Predictors of Efficiency in Throwing Disciplines: Insights from 35 Elite Coaches

Abstract

The primary objective of this research was to determine coaches’ assessments of the key variables that define the success model in athletic throwing disciplines, as well as to evaluate differences between sexes in the disciplines of javelin, discus, shot put, and hammer throw. Thus, 35 elite coaches were asked about the influence of maximum strength and explosive power factors, manifested through various physical exercises, on final success in throwing disciplines. The questionnaire gathered general information about the coach’s achievements as an athlete and coach and key strength and power metrics, including knee lunge, knee jerk, back squat, bench press, deadlift, standing long jump, standing triple jump, and the 20 m sprint. A two-way within–within 2 × 4 ANOVA revealed a significant effect of sex (male, female) (p < 0.001, η² ranged 0.820–0.996) and discipline (javelin, discus, shot put, hammer) (p < 0.001, η² ranged 0.359–0.996) in all variables except triple standing jump. These findings offer valuable insights into how explosive power and maximum strength are perceived by elite coaches to affect success in different throwing disciplines. The results have practical applications, as they can inform the design and refinement of success models tailored to throwing disciplines, providing essential guidelines for optimizing contemporary training approaches in elite athletics and enhancing performance outcomes across genders and specific events.

1. Introduction

Throwing is a natural form of movement and a fundamental skill that is inherently developed in early childhood [1]. The action of throwing can be defined as a ballistic movement initiated by explosive agonist activation, followed by a period of relaxation, and finishing with deceleration due to the action of antagonists or the passive stretching of connective tissue [2]. Each throw involves a complex interaction between the thrower’s neuromuscular and musculoskeletal systems [3,4]. Throwing movements comprise various combinations of body parts and motions that are influenced by numerous factors, mainly depending on the purpose of the throw [5]. For instance, in handball and basketball, the objective of the throw is to hit a target. Conversely, in athletic throwing competitions, the goal is to achieve the maximum distance, as seen in the shot put, discus, javelin, and hammer throw. Additional factors include space constraints and technical rules specific to each discipline, such as the shot put circle, javelin landing strip, and throwing field boundaries [6]. Furthermore, the throwing efficiency is contingent upon the thrower’s ability to produce an optimized and synchronized sequence of movements pertaining to the specific throwing technique [7]. This ability is determined by the complex non-linear relationships between the athlete’s amount of training and their anthropological characteristics [8].

To date, various predictors of success have been identified in throwing disciplines, with maximum strength and explosive power being paramount [9]. Studies have shown a significant correlation between fundamental movement skills that assess maximum strength, such as the deadlift, clean, bench press, and full squat, as well as performance outcomes in the hammer throw for women and the javelin throw for men [10,11]. These exercises facilitate the development of maximal strength, which is crucial for generating the forces necessary for rapid and effective throwing, thereby achieving greater distances. Sakamoto et al. [12] reported a 3.8% improvement in shot put performance following a 12-week regimen of bench press exercises using the Smith machine. Given the significant weight and high loads associated with these implements, shot putters and hammer throwers prioritize motor skills that promote maximum strength development.

Success in throwing is also contingent upon explosive power. Motor skills, such as the standing long jump and sprint, are frequently employed to develop explosive power in throwers [13,14]. Research has shown that longer standing long jump distances and faster 40 m sprints are associated with superior shot put performance. Regarding javelin performance, sprinting ability has a high predictive value [15], indicating that explosive power is a strong indicator of success in javelin throwing. In contrast, a low correlation was found between sprinting and shot put or discus performance, which was attributed to the limited space available for executing these throws [16]. These observations suggest that explosive and maximal strength are critical predictors of success in throwing disciplines. Nonetheless, implementing training programs to enhance these forms of strength relies highly on the coach’s expertise. Consequently, a coach’s comprehension and enhancement of these predictors are essential for improving performance in throwing disciplines.

Competitive throwing is typically performed under standardized conditions mandated by the regulations of the International Athletics Federation. Athletes’ performances are ranked based on precisely measured distances, utilizing high-precision measuring devices [17]. Consequently, the outcomes in throwing disciplines are more objective than those in sports, where the results are influenced by the subjective assessments of referees [18].

