Virrki E., Kalaja T.: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WOMEN'S ARTISTIC Vol. 11 Issue 3: 307 - 320 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WOMEN'S ARTISTIC GYMNASTICS TECHNICAL SKILL, PHYSICAL PERFORMANCE TEST RESULTS AND SUCCESS IN COMPETITIONS IN FINLAND Elina Virkki, Teppo Kalaja University of Jyvaskyla, Faculty of Sport and Health Sciences, Jyvaskyla, Finland _Original article Abstract The aim of this study was to find out the potential of the Minoritest to identify the most likely talented gymnasts to join the national team pre-training group in Finland. The study examined the relationships between gymnasts' (N=215, age 10-13) Minoritest results (2006-2010) and success in competitions after the Minoritests until the end of 2016. The competition results were also compared between the gymnasts who had participated in the test and a random number (N=180) of gymnasts who had not. According to this study, the majority (92%) of the best gymnasts in competitions had participated in the Minoritest. 39% of the best in competitions were among the top 10 in the Minoritest. The test results from the technical skills showed a significant connection to the average competition results in all age groups and to the average competition level in the 10-12-year-olds. The test results of the flexibility section did not show relation to competition success. The test results of the strength section showed a significant connection to the average competition results and to the average competition level in the 10-11-year-olds. In the 12-13-year-olds the test results of the strength section showed a relation to the average competition level. According to this study Minoritest success have a positive connection to the future competition success. However, the relation cannot be considered unequivocal. The test results of the strength section can be considered a significant section for the 10-11-year-olds to predict future potential to succeed. Keywords: Women's artistic gymnastics, talent identification, technical skills, physical performance, competition success. INTRODUCTION In women's gymnastics the training is typically started at about the age of five and the high intensity of training is maintained through the growth (Arkaev & Suchilin, 2004; Armstrong & Sharp 2013; Sands, 2000). It takes about 10 years of intensive training to achieve the elite level in women's gymnastics (Arkaev & Suchilin, 2004; Armstrong & Sharp, 2013; Sands, 2000). Because training is started at early childhood and the elite level is reached at middle to late adolescence, a talented gymnast must be identified earlier than in many other sports. Without early talent identification gymnasts might be excluded from the buoyant training and may not have the time required to reach the top level during the career. Talent Science of Gymnastics Journal 307 Science of Gymnastics Journal Virrki E., Kalaja T.: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WOMEN'S ARTISTIC Vol. 11 Issue 3: 307 - 320 identification at an early stage is important also to ensure gymnast's motivation. (Prescott, 1999.) There is no uniform world wide test for the identification of a potential gymnast. Each country has their own tests for talent identification which are, however, very much alike and include different kinds of measures of gymnast's physical fitness and technical skills (Bale & Goodway, 1990; Jemni, 2011). The importance of physical, anthropometric and motor characteristics have been highlighted in the talent identification (e.g., Bale & Goodway, 1990; Pion, et al, 2014; Prescott, 1999). However, comparison of these different characteristics has been shown to produce varying data (Pion, Hohmann, Liu, Lenoir & Segers, 2017). In addition, each apparatus has its own key elements for a successful performance. There is also a considerable variability in the ability of gymnasts to perform in different apparatuses. (Bradshaw & Le Rossignol, 2004). To understand the physiological conditions of gymnast's early adolescence, it is necessary to take into account the gymnast's age, growth and maturation (individual timing and tempo of puberty) (Armstrong & Barker, 2012; Armstrong, Welsman & Chia, 2001; Armstrong & Sharp, 2013; Brown, Patel & Darmawan, 2017; Mountjoy, 2008; Van Praagh & Dore, 2002). The stage at which the gymnast's growth is, affects the gymnast's physical performance (Brown et al., 2017; Rowland, 2005). Aerobic and anaerobic fitness as well as muscle strength develop with the growth (Goswami, Singha Roy, Dalui & Bandyopadhyay, 2014; Rowland, 2005) and especially during puberty (Beunen & Thomis, 2000; Geithner et al., 2004; Van Praagh, 2000). Increase in the size of the body or its body parts is the most important factor affecting physical performance. The development of physical performance, especially anaerobic fitness and muscle strength, is also influenced by other factors independent of the body size, which explains why gymnasts of the same size do not have the same level of physical performance. Such size-independent factors include e.g. functioning of the nervous system (recruitment, coordination) and the organization of the muscle fibers. (Rowland, 2005.) Talent identification with an individual test is difficult because of the multidimensional nature of gymnastics, gymnast's individual growth and differences in coaching (Pion, Lenoir, Vandorpe & Segers, 2015; Pion, et al, 2017; Prescott, 1999; Sands, 2003; Vayens, Lenoir, Williams & Philippaerts, 2008). The weaknesses in predicting future performance by a single test are that the performance tests are testing only a few characteristics at a time and that the evaluation is strongly governed by the gymnast's