International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport

2011, 11, 254-266.

Objectivity of FRAMI-Software for Judo Match Analysis

Bianca Miarka1, Carlos Roberto Hayashida1, Ursula Ferreira Julio1, Michel Calmet1,2, and
Emerson Franchini1
1
Martial Arts and Combat Sports Research Group, School of Physical Education and Sport,
University of So Paulo, Brazil.
2
Montepellier University, France.

Abstract

The use of technology can greatly improve performance analysis in sport.

The purpose of this paper is to present objectivity measures from the
computer software for judo matches, called FRAMI. In order to verify
objectivity measures, 573 matches of two different levels of championships
(regional and state matches) were taped. Next, the data was assessed through
intra and inter-observer testing procedures. In inter-observer comparison, the
first expert selected 10 combats in a randomized form and had analyzed 20
athletes performances, the second expert analyzed the same 20 athletes and
the third expert analyzed the same 20 athletes. After this procedure, the last
expert analyzed the same sample two more times for intra-observer testing.
The following groups of match variables were considered: time structure;
penalties; execution, orientation and scores of attack techniques, and;
gripping types. In order to verify concordance, means were compared and a
quartile criteria of the confidence interval was established by 0.70, where
concordance was classified as strong (q 30%), moderate (30% < q 60%)
or weak (q > 60%). The computer program showed a strong concordance
between and within the evaluators comparisons, from a total of 42 criteria,
since their replies were almost totally identical (86.11% are strong or
absolute). Variables with weak classification will be grouped for better
results. In conclusion, this software can clarify the understanding of
technical and tactical judo match analysis with very good accuracy.

Keywords: performance analysis, technique, tactics.

1. Introduction

Match analysis is used to investigate technical and tactical behaviors within judo studies,
and it can also be applied to improve athletic performance. This type of data can be used in
a variety of means to provide a descriptive profile of a group, or for giving feedback about
actions of the athlete and his/her opponents. In the same way, this information could help in

254
planning training sessions. For example, Gorostiaga (1988) cleared orientations about time
structure and metabolic demands to specific fitness training. In addition, the goal of this
analysis is to understand the way in which sport skills are performed, and can provide the
basis for improving advantage in combats (adapted from Lee, 2002; Barris & Button, 2008;
Calmet, 2009; Nevill, Atkinson & Hughes, 2008). Franchini et al. (2008), for instance,
compared elite and super elite athletes and demonstrated that a greater number of throwing
techniques and the use of more directions of attack seem to be important to increase
unpredictability in judo matches.

During the coaching process, great emphasis is placed on the ability of coaches to detect
and recall all critical technique incidents at a judo championship performance, and this has
been carried for many decades in judo (Adami & Couturier, 1976; Matsumoto, Takeuchi &
Nakamura, 1978; Branco, 1979). Pawluk (1966) has quantified throw down techniques and
its scores from two groups of weight categories in the European Tournament of 1966.
Results demonstrated that the heavy category used 15 different techniques, while the light
category had 13 variations. However, the last group displayed a wider range of activities,
with 638 technical executions in combat when compared with the heavy group, with 440
executions.

Judo match analysis has been developing a systematic process incorporating scientific
principles and methods since about forty years ago, with the publication of texts linking
scientific principles to coaching practice (Pawluk, 1966; aksa & Siewior, 1972). Calmet &
Ahmaidi (2004) developed a system for notating the direction of attacks in judo matches,
and observed that the number of technique variations used during competitions was higher
for senior athletes than for children. Besides, high-level athletes used 4.7 0.8 attack
directions, which were more than both senior and children groups. However, despite the
importance of this study regarding the applicability of the hand notation system, it is not
possible to describe matches with a large number of details and a high quantity of data
using this method (Hughes & Franks, 1997).

