**3. Results**

There were statistically significant di fferences for playing positions in all measured anthropometric characteristics and skeletal muscle mass and fat mass (all *p*-values < 0.01; Table 1). The wings were significantly shorter compared to backcourt players (*p* < 0.001), pivots (*p* = 0.035), and goalkeepers (*p* = 0.018). Similar significant di fferences were obtained in weight (pivots vs. wing, *p* < 0.001; wings vs. backcourt players, *p* < 0.001), wingspan (wings vs. pivots, *p* < 0.001; wings vs. backcourt players, *p* < 0.001; wings vs. goalkeepers, *p* = 0.038), and thigh circumference (wings vs. pivots, *p* < 0.001; wings vs. backcourt players, *p* = 0.041). Additionally, pivots were heavier than goalkeepers (*p* < 0.001) and backcourt players (*p* = 0.003) and had larger thigh circumference compared to goalkeepers (*p* < 0.001) and backcourt players (*p* < 0.001), whereas backcourt players were heavier than goalkeepers (*p* = 0.015).


**Table 1.** Differences between playing positions in anthropometric characteristics and body composition.

Cir.–circumference, 1—significantly different from the wing, 2—significantly different from the goalkeeper, 3—significantly different from backcourt players.

Body composition measurements revealed that goalkeepers had significantly less skeletal muscle mass than backcourt players (*p* < 0.001) and pivots (*p* < 0.001), while wings had less skeletal muscle mass than backcourt players (*p* < 0.001) and pivots (*p* < 0.001). Pivots, on the other hand, had significantly more fat mass than wings (*p* < 0.001), backcourt players (*p* < 0.001) and goalkeepers (*p* = 0.005). Lastly, goalkeepers also had significantly more muscle mass than wings (*p* = 0.010).

Similar to the anthropometric characteristics, the playing positions differed in maximal isokinetic concentric extensor strength at 60◦/s and 180◦/s (*p* < 0.001), concentric knee flexion of the left knee at 60◦/s (*p* = 0.007), and borderline significance of the right knee (*p* = 0.070) (Table 2). Pivot players displayed lower isokinetic concentric torque of knee extensors and flexors compared with wings and backcourt players at 60◦/s and 180◦/s, respectively, whereas backcourt players were superior compared to goalkeepers at 60◦/s and 180◦/s of knee flexion and extension. Additionally, wings performed better than goalkeepers at 60◦/s and 180◦/s of knee extension and flexion. Otherwise, no differences between playing positions were obtained in hamstring-to-quadriceps ratio (HQR) and in bilateral differences in maximal concentric torque of extensors and flexors at 60◦/s and 180◦/s.



HQR–hamstring-to-quadriceps torque ratio, 1—significantly different from the wing, 2—significantly different from backcourt players.

Measurements of sprinting and vertical jump performance showed significant differences between playing positions (all *p*-values < 0.01; Table 3). Wing players were significantly faster than backcourt players (5 m, *p* = 0.042; 10 m, *p* = 0.001; and 20 m, *p* = 0.027), goalkeepers (5 m, *p* = 0.013; 10 m, *p* = 0.001; and 20 m, *p* = 0.001), and pivots (5 m, *p* = 0.001 and 20 m, *p* < 0.001). At the 10-m time gate, backcourt

players were significantly faster than goalkeepers (*p* < 0.001). Moreover, backcourt players and wings jumped significantly higher compared to pivots (backcourt players vs. pivots: CMJ, *p* = 0.007, SJ, *p* = 0.027; wings vs. pivots: CMJ, *p* < 0.001, SJ, *p* < 0.001) and goalkeepers (backcourt players vs. pivots: CMJ, *p* = 0.006; wings vs. goalkeepers: CMJ, *p* < 0.001, SJ, *p* = 0.004), respectively.


**Table 3.** Differences between playing positions in sprinting, vertical jump performance, and handball shooting performance.

SJ–squat jump, CMJ–countermovement jump, 1—significantly different from the wing, 2—significantly different from the goalkeeper, 3—significantly different from backcourt players.

There were also significant differences in ball velocity among playing positions (both *p*-values <0.001). Post hoc analysis showed that goalkeepers shoot the ball at significantly lower velocity while shooting from ground position (all *p*-values < 0.01) or while performing a three-step jump shot (all *p*-values < 0.01).