current physical and technical skill level (Vayens, et al, 2008). It is often assumed that the child's physical performance and characteristics are in linear relation to adult's ones (Morris, 2000; Vayens, et al., 2008). The problem in selection processes is also the high dropout rate of gymnasts (Pion & al. 2015) due to various reasons (Crane & Temple, 2015). In Finland, majority of gymnasts quit gymnastics during the 11-15 years of age (Lamsa & Maenpaa, 2002). In the talent identification it would be important to understand and identify the factors that influence the development of a gymnast, and to assess the development of talent characteristics, motor learning and the ability to develop performance in the long term (Di Cagno, et al, 2014; Pion, et al, 2015; Prescott, 1999; Vayens, et al, 2008). Minoritest is an annual test camp for female gymnasts in Finland where the gymnasts are selected for the Finnish national team pre-training group. All the 10-13-year-old gymnasts that have fulfilled the requirements of reaching the minimum competition score in the minimum competition level and completing successfully a certain performance badge, are able to participate Science of Gymnastics Journal 308 Science of Gymnastics Journal Virrki E., Kalaja T.: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WOMEN'S ARTISTIC Vol. 11 Issue 3: 307 - 320 in the Minoritest. Participation in the test is optional. The test is based on FIG Age Group Development and Competition Program and consists of various technical skill and physical performance test exercises. The technical skill section consists of different kinds of individual movements and their combinations on each apparatus testing the gymnasts' specific technical prerequisites. The flexibility section consists of exercises that are designed to measure the gymnasts' shoulder and hip flexibility. The strength section tests the gymnasts' explosive power, speed, agility and specific strength-resistance characteristics with various static and dynamic exercises. The gymnasts are divided into three different age groups: 10-11-, 12- and 13-year-olds. The strength and flexibility sections are the same for all age groups, while the test exercises of the technical skills vary by age group. The technical skill exercises have changed somehow each year due to the problems in interpretation in some of the exercises and/or due to the deficiencies in gymnasts' techniques or in general skills. Example of Minoritest exercises can be found on the following websites (only in Finnish): https://www.voimistelu.fi/Portals/0/N aisten%20telinevoimistelu/2019%20Minor itestist%C3%B6.pdf (technical skill test exercises). https://www.voimistelu.fi/Portals/0/N aisten%20telinevoimistelu/NTV%20valme nnusryhmien%20fyysiset%20testit_09032 018.pdf (physical performance test exercises). The purpose of this study was to examine the relationships between gymnasts' Minoritest results and success in competitions after the test and also to see whether any of the test sections predict future success in competitions. The aim of this study was to find out the Minoritest's potential to identify the most likely talented gymnasts to join the national team pre-training group. METHODS This study was conducted as a retrospective quantitative research that compared the test results of the gymnasts (N=215; age 10-13) who participated in the Minoritest in 2006-2010 to the competition results after the Minoritest until the end of 2016. The test results of those gymnasts who participated in the Minoritest in several different years, were analysed as separate performances. The total number of the test participants was 328. The competition results consisted of all the available results between 20062016, depending on when the gymnast participated in the test and for how long she has been competing after the test, but did not include results before Minoritests, apparatus specific competition results, team competition results or international competition results. The Minoritest results as well as competition results were scaled to the seven-step-scale so that a certain percentage of the maximum points corresponded between values 1-7. The purpose of the scaling was to make the test and competition results comparable, and to separate the inadequate performances from the excellent ones (1=inadequate, 2=satisfactory, 3=fairly good, 4=good, 5=very good, 6=creditable, 7=excellent). The Minoritest results were divided into three sections: technical skill (subdivided into vault, uneven bars, balance beam and floor sections), flexibility and strength sections. The competition results were divided into vault, uneven bar, balance beam, floor, total competition score and competition level. In addition, the competition levels (shown in table 1) were scaled to a five-step-scale because the Finnish competition system in female gymnastics changed during the review period. Each gymnast had a different amount of competition results, still at least five, after the Minoritest. The average Science of Gymnastics Journal 309 Science of Gymnastics Journal Virrki E., Kalaja T.: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WOMEN'S ARTISTIC Vol. 11 Issue 3: 307 - 320 competition result, weighted for the competition level, were calculated for each gymnast separately for each apparatus and for total competition score by using the scaled results and competition levels [(Result 1 * competition level + result 2 * competition level + ... + result n * competition level) / N (the amount of results)]. The average competition levels were calculated for each gymnast. The average total competition scores and levels of the gymnasts who participated in the Minoritest were also compared