Knowledge of contextual factors, such as time structure, number of applied techniques and
directions, laterality and grip engagement, quality of attacks awarded with points and
development of grip forms (v.g. Sterkowicz, Lech & Blecharz, 2010; Sterkowicz &
Franchini, 2001; Calmet, Trezel & Ahmaidi, 2006) can potentially affect combat
performance. In addition, computerized notational systems enable us to process large sets
of data very quickly and with more accuracy. Judo teams from different countries have
been trying to investigate tecnical-tactical behaviors; however, it has been shown that
coaches cannot accurately observe and recall all the detailed information required for a
complete interpretation of a judo match (adapted from Lee, 2002). There have been many
developments in technical-tactical analysis determined by the different interests and needs
of scientists and judo coaches, aiming to identify critical events, often referred to as
performance indicators in judo players (Adami & Couturier; 1976; adapted from Nevill,
Atkinson & Hughes, 2008).

255
In general, previous research about notational analysis has reported how the use of
computerized analysis can increase precision in results (v.g. Calmet & Ahmaidi, 2002).
However, incorrect use of computers could induce error possibilities from either operator or
software (Hughes & Frank, 1997). Added to this, certain characteristics are essential in
order to carry technical and tactical judo analysis; without them, little credit can be attested
for this type of collected data. Knowledge about the true or criterion value of the analysis
and between the observed values are the most important indication of quality. Another
important characteristic of consistent results is the objectivity in intra and inter observations
measure, which concerns the reproductibility of the observed value when the measurement
is repeated (Hopkins, 2000; Baumgartner et al., 2006). Despite of the estabilished criteria
for data acquisition, none of the currently available technical-tactical judo studies have
reported instrumental objectivity in software application (Matsumoto, Takeuchi &
Nakamura, 1978; Heinisch, 1997; Sagnol & Biscotti, 1997; Sterkowicz & Franchini, 2001;
Calmet & Ahmaidi, 2004; Calmet, Trezel & Ahmaidi, 2006, Ploszaj, 2007).

Since, as we discussed, the main attributes of software for technical analysis quality include
the reproductibility of the criteria estabilished, with a profound impact on notational
analysis of sport (Hughes & Franks, 1997), the purpose of this paper is to present the
objectivity measures of a new computer software for judo matches, called FRAMI.

2. Methods

2.1. Match sample, Participants and Objectivity testing

In order to verify objectivity measures, two different levels of championships (223 regional
matches and 350 state matches of all categories in juvenile, junior and senior classes from
both sexes) were taped using four Sony cameras model DCR-DVD508 during the year
2008. For a guarantee of ecological validity, each camera was responsible for one match
area, in the same way as coaches and match analysts have previously done. All participants
were informed about the procedures used in the record, and provided their informed
consent.

Next, data objectivity was assessed through intra and inter-observer testing procedures.
This involved three judo experts, with more than ten years of practice and degrees in
Physical Education, who analyzed judo matches with this software after having received
training from 5 to 10 hours about its use. In this training, experts learned commands on
keyboard used for obtaining information on the technical and tactical characteristics from
each athlete. For example, for the purpose of record an action by the athlete who is wearing
blue judogi, it was necessary first to type F8 on the keyboard (athlete with blue judogi),
then a subcommand tab to choose the variable grip in order to insert the code for the
configuration of the grip.

The first expert selected 10 combats (20 athletes) between 573 matches in a randomized
form. The same matches were divided and the other two experts chose in randomized

256
arrangement the same 10 combats for analysis. In inter-observer comparison, the first
expert analyzed 20 athletes performances, the second expert analyzed the same 20 athletes
and the third expert analyzed the same 20 athletes. After this procedure, the last expert
analyzed the same sample two more times for intra-observer testing, with a 24h interval
between measures (Hopkins, 2000; James, Taylor & Stanley, 2007).

2.2. Identification of judo performance indicators

Indicator information obtained from previous studies (Matsumoto, Takeuchi & Nakamura,
1978; Calmet & Matet, 1987; Gorostiaga, 1988; Franchini & Sterkowicz, 2003; Calmet &
Ahmaidi, 2004; Sterkowicz, Lech & Almansba, 2007) was used to formulate the list of
technical and tactical behaviors used in the computerized match analysis. This group of
variables was composed of time structure (total combat time, standing combat time, pause
time, groundwork combat time, movement without contact, gripping time and time of
technical aplication); execution and orientation of attack techniques; quantification of
received and applied scores and penalties, and variation of gripping types. Next, each
variable was given two operational definitions, the first to aid in the identification of each
behavior type (e.g. execution of a standing attack technique was an attempt to throw down
the opponent, following the official Kodokan classification for judo techniques current in
2008). This procedure was similar to that proposed by Sterkowicz, Lech & Almansba
(2007). Briefly, occurrence of turns around the long axis of the body (with or without
rotation), hand/arm, foot/leg or sacrifice throwing techniques according to Kodokan
traditional system, groundwork actions, direction of attacks (forwards, backwards, left,
right), moment and duration of actions. The second operational definition was to determine
whether this technique or another action resulted in scores according to the official
refereesopinion (Taylor et al., 2008; International Judo Federation, 2008).

2.3. Development, verification and testing of FRAMI-Software

With the research approved by the Ethics Committee, this software was developed in the
School of Physical Education and Sport - University of So Paulo, and written using Delphi
C++, from Borland Software Corporation. The program was verified during the making.
The primary reason for early investment in verification activity was to catch potential errors
early before the cost of their correction escalated. The requirements of verification
activities were to determine verification approach, adequacy of requirements, and to
generate functional test data. For design verification activities there was an attempt to
determine consistency of design with requirements, adequacy of design, generate structural
and functional test data. After that, the verification activities in the construction stage
resided in determining consistency with design, adequacy of implementation, general
structural and functional test data, and applying test data. The last verification activity was
to check and commensurate the level of redevelopment, in the operation and maintenance
stage (Adrion, Branstad & Cherniavsky, 1982). Data was collected by experts for the
duration of each match using the performance indicators described.

257
2.4. Statistical Analysis

2.4.1. Concordance Correlation Coefficient

The objectivity and validity of this software were examined using the sample concordance
and correlation coefficient (CCC), suggest by Lin (1989) and calculated with:

2 Sij
ij 2 2
, i 1,2,3, j 1,2,3 , (1)
S i S j (Xi X j )2
n n n n
X ik X jk ( X ik X i )2 ( X jk X j )2
exist Xi k 1
, Xj k 1
, S i2 k 1
, S 2j k 1
,
n n n 1 n 1
n
( X ik X i )( X jk X j)
k 1
S ij .
n 1

with X ik : the k observation of i expert-observation, n: total observational number,

i 1,2,3 j 1,2,3

For estimating the agreement between the three experts, it was used this generalization of
coefficient above, suggested by Barnhart, Haber & Song (2002):

J 1 J
2 S ij
0 J
i 1 j i 1
J
, i 1,2,3, j 1,2,3 e J 3 experts(2)
2 2
( J 1) S i J (Xi X)
i 1 i 1

exist Si2 , Sij , X i e X j the same defined before.

The coefficients assume values between -1 and 1, as the closer it gets to 1, the more
concordance will exist between experts for this specific variable. The same procedure was
used within expert concordance.

2.4.2. Transformation of variables

In order to compare the analyses of the temporal structure groups, variables were gauged,
being divided by the total match time on the values of each athlete, evaluated by each
observer. This allowed continuous variables for the use of the Concordance Correlation
Coefficient. Therefore, apart from Total Match Time, a transformation was carried on for
each variable in this study. For the variables of the group Time on Each Type of Grip the
transformation was analogous, and the values were divided by the Total Grip Time.

258
Transformations made on the group Frequency were different for each variable: Number of
Pauses, Number of Groundwork Match Times and Number of Free Movement Times,
divided by Average Pause Time, Average Ground Fight Time and Average Free Movement
Time for each athlete, respectively. Average Time was calculated from the average of times
observed on the three evaluators. The other three variables of the group (Number of
Transition Times, Number of Techniques Used and Number of Scores) were divided by the
Average Fight Time for each athlete, as well as all variables of the Groups of Attempted
Techniques, of the Orientation group and the specifications of techniques from the groups
Leg (Ashi-waza), Hip (Koshi-waza), Arm (Te-waza) and Sacrifice (Sutemi-waza)
techniques.