Correlations between handball shooting performance and sprinting, jumping, and maximal strength performance are shown in Table 4. With the exception of body fat mass and thigh circumference, all other anthropometric characteristics were significantly correlated with the ball velocity of a three-step set shot and jump shot. A higher SJ was significantly correlated with the ball velocity of the set shot, and borderline significant with the ball velocity of the jump shot. Maximal isokinetic torque of knee flexors and extensors was significantly correlated with ball velocity of both shot types. Lastly, HQR at 60◦/s was significantly correlated with the ball velocity of the set shot.


**Table 4.** Correlations between playing positions in sprinting, vertical jump performance, and handball shooting performance.

SJ–squat jump, CMJ–countermovement jump, HQR–hamstring-to-quadriceps torque ratio.

## **4. Discussion**

In the present study, we identified di fferences between playing positions in anthropometric characteristics, isometric maximal leg strength, sprinting and vertical jumping performance, and established new evidence on the relationship between anthropometry, physical performance, and ball velocity as an indicator of game performance. The most novel findings of this study were related to isokinetic performance, adding to the few reports of the isokinetic maximal strength and strength imbalances in elite male handball players that have been published to our knowledge [19–21]. Our results sugges<sup>t</sup> that maximal knee flexor and extensor strength is related to playing position, whereas no di fferences between playing positions were observed in bilateral muscle imbalances or the ratios between knee joint agonists and antagonists.

In the previous studies of sports performance in elite handball, the investigators applied di fferent methods to assess maximal leg strength. Most of those studies on elite male handball players used di fferent variations of maximal squat tests to determine maximal leg strength [4,11,15,32], while (only) a small body of evidence used isokinetic testing [19,20], despite it being considered the gold standard for assessing quadriceps and hamstring maximal strength and muscle imbalances [17,18]. Most studies measuring maximal isokinetic knee strength were performed with females [18,24,38,39], likely due to higher rates of anterior cruciate ligament injuries, compared with males [40], while only two isokinetic studies included male handball players [19,20]. In the latter studies, male handball players were recognized as functionally balanced athletes, where maximal unilateral (50–69%) and bilateral (10–15%) muscle strength di fferences were in the normal range [19,20]. This was similarly demonstrated in our study, although there were no bilateral di fferences in maximal strength of flexors and extensors, or muscle imbalances between hamstrings and quadriceps on each leg at 60◦/s and 180◦/s. Our relative values of maximal flexion and extension torque at 60◦/s and 180◦/s (N/kg) were also similar to a report by Gonzalez-Rave et al. [20]. Additionally, our study also evaluated the di fference between playing positions in relative maximal strength and muscle imbalances. Backcourt and wing players were the strongest in extension and flexion, independent of muscle mass at both angular velocities. These results may potentially be associated with game demands, as wings and backcourt players perform the most jumps and throws [7]. In contrast, all playing positions showed symmetrical strength (unilateral and bilateral ratios in the normal range) between legs and within each leg analysis.

Studies have suggested that anthropometric characteristics are related to playing position. In our study, wing players were the shortest, had the lowest body weight, shortest wingspan and smallest thigh circumference, while pivots had the highest body weight, skeletal muscle mass, and body fat mass content. These results were in line with previous studies [7,10,13–16] from elite and sub-elite male handball players. Despite the similar ages of players and the di fferences between playing positions in body weight and height, our subsample of backcourt players, pivots, and goalkeepers was generally shorter and lighter than players competing on elite German [10,14], Norwegian [15], and national teams playing in the World Championship [9]. Thus, these di fferences can be explained by the level of play and age. Players competing in lower leagues were generally shorter [10], independent of playing position, whereas pivots in higher leagues were heavier and had the highest body mass index [14]. Also, younger elite handball players were shorter, lighter, had lower free fat mass and body mass index values compared to elite adult players [16].