The objective of the present study was to capture the perspectives of elite athletic trainers regarding the outcomes of individual tests designed to assess maximum strength and explosive power, which are regarded as optimal predictors of success in the javelin, discus, shot put, and hammer throw. Additionally, this study aimed to investigate differences in these specific athletic throwing disciplines between sexes.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Sample of Participants

First, the required sample size was estimated following the guidelines described by [19], based on the statistical analysis of variables describing the scores of elite athletes in throwing disciplines [9,20,21,22]. For a type-one error α of 0.05 and a power of 0.80, a sample size of 22 to 31 was considered necessary to detect significant effects. Therefore, the 35 coaches from 16 countries who responded to the research invitation represented a satisfactory sample population. The selection criteria included the accurate and thorough completion of a questionnaire and precise identification via IP address and personal data (name, surname, address, and e-mail). Additionally, the coaches’ athletes were required to be medal holders of globally recognized competitions, such as the Olympics. Of the initial 66 coaches from 20 countries, 35 respondents from 16 countries (USA, UK, Croatia, Slovenia, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Ireland, Lithuania, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Sweden, Philippines, Bahamas) were selected and included in the final analysis (dropout rate of 15%). The respondents, aged between 27 and 50 years, included in this study are active coaches with extensive experience in throwing disciplines gained through their competitive careers and many years of coaching practice. After completing their competitive careers, these experts transitioned to coaching, integrating personal sporting achievements with professional expertise in leading and developing elite athletes in throwing disciplines.

2.2. Questionnaire Construction

The questionnaire assessed key performance indicators related to athletic throwing events. Its primary objective was gathering expert opinions and insights based on coaches’ data to identify metrics correlating with top performance in throwing events. The foundation for developing the questionnaire was a review of relevant literature [10,11,12,14,15], including studies that examined factors contributing to success in throwing events. Particular emphasis was placed on maximal strength and explosive power, recognized as key performance indicators and integral components of thrower training. Based on these findings, the questionnaire was developed to align with the needs and expertise of coaches specializing in throwing events. It was structured into two main parts: the first focused on general information, while the second encompassed the assessment of optimal training outcomes for maximal strength and explosive power. This comprehensive approach facilitated data collection to identify critical variables influencing performance in individual throwing events.

The first part of the questionnaire was dedicated to gathering basic demographic data and information about the respondents’ professional athletic careers. Respondents provided details regarding their age, gender, level of education, and country of origin. Additionally, they answered athletics-specific questions, which included their most significant achievements as athletes and coaches, the categories of athletes they train (cadets, juniors, seniors), and the disciplines in which they specialize (hammer, discus, javelin, shot put).

The second part of the questionnaire, Assessment of Optimal Training Outcomes for Maximum Strength and Explosive Power (

Table 1. Questionnaire—assessment of optimal training outcomes for maximum strength and explosive power.

Question Number	Question	Additional Information
Q9	Enter the result (in kg or lb) for each strength discipline you believe is an indicator of success in javelin throw for senior men and women.	Strength disciplines include: Clean (from knees), Snatch (from knees), Back squat, Bench press, Dead lift.
Q10	Enter the result for each test you think is an indicator of success in the javelin throw for senior men and women.	Tests include: Standing long jump, Triple standing jump, Sprint 20 m.
Q11	Enter the result in the standing javelin throw that you think indicates success for senior men and women.	Javelin weights: Men (800 g), Women (600 g).
Q12	Enter the result (in kg or lb) for each strength discipline you believe is an indicator of success in discus throw for senior men and women.	Strength disciplines include: Clean (from knees), Snatch (from knees), Back squat, Bench press, Dead lift.
Q13	Enter the result for each test you think is an indicator of success in the discus throw for senior men and women.	Tests include: Standing long jump, Triple standing jump, Sprint 20 m.
Q14	Enter the result in the standing discus throw that you think indicates success for senior men and women.	Discus weights: Men (2 kg), Women (1 kg).
Q15	Enter the result (in kg or lb) for each strength discipline you believe is an indicator of success in shot put for senior men and women.	Strength disciplines include: Clean (from knees), Snatch (from knees), Back squat, Bench press, Dead lift.
Q16	Enter the result for each test you think is an indicator of success in the shot put for senior men and women.	Tests include: Standing long jump, Triple standing jump, Sprint 20 m.
Q17	Enter the result in the standing shot put that you think indicates success for senior men and women.	Shot put weights: Men (7.26 kg), Women (4 kg).
Q18	Enter the result (in kg or lb) for each strength discipline you believe is an indicator of success in hammer throw for senior men and women.	Strength disciplines include: Clean (from knees), Snatch (from knees), Back squat, Bench press, Dead lift.
Q19	Enter the result for each test you think is an indicator of success in the hammer throw for senior men and women.	Tests include: Standing long jump, Triple standing jump, Sprint 20 m.
Q20	Enter the weight of a heavier hammer and the result you think indicates success in the hammer throw for senior men and women.	No additional details except weight and result.

), focused on evaluating key variables associated with maximal strength and explosive power. These variables are considered fundamental to performance in throwing events, as previous research [12,14,15] has demonstrated their significant impact on athletic performance. The assessed variables included clean (from the knee) 1RM (CFK), snatch (from the knee) 1RM (SFK), back squat 1RM (BS), bench press 1RM (BP), deadlift 1RM (DL), standing long jump (SJ), standing triple jump (TSJ), and 20 m sprint with a flying start (S20M). The evaluation was conducted separately for male and female athletes and for athletes specializing in javelin, discus, shot put, and hammer throw events. Respondents were required to evaluate the optimal training outcomes for each variable, considering the specific demands of gender and discipline. This structured approach ensured the collection of detailed and relevant data, contributing to a better understanding of the key factors for success in throwing events.

2.3. Experimental Procedure

After the questionnaire design was completed, the research implementation began with data collection via an online platform to ensure easy distribution and accessibility to respondents at an international level. Respondents were personally invited to participate in the research through e-mail, their home clubs, and directly through athletes. Each invitation contained a detailed explanation of the research problem, which clearly defined the purpose of the research and its importance, and a link to access the online questionnaire. This transparent approach increased respondents’ trust and facilitated their participation in the study.

Participation in the study was subject to strict criteria, requiring relevant coaching experience or significant competitive achievements at the highest levels. Specifically, eligibility was limited to coaches who had guided athletes to win at least one medal at the Olympic Games, World Championships, or European Championships or athletes who had achieved notable success by winning a medal at one of these competitions during their careers. This criterium ensured a high level of expertise among the participants.

Of the 66 questionnaires collected, 35 met the inclusion criteria and were subjected to further analysis. Due to the respondents’ expertise and achievements, the sample is considered representative of the world’s leading throwing coaches. The insights we gained provide valuable perspectives on best practices and training standards as a foundation for advancing training methodologies in throwing disciplines.

2.4. Statistical Analysis

The reliability of the questionnaire was assessed through correlation of the test and retest on a subsample of 12 participants, and the validity of the questionnaire was examined by previous communication with several athletic experts. All data were reported as the mean ± standard deviation (SD). The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test was applied to determine each variable’s deviation from a normal distribution, and all data were checked for univariate outliers. To identify the within-subject significance of sex (male (M) and female (F)) and discipline (shot put, javelin, discus, and hammer), 2-way 2 × 4 ANOVA with repeated measurements on both factors was applied. For throwing implements (shot put, javelin, discus) from a stationary position (TDSP), two-factor 2 × 3 ANOVA was applied considering the sex-related specificity. Degrees of freedom were Greenhouse–Geisser-corrected if the assumption of sphericity was violated for the given discipline. Bonferroni correction was used to identify particular significant differences. Partial eta squared (partial η²) was used to assess the effect size. An effect size of 0.1 or less was interpreted as trivial, between 0.1 and 0.5 as moderate, and greater than 0.5 as large. Type-one error was set at α = 5%. For statistical analysis, we used Statistica software for Windows (version 14.1.0.8., Cloud Software Group Inc., Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA).

3. Results

The reliability of the questionnaire was found to be very high; the test–retest correlation for all items ranged from 0.84 to 0.98.

Table 2. Arithmetic mean ± standard deviation of variables in men.

	JAVELIN	DISKUS	SHOT PUT	HAMMER
CFK	138.60 ± 14.52	163.67 ± 10.93	182.20 ± 9.40	174.67 ± 8.34
SFK	113.33 ± 13.45	128.80 ± 16.72	143.33 ± 12.91	136.67 ± 9.76
BS	188.67 ± 17.27	224.53 ± 16.44	256.67 ± 19.97	231.00 ± 19.38
BP	147.00 ± 12.65	190.33 ± 11.10	226.67 ± 19.43	154.67 ± 13.16
DL	218.33 ± 18.48	242.00 ± 18.50	266.00 ± 22.62	247.33 ± 15.10
SLJ	321.67 ± 5.23	316.67 ± 10.47	307.00 ± 14.74	313.33 ± 9.00
TSJ	956.00 ± 49.43	947.33 ± 35.25	924.67 ± 47.34	943.67 ± 43.07
S20M	2.64 ± 0.19	2.83 ± 0.23	2.97 ± 0.17	2.85 ± 0.24
TDSP	65.60 ± 4.09	55.73 ± 2.05	18.17 ± 0.64	-

CFK—clean (from knee) 1RM; SFK—snatch (from knee) 1RM; BS—back squat 1RM; BP—bench press 1RM; DL—deadlift 1RM; SLJ—standing long jump; TSJ—triple standing jump; S20M—flying start 20 m sprint; TDSP—throwing a device (shot put, javelin, discus) from a stationary position.

shows the expert assessment results for men, and

Table 3. Arithmetic means ± standard deviation of variables in women.

	JAVELIN	DISKUS	SHOT PUT	HAMMER
CFK	95.80 ± 11.38	109.67 ± 10.08	123.67 ± 11.41	114.33 ± 9.61
SFK	76.33 ± 11.10	83.67 ± 10.93	98.67 ± 11.87	90.33 ± 10.77
BS	136.33 ± 22.64	154.67 ± 10.60	177.67 ± 13.61	159.67 ± 16.09
BP	82.67 ± 8.63	114.00 ± 8.90	138.33 ± 10.80	82.00 ± 13.91
DL	152.67 ± 15.45	165.67 ± 15.22	182.67 ± 12.94	168.00 ± 13.99
SLJ	271.87 ± 11.53	270.00 ± 11.34	266.67 ± 10.47	268.67 ± 7.90
TSJ	687.33 ± 270.12	803.00 ± 43.09	788.67 ± 49.26	805.33 ± 35.38
S20M	3.05 ± 0.23	3.14 ± 0.24	3.25 ± 0.17	3.24 ± 0.24
TDSP	50.40 ± 2.75	54.27 ± 2.34	17.05 ± 0.63	-

CFK—clean (from knee) 1RM; SFK—snatch (from knee) 1RM; BS—back squat 1RM; BP—bench press 1RM; DL—deadlift 1RM; SLJ—standing long jump; TSJ—triple standing jump; S20M—flying start 20 m sprint; TDSP—throwing a device (shot put, javelin, discus) from a stationary position.

shows the results for women. By analyzing the arithmetic means ± SD of the strength characteristics for each athletic throwing discipline, distinct differences are observed. Compared with other disciplines, the most pronounced differences are observed in the bench press, back squat, and knee throw tests (CFK and SFK) for shot putters.

In discus and hammer throwing, expert opinions indicate minimal deviations in the results of maximum absolute and explosive power, except for the bench press. This is expected because the muscles of the arms, shoulder girdle, and chest have a more significant impact on the final performance in discus throwing than in hammer throwing.

Examining the results from

Table 4. Results of a two-factor (2 × 4) ANOVA with repeated measurements on both factors, except for the variable “Throwing a device (shot put, javelin, discus) from a stationary position (TDSP)”, where a two-factor (2 × 3) ANOVA with repeated measurements on both factors was used.

	Gender			Discipline			Gender × Discipline
	F	p	η2	F	p	η2	F	p	η2
CFK	795.96	<0.001	0.983	70.06 *	<0.001	0.883	11.36 *	<0.001	0.448
SFK	267.16	<0.001	0.950	101.86	<0.001	0.879	5.80 *	0.002	0.293
BS	340.21	<0.001	0.960	60.87 *	<0.001	0.813	12.24 *	<0.001	0.466
BP	3193.97	<0.001	0.996	149.51 *	<0.001	0.914	9.86	<0.001	0.413
DL	338.28	<0.001	0.960	55.84	<0.001	0.800	5.39	0.003	0.278
SLJ	555.82	<0.001	0.975	7.84	<0.001	0.359	2.16	0.107	0.134
TSJ	89.61	<0.001	0.865	1.69 *	0.185	0.107	4.28 *	0.010	0.234
S20M	63.85	<0.001	0.820	14.43 *	<0.001	0.507	1.70 *	0.182	0.108
TDSP	174.21	<0.001	0.926	3133.38	<0.001	0.996	130.19 *	<0.001	0.903

* The condition of sphericity was violated and the Greenhouse–Geiser correction was used; CFK—clean (from knee) 1RM; SFK—snatch (from knee) 1RM; BS—back squat 1RM; BP—bench press 1RM; DL—deadlift 1RM; SLJ—standing long jump; TSJ—triple standing jump; S20M—flying start 20 m sprint; TDSP—throwing a device (shot put, javelin, discus) from a stationary position.