2.4.3. Bootstrap technique

In order to obtain a distribution of the estimated coefficient and corresponding error
measure, the Bootstrap resample technique was used to estimate a distribution of
probability for a better analysis of resemblances on the observations intra- and inter-
evaluators (Efron & Tibshirani, 1993). For each variable, the resample considered only
those athletes from which one value was observed by at least one evaluator. That being, the
N size of the bootstrap samples was equal to the total of athletes with the occurring
variables in question.

From the distribution for each variable, the following criterion was established: the
observations of the evaluators were considered strong in concordance when the quantile,
from which all samples obtained a coefficient value above 0.70, was under or equal to 30%;
moderate when this quantile was between 30% and 60%; and, in the cases when the
quantile was superior to 60%, the concordance was considered weak. The same procedure
was carried on for the intra-evaluator observations.

3. Results

The index and classification of time structure data are shown on Table 1. Objectivity results
showed a strong classification between experts and within expert.

259
Table 1. Index and classification between experts and within expert on time structure
analysis.
Time structure Between experts Within expert
Index Classification Index Classification
Combat time 0.990 Strong 0.999 Strong
Tachi-waza time 0.890 Strong 0.993 Strong
Pause time 0.912 Strong 0.986 Strong
Ne-waza time 0.838 Strong 0.999 Strong
Movement without contact 0.895 Strong 0.992 Strong
Tachi to Ne-waza transition 0.879 Strong 0.975 Strong
Gripping time 0.838 Strong 0.991 Strong
Technical application 0.848 Strong 0.974 Strong
Tachi-waza standing techniques; Ne-waza groundwork techniques

The index and classification of technical analysis data are shown on Table 2. In this group
of variables, two groups did not appear in the analysis. In addition, most of the groups had
absolute or strong classification. Just one group was classified as moderate.

The index and classification of technical directions analysis data are shown on Table 3.
This group showed absolute or strong classification for the most part of variables. Just in
two cases the weak classification appeared. The index and classification of configurations
of grip used data are shown on Table 4.

Table 2. Index and classification between experts and within expert on technical analysis.
Technical group Between experts Within expert
Index Classification Index Classification
Leg techniques 0.972 Strong 1 Absolute
Hip techniques 1 Absolute 1 Absolute
Arm techniques 0.754 Moderate 1 Absolute
Sacrifice techiniques 0.958 Strong 0.957 Strong
Arm lock technique 1 Absolute 1 Absolute
Pinning technique Not observed
Choking technique Not observed

Table 3. Index and classification between experts and within expert on technical directions
analysis
Technique Directions Between experts Within expert
Index Classification Index Classification
Back 1 Absolute 1 Absolute
Back Left 0.121 Weak 1 Absolute
Left -0.314 Weak 1 Absolute
Front Left 0.824 Strong 1 Absolute
Front 0.891 Strong 1 Absolute
Front Right 0.915 Strong 0.915 Strong
Right 1 Absolute 1 Absolute
Right Back 1 Absolute 1 Absolute

260
Table 4. Index and classification between experts and within expert on configurations of
grips used.
Between experts Within expert
Index Classification Index Classification
Left Collar 0.979 Strong 0.994 Strong
Right Sleeve 0.633 Moderate 0.974 Strong
Left Collar and Right Sleeve 0.958 Strong 0.995 Strong
Left Back and Right Sleeve 0.874 Strong 0.914 Strong
Right Collar 0.965 Strong 0.997 Strong
Left Sleeve 0.875 Strong 0.787 Moderate
Right Collar and Left Sleeve 0.909 Strong 0.982 Strong
Right Back and Left Sleeve 0.020 Weak 0.939 Strong
Right Sleeve and Left Sleeve 0.941 Strong 0.994 Strong
Right Collar and Left Collar Not observed
Right Collar and Right Sleeve Not observed
Left Collar and Left Sleeve Not observed

Figure 1. Number of variables per classification.

4. Discussion

Objectivity is an important requirement for effective coaching analysis in accurate and

reliable data. Previous research has indeed studied technical and tactical aspects in judo
matches, especially time structure and interrelationships between events with judo
performance. However, technical and tactical judo measures have not traditionally been
261
available including these essential factors. Match analysis has been either a short or long-
hand procedure and requires several experts. In this research, however, experts carried
observations in the same conditions, and match analyses were almost totally identical:
86.11% of the results were strong or absolute (figure 1).

