Does the Kinetic Chain Work in the Forehand Drive Open Stance? What Electromyographic Analysis of the latissimus Dorsi and the Posterior Deltoid Muscles Showed Us



Abstract Views
313

Downloads
234

Citations

Share

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Submitted Apr 22, 2023
Published May 29, 2023
10.24018/ejsport.2023.2.3.81

Abstract viewed = 313 times

Table of Contents

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

This study examines electromyographic activity of the latissimus dorsi and the posterior deltoid, which act as competitors and agonists, respectively, during the rotational movement in the forehand drive technique with an open stance, among young tennis players aged 12-16. Eleven athletes participated in the research. The average of the maximum activation of the latissimus dorsi recorded with EMG, in the movement of the forehand drive corresponds to 4,15±1,137 and for the posterior deltoid, the maximum activation was 6,70±1,90. The results of the measurements indicate differences in the sequence of activation between the two muscles. The posterior deltoid was the second muscle to contract after the latissimus dorsi. At the start of the rotating action, the latissimus dorsi was most fully activated, while the maximum activation posterior deltoid was towards the end of the movement. The t-test showed P<0.05 between the two means. So, we found that the function of the motor chain follows the coordination of the involvement of the two muscles to perform the forehand drive with the open stance, which means that the rotational motion transfers significant energy which translates into speed and strength. These results are very important to coaches, physical trainers, and physiotherapists in providing appropriate treatment, training, and rehabilitation protocols not only for young athletes but also older in age.
Keywords: Forehand Drive with the Open Stance Tennis Surface Electromyography

References

  1. Antony N.T., & Keir P.J. (2010). Effects of posture, movement and hand load on shoulder muscle activity. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 20, 191–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2009.04.010.
     Google Scholar
  2. Bahamonde, R. (1999). Function analysis: new forehand options alter biomechanics of tennis. BioMechanics Magazine, CMPMEdica, 51-60.
     Google Scholar
  3. Basmajian, J.V., & Deluca, C.J. (1985). Muscles Alive: Their Functions Revealed by Electromyography (5th ed). Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins.
     Google Scholar
  4. Brindle T.J., Nitz, A.J., Uhl, T.L., Kifer, E., & Shapiro, R. (2006). Kinematic and EMG characteristics of simple shoulder movements with proprioception and visual feedback. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 16, 236–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2005.06.012.
     Google Scholar
  5. Crespo, M. & Reid, M.M. (2009). ITF Coaching beginner and intermediate tennis players. ITF Ltd. London.
     Google Scholar
  6. Elliott, B.C., Takahashi, K., & Noffal, G.J. (1997). The influence of grip position on upper limb contributions to racket head velocity in a tennis forehand. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 13, 182-196. http://dx.doi.org/10.1123/jab.13.2.182.
     Google Scholar
  7. Elliott B.C. (2003). The development of racquet speed. In: Elliot B., Reid M., Crespo M. (editors), Biomechanics of advanced tennis (pp. 33–47). International Tennis Federation.
     Google Scholar
  8. Illyés Á., & Kiss, R.M. (2005). Shoulder muscle activity during pushing, pulling, elevation and overhead throw. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 15. 282–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2004.10.005.
     Google Scholar
  9. Johnson, C. D., & McHugh, M. P. (2006). Performance demands of professional male tennis players. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 40, 696–699.
     Google Scholar
  10. Hermens, H.J., Freriks, B., Merletti, R., Hägg, G., Stegeman, D., Blok, J. et al., (1999). SENIAM 8: European recommendations for surface electromyography. Roessingh Research and Development B.V., results of SENIAN project. Enschede, Netherlands.
     Google Scholar
  11. Hirashima, M., Kudo, K., & Ohtsuki, T. (2003). Utilization and compensation of interaction torques during ball-throwing movements. Journal of Neurophysiology, 89, 1784-1795. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jn.00674.2002.
     Google Scholar
  12. Kellis, E., & Baltzopoulos, V. (1998). Muscle activation differences between eccentric and concentric isokinetic exercise. Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 30, 1616–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00005768-199811000-00010.
     Google Scholar
  13. Marsden, C.D., Obeso, J.A., Rothwell, J.C. (1983). The function of the antagonist muscle during fast limb movements in man. Journal of Neurophysiology, 335, 1–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.1983.sp014514.
     Google Scholar
  14. Morris, M., Jobe, F.W., Perry, J., Pink, M., Healy, B.S. (1989). Electromyographic analysis of elbow function in tennis players. The American Journal of Sports Medicine, 1, 241–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/036354658901700215.
     Google Scholar
  15. Reid, M., Elliott, B., & Crespo, M. (2013). Mechanics and learning practices associated with the tennis forehand: a review. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, 12, 225-231.
     Google Scholar
  16. Rogowski, I., Creveaux, T., Faucon, A., Rota, S., Champely, S., Guillot, A. (2009). Relationship between the muscle coordination and racket mass during tennis forehand drive. European journal of applied physiology, 107, 289–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00421-009-1124-4.
     Google Scholar
  17. Rouffet, D., Hautier, C., Brosseau, O., & Rogowski I. (2009). Coordination musculaire lors du droit liftι chez les jeunes joueurs de tennis. Science, and Sports, 24, 111–4.
     Google Scholar
  18. Ryu, R.K., McCormick, J., Jobe, F.W., Moynes, D.R., Antonelli, D.J. (1988). An electromyographic analysis of shoulder function in tennis players. The American Journal of Sports Medicine, 16, 481–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/036354658801600509.
     Google Scholar
  19. Roetert, P., & Kovacs, M. (2011). Tennis anatomy, Human Kinetics. Champaign IL.
     Google Scholar
  20. Rota, S., Hautier, C., Creveaux, T., Champely, S., Guillot, A. & Rogowski, I. (2012). Relationship between muscle coordination and forehand drive velocity in tennis. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 22(2), 294-300.
     Google Scholar
  21. Schonborn, R. (1999). Advanced techniques for competitive tennis. Meyer and Meyer Sport: Aachen.
     Google Scholar
  22. Seeley, M., Funk, M., Denning, W., Hager, R. and Hopkins, J. (2011). Tennis forehand kinematics change as post-impact ball speed is altered. Sports Biomechanics, 10(4), 415-426.
     Google Scholar