, a pronounced difference is observed between sexes, with 99% confidence in specific disciplines, such as the bench press, and slightly less than 82% in the 20 m sprint. Regarding the interaction between sex and discipline, the most minor differences are observed in the standing long jump and 20 m sprint disciplines, which is attributed to the relatively equal influence of the lower extremities’ explosive power across all throwing disciplines. Additionally, the results indicate no significant difference between men and women in the interaction between javelin and hammer throwing.

Moreover, there are no significant differences in the clean and snatch variables, except for the shot put–hammer interactions in men and discus–hammer interactions in women. Shot putters exhibit significantly higher results in the back squat and deadlift variables than the other throwing disciplines, especially compared with javelin throwers, whose results are notably lower (

Table 5. The results of the post hoc analysis of the interaction effects of the two-factor (2 × 4) ANOVA with repeated measurements on both factors except for the variable “Throwing a device (shot put, javelin, discus) from a stationary position (TDSP)”, where the post hoc analysis of the interaction effects was the two-factor (2 × 3) ANOVA with repeated measures on both factors.

		CFK	SFK	BS	BP	DL	SLJ	TSJ	S20M
M	Javelin-Discus	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	1.000	1.000	0.009
	Javelin-Shot put	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	1.000	<0.001
	Javelin-Hammer	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	0.564	<0.001	0.100	1.000	0.004
	Discus-Shot put	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	0.025	1.000	0.170
	Discus-Hammer	0.001	0.002	1.000	<0.001	1.000	1.000	1.000	1.000
	Shot put-Hammer	0.069	0.014	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	0.664	1.000	0.345
F	Javelin-Discus	<0.001	0.004	<0.001	<0.001	0.007	1.000	0.017	1.000
	Javelin-Shot put	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	1.000	0.065	0.005
	Javelin-Hammer	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	1.000	0.001	1.000	0.014	0.011
	Discus-Shot put	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	1.000	1.000	0.793
	Discus-Hammer	1.000	0.014	1.000	<0.001	1.000	1.000	1.000	1.000
	Shot put-Hammer	0.007	0.001	<0.001	<0.001	0.001	1.000	1.000	1.000

CFK—clean (from knee) 1RM; SFK—snatch (from knee) 1RM; BS—back squat 1RM; BP—bench press 1RM; DL—deadlift 1RM; SLJ—standing long jump; TSJ—triple standing jump; S20M—flying start 20 m sprint; TDSP—throwing a device (shot put, javelin, discus) from a stationary position.

).

The standing long jump and triple jump, which are related to explosive jumping power, and the 20 m sprint, which represents explosive sprinting power, primarily show differences in the javelin–shot put interaction. This disparity is anticipated due to the comparatively greater weight of the shot put, which requires more strength and technique to achieve distance, impacting performance outcomes.

4. Discussion

This research aimed to ascertain athletic trainers’ perspectives regarding the outcomes of individual strength tests and their utility for assessing explosive power and maximal strength, which are considered optimal indicators of success in the javelin, discus, shot put, and hammer throwing disciplines. Our findings on coaches’ perspectives regarding explosive power and maximal strength in throwing disciplines are consistent with previous research. Numerous studies on the relationship between motor skills and performance in throwing disciplines have confirmed the predominant influence of absolute explosive and maximal strength [11,12,13]. This relationship stems from the specific dynamics of throwing, where achieving the greatest possible results necessitates producing maximal energy in the shortest possible time. Thus, in the present study, the questionnaire focused on the ability to assess the thrower’s condition based on these characteristics.

The most significant differences were observed in the bench press, back squat, and throw from the knees, where shot putters exhibited markedly superior results compared with other throwers. This finding corroborates previous research on the relationship between motor skills and shot put performance, confirming the predominant influence of strength [12]. This relationship arises from the shot put’s specific kinematic and dynamic parameters, where it is crucial to generate maximal energy within a brief interval. Regarding tests of explosive power, such as the standing long jump, standing triple jump, and 20 m sprint, javelin throwers demonstrate superior performance compared to other throwers. This observation is consistent with prior research indicating that explosive power, which is influenced by the mechanism regulating excitation intensity, is critical for competitive success in javelin throwing [15].