A large number of researches accurately reported the time structure analysis of judo
matches, indicating that it can be an effective referential for the training process. They
developed particular considerations such as, for instance, a subjective analysis of action
intensity (Castarlenas & Planas, 1997; Monteiro, 1995; Sikorski et al., 1987; Sterkowicz &
Maslej, 1998; Van Malderen et al., 2006). In the current study, experts did repeated
observations and Table 1 shows a strong classification between them. The table also shows
a similar result within experts, with a strong concordance, which accurately reflects specific
concepts about time structure. In the same way, the protocol was able to detect small but
important changes in time structure, such as the technical application time.

Judo matches are dynamic systems, whose evolution captures invariance and change in the
collective behavior of judo players (e.g. Calmet & Ahmaidi, 2004; Sterkowicz, 1998).
Several authors described observational technical analysis, such as one of the first judo
studies about match techniques and tactics, carried by Matsumoto, Takeuchi & Nakamura
(1978). This technical analysis enables coaches in the technical evaluation process both for
the opponent and for his/her athlete, which can aid match strategy, and is also useful in the
teaching-learning process.

Most of the groups of variables presented on Table 2 had absolute or strong classification.
Just one group was classified as moderate, which demonstrates a good result despite the
fact that we used one camera per area, like coaches usually do. In spite of this ecological
validity, the acquisition of data was affected by some interferences, mainly the positioning
of the referee between the camera and the athletes. The same case occurred with the
analyses of direction of attacks and laterality with grip engagement (Calmet & Ahmaidi,
2004; Franchini et al., 2008; Sterkowicz, Lech & Blecharz, 2010). Despite this natural
limitation, our study managed to evaluate the index and classification of technical
directions analysis data by the experts. Results showed absolute or strong classification for
the most part of variables, and in just two cases a weak classification appeared. Previous
investigations have suggested that one of the most crucial aspects in the combination of
performance indicators is the direction of attacks and the grip engagement. Franchini et al.
(2008) pointed out that athletes are currently trying to perform effective attacks and
preferential grips to control the space and to defend the attempt of his/her opponent. In
agreement, Sterkowicz, Lech & Blecharz (2010) showed that effectiveness of the chosen
perspective depends on the task type with significant correlation between laterality of upper
and lower limbs, as well as the choice of dominant directions of attack during the match.
However, these aspects and the course of the judo match are still waiting for further
investigation (Calmet & Ahmaidi, 2004; Franchini et al., 2008; Sterkowicz, Lech &
Blecharz, 2010).

262
The most effective means to control an opponent is to control the grip (Weers, 1996).
Calmet, Miarka & Franchini (2010) demonstrated that the time spent in both hand-gripping
to attack and throw vary from 86% to 53% down to 24% for beginner, intermediate and
expert judokas, respectively, indicating that the high-level judo athletes spend much less
time between the grip dominance and technique application compared to other judo athletes
and practitioners. The three groups were different especially concerning the time spent with
two grasped hands. Nevertheless, few studies were conducted analyzing this component.
Adopting a variable grip raises the level of uncertainty for the opponent and allows more
motion variations during the match, creating more offensive and defensive abilities for the
athlete to adjust to new situations. In the present study, we conducted the criterion of grip
with 12 variations; however, three were not observed. The data for index and classification
of grip configurations, shown on Table 4, suggests that this group of variables can be
analyzed with combinations from sleeve, collar and grip on back, which was divided in
right and left sides. In eight diferent configurations, seven had a strong concordance within
expert observations and one had moderate concordance. In addition, few differences
appeared between experts, in eight different types of grips just one obtained a weak
concordance and one moderate. Although the present research had limitations associed with
video shooting (e.g.: parts of the athletes bodies could stand in front of the full grip view)
six types among eight obtained a strong concordance between experts.