to the average total competition scores and levels of a random number (N=180) of gymnasts who had not participated in the test. This was made to find out the level on which the non-participants were on their competition success. Finally, from the average total competition scores, the top 50 gymnasts among those who participated in the test and among all (gymnasts who did and did not participate in the test) were separated (as value 1) from the rest of the gymnasts' average total competition scores (as value 0). All the comparisons of this study between the test results and competition results, as well as the comparison between the gymnasts who participated in the test and those who did not, are made by using the gymnasts' average competition results (vault, uneven bar, balance beam, floor, total competition score) and average competition level. Table 1 Scaling of the competition levels. Old system New system Scaling competition competition category level level 1 2, 3 D 2 4 E, 2 3 5 F, 3 4 6 4 5 7, 8 5 The research material was analysed using IBM SPSS Statistics 24 -software. The normal distribution of the material was tested by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Nominal and ordinal measures were used to classify the material variables. Crosstabs and Chi-Square tests were used for testing how the top 50 gymnasts in the average total competition scores were divided into the group of gymnasts who had participated in the Minoritest and into the group of gymnasts who had not participated in the test. In the analysis, those gymnasts who had participated in the Minoritest were subdivided into the test ranking groups of 1-10, 11-20, 21-30 and >30. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to analyse the differences in the distribution of the average total competition score and the average competition level by test ranking groups. It was also used for testing the age effect on test results by testing the distribution equality of the test results of different test sections between different age groups (the 10-11-, 12- and 13-year-olds). The Mann-Whitney U test was used to analyse the differences in the distribution of the average total competition score and in the average competition level between the gymnasts who had and gymnasts who had not participated in the Minoritest. Spearman's correlation coefficient was used to explore the correlations between the test results of different test sections and competition success. In the analysis the apparatus specific test results of the technical skills were compared to the similar apparatus specific average competition results. The total test results of the technical skills were compared to the average total competition score and to the average competition level. The test results of the flexibility and strength sections were compared to the apparatus specific average competition results, to the average total competition score and to the average competition level. The total test score was compared to the average total competition score and to the average competition level. Spearman's correlation coefficient was also used to explore the relationships of the Science of Gymnastics Journal 310 Science of Gymnastics Journal Virrki E., Kalaja T.: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WOMEN'S ARTISTIC Vol. 11 Issue 3: 307 - 320 test results of different test sections to the average total competition score and to the average competition level by age groups. RESULTS Minoritest results connection to the competition success Figure 1 shows the distribution of the average total competition score and of the average competition level by test ranking groups. The differences between the test ranking of 1-10 and 21-30; 1-10 and >30; 11-20 and >30 were statistically very significant (p<0.001). The differences between test ranking of 21-30 and >30 were statistically significant (p<0.01). Those gymnasts with top 10 results in the test showed relatively the highest values in the average total competition score and in the average competition level. Figure 2 shows the distributions of the average total competition score and of the average competition level between the gymnasts who participated in the test and those who did not. The gymnasts who participated in the test showed relatively higher competition scores and progressed into higher competition levels compared to those who did not participate in the test. The differences between these two groups were statistically very significant (p<0.001). The results of the gymnasts who did not participate in the test showed some clear deviating values (marked with black spots) from the rest of the results. The crosstabs of how the top 50 gymnasts in the average total competition scores were divided into the gymnasts who did and into the gymnasts who did not participate in the Minoritest, showed that the majority (92%) of the best gymnasts in competitions participated in the Minoritest. Those with top 10 results in the test had the highest proportion (39%) of being among the best in the competitions. Test ranking of 11-20 showed also a connection (31%) of being among top 50 in the competition results. 8% of the best in competitions didn't participate in the test. The Chi-Square test showed statistically a very significant reliance (p<0.001) between the top placing in the test and the top placing in the competitions. The test characteristics ' connection to the future competition success Table 2 shows the different test sections' test results correlation coefficient (r) and the coefficient of determination (r2) to the average competition results and level. In the comparisons, the strength section showed significant coefficient of determination (25