A secondary objective of this research was to determine differences between sexes among the individual athletic throwing disciplines. Significant differences were observed in strength variables between sexes, as previously documented [23,24]. Owing to their greater muscle mass and strength, men achieved significantly higher values in all strength tests.

Variables of explosive power are fundamental to success in athletic throwing disciplines, while muscle mass and strength, particularly pronounced in shot putters and hammer throwers, are vital prerequisites for generating maximal force [11]. This relationship also arises from the dynamics of competitive throwing, where achieving top results necessitates the production of maximum energy within the shortest possible time interval [25]. The extremely high correlation between performance in athletic throws and absolute explosive power, as assessed by weightlifting tests, is attributed to the significant dependence of both areas on the morphological characteristics of the athletes.

The lack of significant differences in women regarding the interaction between the discus and hammer throw disciplines can be attributed to the unique morphological characteristics of individual athletes and the specific demands of these sports. In female shot putters, increased lean mass directly influences the outcomes of absolute explosive power tests [26]. Conversely, speed, coordination, and precision are more critical for javelin throwers because of the need for rapid and accurate muscle tone adjustment and movement amplitude. Additionally, javelin throwers must achieve specific launch angles and maintain the angle of the javelin’s longitudinal axis to optimize their results. Previous research has shown that javelin performance depends on the coordinated action of the whole body [26,27,28]. The lower extremities generate the greatest amount of force, whereas the upper extremities ensure control and precision of the throw. This synergy between the lower and upper body is essential for optimal energy transfer through the kinetic chain, providing the maximum speed of the javelin during the throw [28,29]. Thus, the findings of this research are consistent with those of previous studies. Considering the javelin’s weight—800 g for men and 600 g for women—compared with the shot put—7.26 kg for men and 4 kg for women—and the differences in body mass, it is not surprising that javelin throwers exhibit superior manifestations of explosive relative strength in jumping and sprinting. This is due to the need to propel their bodies through space, which correlates with the nature of the light javelin. In contrast, the shot put requires maximum absolute power to manipulate the heavier implement throughout the throwing motion [30].

After reviewing and interpreting the results, we established the model characteristics of elite throwers and provided a benchmark for other athletes and coaches. By identifying the relationships between the model characteristics of top throwers and a specific athlete’s current condition, we can better understand the requirements needed for that athlete. Overall, sports training in athletic throws should be tailored to the individual development of the athlete to minimize the disparity between their motor characteristics and the ideal parameters identified in our findings.

5. Conclusions

The results of this study provided key insights into the factors contributing to success in athletic throwing disciplines. Based on the opinions of elite coaches, key parameters of maximal strength and explosive power were identified as significant determinants of performance in disciplines such as javelin, discus, shot put, and hammer throw. The analysis revealed differences between disciplines and genders, with men achieving significantly better results in strength tests across all throwing disciplines.

This study highlights the importance of maximal strength, particularly in disciplines requiring the manipulation of heavy implements, such as the shot put and hammer throw. On the other hand, explosive power plays a crucial role in achieving peak performance across all disciplines, emphasizing its importance in quickly generating high-speed movement and force application. Differences in results between men and women underscore the necessity of tailoring training programs to address the specific physiological and biomechanical demands of each gender and discipline.

The practical implications of this research are manifold. The developed success model enables coaches to optimize training processes and better tailor programs to athletes’ specific needs. Furthermore, the findings facilitate the assessment of an athlete’s current state relative to the model characteristics of elite throwers, allowing for systematic progress monitoring. The identified differences in test outcomes can be used to define selection strategies for athletes suited to specific disciplines.

This study has several limitations, the most notable being the small sample size. While the research was conducted with elite-level coaches whose expertise and insights offer significant value, the limited number of participants restricts the generalizability of the findings. The results of this study provide important implications for coaching practices in throwing disciplines; however, expanding the sample size in future research would enhance the robustness and applicability of the findings. In particular, it is recommended that future studies include a broader population of throwing coaches representing diverse geographical regions and competitive levels. Such an approach would increase the research’s external validity and allow for a more comprehensive understanding of coaching strategies and training outcomes across different contexts. Future research can better address the complexities and nuances of coaching practices in throwing disciplines by including a more extensive and diverse sample.