5. Conclusion

Certain requirements are essential for a good match analysis. In this research, we tried to
present two of the most important characteristics of technical and tactical measurements,
the inter and intra objectivity requirements. The present study showed a high objectivity in
the experts analysis, even with a small time of training in the FRAMI software. Results
revealed overall a strong concordance between and within evaluators comparisons. When
all the 42 criteria are considered, expert replies were mostly identical (86.11% were strong
or absolute). Therefore, this software can clarify the understanding of technical and tactical
judo match analysis with very good accuracy.

The use of an instrument capable of tracing technical-tactical profiles of judo athletes is an

interesting approach to understand how athletes use their skills in the attempt to win a
competition. Therefore, computer software that analyzes technical and tactical aspects can
be useful for the development of tactical training and strategies in order to overcome
actions used by opponents.

6. References

Adami, J.P. & Couturier, G. (1976). Vers une approche nouvelle du judo de haut -
niveau. Paris: Sport et plein air.

263
Adrion, W.R., Branstad, M.A. & Cherniavsky, J.C. (1982). Validation, verification, and
testing of computer software. Computing Surveys, 14(2): 159-191.
Barnhart, H.X., Haber, M. & Song, J. (2002). Overall concordance correlation coefficient
for evaluating agreement among multiple observers. Biometrics, 58: 1020-1027.
Barris, S. & Button, C. (2008). A review of vision-based motion analysis in sport. Sports
Medicine, 38 (12): 1025-1043.
Baumgartner, T.A., Jackson, A.S., Mahar, M.T. & Rowe, D.A. (2006). Measurement for
evaluation. (8 thed., p.544). McGraw: New York.
Branco, J. C. (1979). A observao no jud: recolha efectuada nos campeonatos nacionais
de 1979 (por categoria de peso). Ludens, 3 (4): 30-52.
Calmet, M. & Ahmaidi, S. (2002). Technological tools usable for the observation of the
high level Sport in the structures of training. Expertise in Elite Sport. Paris:
INSEP, 12-15.
Calmet, M. (2009). Analyse de squences vidos - Systmes d'aides multimdias
interactifs. Available:
<http://www.atlas.univmontp1.fr/main/document/document.php?cidReq=CALMET
08277114722> [Accessed in mar. 11, 2009].
Calmet, M. & Ahmaidi, S. (2004). Survey of advantages obtained by judoka in competition
by level of practice. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 99: 284-290.
Calmet, M. & Matet, P. (1987). Informatique: vido et jud. UNSS 44: 50-53.
Calmet, M.; Trezel, N. & Ahmaidi, S. (2006). Survey of system of attacks by judoka in
regional and interregional matches. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 103: 835-840.
Calmet, M., Miarka, B. & Franchini, E. (2010). Modeling of grasps in judo contests.
International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 10:229-240.
Castarlenas, J.L. & Planas A. (1997). Estudio de la estructura temporal del combate de
judo. Apunts - Ed Fsica Deportes, 47: 32-39.
Efron, B. & Tibshirani, R. (1993). An introduction to the bootstrap. New York:
Chapman & Hall.
Franchini, E. & Sterkowicz S. (2003). Ttica e tcnica no jud de alto nvel (1995-2001):
Consideraes sobre as categorias de peso e os gneros. Revista Mackenzie de
Educao Fsica e Esporte, 2 (2): 125-138.
Franchini, E., Sterkowicz, S., Meira, J.R.C.M., Gomes, F. R. F. & Tani, G. (2008).
Technical variation in a sample of high level judo players. Perceptual and Motor
Skills, 106: 859-869.
Gorostiaga, E.M. (1988). Coste energtico del combate de Judo. APUNTS, Medicina de l
Esport, 25 (97): 135-139.
Heinisch, H.D. (1997). LAnalisi dellallenamento e della gara nel judo. Sds/Rivista di
Cultura Sportiva, anno XVI (37): 53-62.
Hopkins, W.G. (2000). Measures of reliability in sports medicine and science. Sports
Medicine, 30 (1): 1-15.
Hughes, M.D. & Bartlett, R.M. (2002). The use of performance indicators in performance
analysis. Journal of Sports Sciences, 20 (10): 739-754.
Hughes, M. & Franks, I. (1997). Notational analysis of sport. London: E& FN Spon,
p.216.

