EVALUATION OF TECHNICAL-TACTICAL JUDO COMBATS ANALYSIS WITH A COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR USERS WITH DIFFERENT LEVELS OF EXPERTISE

ABSTRACT The objective was to compare the objectivity and to verify the applicability of computational time-motion analysis (TMA) and technical-tactical analysis of judo for different levels of expertise. The sample was composed by 22 subjects (12 practitioners, separated into six experts and six non-experts, and 10 non-practitioners). The sample qualified the software via questionnaire and they conducted 150 analysis (90 = inter-group comparisons; 60 = intra-group comparisons). Data were compared by Wilcoxon and Friedman, and by Kappa Cohen coefficient, p <0.05. No differences were observed between groups when compared the quality indicators, which showed better percentage in response "all the time", when compared with the responses "most of the time", "part time" and "never or not" (p <0.001 ). The correlations showed "strong" concordance (index = 0.76) in TMA for the three groups, but a "weak" agreement (index = 0.08) of technical-tactical analysis between practitioners and non-practitioners. In conclusion, TMA presented replicability in the three groups; for technical-tactical analysis it is required a specific knowledge of judo.

摘要
本研究旨在比较客观性，并验证计算型时间运动分析（computational time-motion analysis, TMA）与柔道技术战术分析（technical-tactical analysis）针对不同专业水平人群的适用性。研究样本共纳入22名被试：12名柔道练习者，分为6名专家与6名非专家；另有10名非柔道练习者。所有被试通过问卷对该软件进行评估，并完成150次分析，其中90次为组间比较，60次为组内比较。数据分析采用Wilcoxon检验、Friedman检验以及科恩Kappa系数（Cohen's Kappa coefficient），显著性水平设定为p<0.05。结果显示，各组间的质量指标无显著差异；相较于“大多时间”“部分时间”以及“从未/未”这几类响应，选择“始终”的占比更高（p<0.001）。相关性分析表明，三组的TMA均呈现“强”一致性（系数=0.76），但柔道练习者与非练习者之间的技术战术分析一致性则为“弱”（系数=0.08）。综上，TMA在三组被试中均具备可复现性；而技术战术分析则需要具备特定的柔道专业知识。