness： There were no significant differences in all the test items .