The fastest sprint times were recorded in wing players compared to other playing positions on each of three time gates (5 m, 10 m, and 20 m). Similar variations in sprinting performance at 20 m were observed in the other two studies consisting of handball players performing in elite European leagues [14,15]. In addition to the fastest times recorded by wings, backcourt players were also faster than goalkeepers on 10-m sprints, similar to data obtained by Haugen et al. [15] (wings, 2.78 (0.08) s; backcourt players, 2.83 (0.11) s; goalkeepers, 2.94 (0.10) s). Partly contrary to our findings, one study reported significant di fferences between playing positions only on longer sprint distances (30 m), postulating equal starting acceleration of all playing positions, which likely contributed to the longer competitive career and a higher level of competition [14]. Moreover, sprinting performance is closely related to the in-game demands of each playing position. Data derived from game movement analysis has shown that wing players have a higher frequency of performed sprints, with the longest duration, time, and fraction of distance covered compared to pivots and backcourt players [7].

Vertical jumping is an important movement performed during the course of the game [7]. In previous studies, the best vertical jumps were performed by the wings (39–50 cm) and backcourt players (38–47 cm), compared to pivots (35–43 cm) and goalkeepers (35–47 cm) [14,15]. Similar differences between playing positions were also obtained in our study. Nevertheless, jump performance was lower compared to data from two samples of elite European Championship players [14,15], but comparable to a similar level of play [16], thus, our results were likely influenced by the level of play and quality of the training regime.

Handball scoring efficiency is largely dependent on ball velocity. In our study, ball velocity was highest in backcourt players and lowest in wings and goalkeepers. A similar superiority was also obtained in other samples of elite players [13–15], although the maximal shooting velocities of our participants (88.94 km/h) were only comparable to one study (90.72 km/h) [14], while others performed better (94.32–96.84 km/h) [13,15]. The best shooting performance from three-step shots was reported in a sample of Tunisian national team players (99.67 km/h), although it showed no significant difference between playing positions, likely due to its small sample size (N = 21) [11].

The kinematics of overhead shoots is a highly complex whole-body movement [26], with many studies undertaken to identify the possible determinants of shooting success [10,11,13,31,32]. Our results supported previous findings that sugges<sup>t</sup> body height and mass may influence shooting velocities from a standing [11] and/or jumping position [10,13,31]. In contrast, several studies investigating the correlations between physical performance and ball velocity have been inconclusive [11,13,31,32]. Others, including our study, reported significant correlations between ball velocity and sprinting time, lower limb maximal strength, and endurance [31,32], while others failed to reach such conclusions [11,13]. Furthermore, our results also highlighted the importance of lower limb muscle mass and strength as an initiator of proximal-to-distal principal during the shot [41]. When an optimal sequence of force translation from proximal muscles of legs, pelvis, and trunk to throwing arm is achieved, the highest force production in the leg muscles can substantially contribute to higher ball velocities [27,29,32], as confirmed in our study. Similarly, recent study has suggested that jump height in the CMJ is significantly correlated with jump height while performing a jump shot in a game-based performance test [42]. During the handball game, this may present an advantage over the opponent, as the three-step jump shot is the most frequently executed shot [26]. In addition to faster ball-shooting velocity, the importance of jump height may also explain the higher frequency of jumps and shots performed during the game by backcourt players compared to pivots and goalkeepers [7]. However, as a handball shot is a complex, multi-joint movement, more research is needed to determine new potential physical performance determinants of shooting success (e.g., ball velocity).

In summary, the results of this study may further clarify several important aspects of the anthropometric and physical aspects of handball performance with special reference to playing position. Firstly, we confirmed previously reported variations between playing positions in anthropometric characteristics, sprinting, jumping, and handball shooting performance. Secondly, and most importantly, our study was one of the first to establish new evidence on the isokinetic maximal strength of lower limbs. We provided novel data for maximal torque of extensors and flexors in elite handball as well as demonstrated that male handball players are symmetrical with no significant maximal strength deficits between, and within, knee extensors and flexors. Lastly, our study also established further evidence on the potential role of various physical performance aspects in handball success as measured by ball velocity. Despite presenting novel findings on one of the largest samples in male handball performance research, some limitations must be acknowledged. Most of our sample were members of Kosovo's national handball team, but none of them played abroad in higher-ranking leagues or the European Championship league. As Kosovo is a young country with very few professional handball opportunities, our results may be affected by the playing level, training process, and relative

lack of experience of the players. Nevertheless, our data showed results comparable to other elite playing countries, e.g., Germany and Norway, therefore, we believe that strong professional handball foundations have been built in Kosovo.