264
International Judo Federation. Rules. Available: <
http://www.intjudo.eu/?Menu=Static_Page&Action=List&m_static_id=12&mid=7
&main=12> [Accessed in Jun. 18, 2009].
James, N., Taylor, J. & Stanley, S. (2007). Reliability procedures for categorical data in
Performance Analysis. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport,
7 (1): 1-11.
aksa, C. & Siewior, S. (1972). Wspczynniki skutecznoci, aktywnocii sposb ich
wykorzystania przy obserwacji walk judo. Biblioteka Trenera, 4: 13-20.
Lee, A. (2002). Technique analysis in sports: a critical review. Journal of Sports Sciences,
20 (10): 813-828.
Lin, L.I. (1989): A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics. 45:
255-268.
Matsumoto, Y., Takeuchi, Y. & Nakamura, R. (1978). Analytical studies on the contests
performed at the All Japan Judo Championship Tournament. Bulletin of the
Association for the Scientific Studies on Judo Kodokan, Report V: 83-93.
Monteiro, L.F. (1995). Estrutura e custo energtico do combate de judo. In: Congresso de
Educao Fsica e Cincia do Desporto dos Pases de Lngua Portuguesa, 4,
Coimbra. Anais. Coimbra, MD-3.
Nevill, A., Atkinson, G. & Hughes, M. (2008). Twenty-five years of sport performance
research in the Journal of Sports Sciences. Journal of Sports Science, 26 (4): 413-
426.
Pawluk J. (1966). Obserwacje mistrzostw europy seniorw w judo. Sport Wyczynowy, 7:
32-36.
Ploszaj, J. (2007). Determining individual indexes of effectiveness in Men's judo contest
for particular weight categories. Research Yearbook, 13 (1): 1399-1430.
Sagnol, J. M. & Bisciotti, G. N. (1997). La scelta desicionale nel judo: aspetti
psicofisiologici e biomeccanici. Sds/Rivista di Cultura Sportiva, anno XVI (41):
97-103.
Sikorski, W., Mickiewicz, G., Majle, B. & Laksa, C.Z. (1987). Structure of the contest and
work capacity of the judoist. Institute of Sport, Department of Theory of Sport,
Department of Physiology, Data Base Center, and Polish Judo Association, p. 59-
65.
Sterkowicz, S. (1998). Differences in the schooling tendencies of men and women
practicing judo (based on the analysis of the judo bouts during the 1996 Olympic
Games). In: Usji National Judo Conference - International Research
Symposium. Colorado Springs. Annals. Colorado Springs, United States Olympic
Training Center, p. 14-15.
Sterkowicz, S. & Franchini, E. (2001). Variations of techniques applied by Olympic and
World Championships medalists. In: Annals of The Second International Judo
Federation World Judo Conference, Munich, International Judo Federation, p.
32.
Sterkowicz, S., Lech, G. & Almansba, R. (2007). The course of fight and the level of sports
achievements in judo. Archives of Budo, 3: 72:81.
Sterkowicz, S., Lech, G. & Blecharz, J. (2010). Effects of laterality on the technical/tactical
behavior in view of the results of judo fights. Archives of Budo, 6(4): 173-177.
265
Sterkowicz, S. & Maslej, P. (1998). An evaluation of modern tendencies in solving judo
match. Available: <http://www.judoinfo/research5.htm> [Accessed in mar. 01,
1998].
Taylor, J.B., Mellalieu, S.D., James, N. & Shearer, D.A. (2008). The influence of match
location, quality of opposition, and match status on technical performance in
professional association football. Journal of Sport Sciences, 26(9): 885-895.
Van Malderen K., Jacobs C., Ramon, K., Zinzen, E., Deriemaeker, P., Clarys, P. (2006).
Time and technique analysis of a judo fight: a comparison between males and
females. Annals 11th Annual Congress of the European College of Sport
Science, 2006. Available:
http://www.ecss2006.com/ASP/ScProlAbstractText.asp?myAbstractID=1561>.
[Accessed in Dec. 20, 2008].
Weers, G. (1996). First contact and grip domination. Available:
<http://www.judoinfo.com/weers2.htm> [Accessed in Dec. 8, 1996].

266