Objective of the study was to test benefits of an experimental psychological-service-prioritizing training model for skilled boxers. Methods and structure of the study. Benefits of the new psychological-service-prioritizing training model were tested on a sample of 15-17 -year-old Class I-II boxers (n=28) from the Youth Olympic Reserve Sport School in Ulyanovsk. The sample was split up into Experimental and Reference Groups (EG, RG) of 14 people each. Individual physical fitness prior to the experiment was tested by the 30m sprint; 100m sprint; 3000m race; standing long jump; right/left hand shot put (4kg); and pull-ups tests. Technical fitness was tested by the reps of accurate power punches landed and eaten; distance control actions and their quality; defense actions and their quality; punch faking actions etc. - rated by a group of top-skilled experienced coaches on a 5-point scale. Results and conclusions. The pre- versus post experimental physical fitness tests found progress in both groups, with the EG progress tested significantly higher on every test scale. Thus the 30m sprint test found the RG making progress from 14.53±87min to 14.17±69min (p?0.05) versus the EG progress from 14.55±1.03min to 13.51±1.12min (p?0.05). The pre- versus post experimental shot put test data were the following: RG made progress in the right-/ left hand tests from 6.71±0.56m/ 5.83±0.47m to 7.12±0.45m/ 6.93±0.59m (p?0.05), respectively; versus the EG progress from 6.73±0.61m to 8.21±0.53m (p?0.05) in the right-hand tests; and progress up to 7.62±0.35m (p?0.05) in the left-hand test. The group progress was virtually the same in the other physical fitness tests. The pre- versus post experimental technical fitness tests found the following group progress. Accurate attacking punches per round in the RG were tested to grow from 4.0±0.17 to 6.0±0.21 (p?0.05); versus the EG progress from 3.0±0.22 to 8.0±0.27 (??0.05). On the eaten punches counting scale, the RG made progress from 7.0±0.2 to 5.0±0.17 (p?0.05); versus the EG progress from 6.0±0.19 to 3.0±0.21 (p?0.05). In the defense actions counting test, the RG made progress from 11.0±0.24 to 14.0±0.27 (p?0.05); versus the EG progress from 12.0±1.17 to 19.0± 0.27 (p?0.05). The group progress was virtually the same in the other technical fitness tests.
© Copyright 2021 Theory and Practice of Physical Culture. ANO SPC "Theory and Practice of Physical Culture and Sport". Alle Rechte vorbehalten. / Übersetzt mit https://www.DeepL.com/Translator