Relationship between Kinematic Variables of Jump Throwing and Ball Velocity in Elite Handball Players

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have performed a good investigation into the variables that contribute to ball velocity in handball. Although there is merit in their work, there are areas where the manuscript needs further attention.

The abstract needs further editing in the last few lines. What do you mean by “optimal angles” ? Also, what are the r-vlaues for the correlations? These are not provided.

Lines 42-43: this statement seems to be a combination of shorted phrases to explain the performance of handball players. Please explain this further.

Lines 44-50: break this one sentence into multiple sentences for accuracy. The authors mention what was measured previously, but are not bringing together the issues raised in a coherent synthesis.

Lines 58-60> what is “displacement along the velocity accuracy”? Are you conveying that displacement and velocity variables are related to the speed-accuracy trade off?

Lines 74-77: what is your hypothesis? What “drives” the ball velocity?

Lines 88-89: five trials were performed for each participant but only one trial was assessed based upon the ball velocity. What was the variability of the ball velocities, and could the kinematics and GRFs be used to better understand the “optimal” ball velocity if all five trials were assessed? My contention is that more trials analyzed will better assist the authors in evaluating the performances.

Figure 2: the elbow markers are mislabeled in the illustration (right versus left side)

Table 1: these are only the right hand kinematics? CoM is termed in the caption, but is this whole body CoM or hand CoM?

Lines 160-172: be certain to have each correlation value provided in the text.

Author Response

Reviewer 1:

- The abstract needs further editing in the last few lines. What do you mean by “optimal angles” ? Also, what are the r-vlaues for the correlations? These are not provided.

We mean the best angle. (Corrected)

The r-values have been added. (Corrected).

 

- Lines 42-43: this statement seems to be a combination of shorted phrases to explain the performance of handball players. Please explain this further.

The sentence was rephrased.

 

Lines 44-50: break this one sentence into multiple sentences for accuracy. The authors mention what was measured previously, but are not bringing together the issues raised in a coherent synthesis.

The paragraph was reorganized.

 

Lines 58-60> what is “displacement along the velocity accuracy”? Are you conveying that displacement and velocity variables are related to the speed-accuracy trade off?

Yes.

 

Lines 74-77: what is your hypothesis? What “drives” the ball velocity?

The hypothesis of the study has been added.

 

Lines 88-89: five trials were performed for each participant but only one trial was assessed based upon the ball velocity. What was the variability of the ball velocities, and could the kinematics and GRFs be used to better understand the “optimal” ball velocity if all five trials were assessed? My contention is that more trials analyzed will better assist the authors in evaluating the performances.

We agree, it is a limitation of this study (which is a pilot study) and we will take in consideration in future work.

 

Figure 2: the elbow markers are mislabeled in the illustration (right versus left side)

It is in the illustration of Figure 2 Epicondylus lateralis (elbow lateral) left/right (LLE, RLE) in the line 131.

 

Table 1: these are only the right hand kinematics? CoM is termed in the caption, but is this whole body CoM or hand CoM?

We mean hand center of mass, and this has been clarified now in the text. Thanks for catching our error.

 

Lines 160-172: be certain to have each correlation value provided in the text.

Revised and Corrected. Thanks.

Reviewer 2 Report

I'm really excited after reading this article. Its good approach to study biomechanical principle during sport activities. Please check the grammatical error and go ahead.

Author Response

Dear reviewer.

Thank you so much.

 

Reviewer 3 Report

The study has quality to be published, but there are some aspects of the document that should be improved:

Abstract: Improve the abstract by aggregating study findings

Keywords: Do not repeat terms that appear in the title of the document.

Introduction: Add hypothesis.

Materials and Methods:

Subjects: Include the reference number of the Ethics Committee certificate and the institution.

Discussion: Add the limitations of the study and what it brings to current literature (strengths).

Author Response

Dear reviewer, 

Thank you. Please, find our comments below.

 

Reviewer 3:

Abstract: Improve the abstract by aggregating study findings

Corrected. Thanks.

 

Keywords: Do not repeat terms that appear in the title of the document.

Corrected

 

Introduction: Add hypothesis.

We have added the hypothesis of the study to the text.

 

Subjects: Include the reference number of the Ethics Committee certificate and the institution.

The Ethics Committee certificate in attachments

Discussion: Add the limitations of the study and what it brings to current literature (strengths).

We added limitations (Lines 251-254).

 

Regards

 

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf