A Comparative Study of Different Training Methods on the Performance of Table Tennis Players

Sports performance is the unity of execution of a sports action or a complex sequence of actions measured or evaluated according to socially determined and agreed norms. Training is a learning process that involves the acquisition of knowledge, sharpening of skills, concepts, rules or changing of attitudes and behaviours to enhance the performance of an individual/athlete. As we know, there is a lack of throwing machine training in Table-Tennis for assessing the ability and predicting the performance of Table-Tennis players, a definite and appropriate training method is essential. The comparative study of different training methods on the performance of Table Tennis Players serves this purpose in a meaningful way. Therefore, observing the felt requirement, the researcher considered it necessary to attempt compare the effect of different training methods on performance of table tennis players.

For the purpose of study, 30 male table tennis players were randomly selected. The players were selected from Lakshmibai National University of Physical Education and Gwalior District Table Tennis Association. The subjects were divided into three groups namely, Throwing Machine Training Method Group, Manual Training Method Group and Control Group. Each group consisted of 10 players. The Skill Test constructed by Dr. Pushpendra Purashwani was selected as criterion measure to measure the performance of table tennis players. This test includes items namely, Alternate Push Test, Alternate Counter Test, Target Service Test & Drive on Target Test. In order to measure the performance of table tennis players, the data was collected on the basis of „pretest‟ and „posttest‟. The scoring was done on the basis of norms of the selected skill test. All the subjects were undergone though six weeks training programme of different training methods i.e. Throwing Machine Training Method Group, Manual Training Method Group and Control Group. In order to compare the means of different groups that participated in the experiment, the data were compared using One Way Analysis of Variance i.e. „F‟-ratio. The level of significance chosen was 0.05.

The analysis was done by using Statistical Package for Social Science 12.0 for Windows and online statistics calculator “http://www.danielsoper.com”.

Throwing Machine Training Method (A) Manual Training Method (B) Control (C) Mean Difference Critical Difference (.05) The data collected through administering Table Tennis Skill Test constructed by Dr. Pushpendra Purashwani among the participants of three groups, namely, Throwing Machine Training Method Group, Manual Training Method Group and Control Group was analyzed by computing „F‟-ratio in the initial stages prior to treatment in order to find out the difference among the groups, if any. The finding pertaining to analysis of variance among the three groups in pre test scores has been presented in table 1.

Table 1 reveals that there is insignificant difference among the means of three groups as the obtained „F‟- value (.19) is less than the tabulated value (3.35) needed for significance at .05 level of confidence with 27 degree of freedom. Table Tennis Skill test was again re-administered after the treatment of six weeks and the collected data was again analyzed by computing of analysis of variance in the skill test among the three groups have been presented in table 2.

F.05 (2,27) = 3.35

Table 2 reveals that a significant difference has been obtained in „F‟ test as the calculated „F‟-value of 3.64 is greater than the tabulated „F‟ value of 3.35 needed for significance at .05 level of confidence with 27 degree of freedom. As the significant „F‟- value was obtained, in order to find out which group differed from one another, a post hoc test of significance by applying LSD (Least Significant Difference) test was employed and the findings pertaining to this has been presented in table 3.

Observation of table 3 reveals that a significant difference has been obtained between Throwing Machine Training Method Group & Manual Training Method and Throwing Machine Training Method Group & Control Group. Insignificant difference has been obtained in Traditional Training Group & Control Group. The findings have been presented in figure 2.

Analysis of data revealed that three groups namely, Throwing Machine Training Method Group, Manual Training Method Group and Control Group initially prior to administration of experimental treatment did not show significant difference. After administering treatment for duration of six weeks the three groups were re-administered table tennis test and the result showed a significant difference between Throwing Machine Training Method Group & Manual Training Method Group because throwing machine continuously feeds the balls with desired speed at desired place with desired frequency till the subjects desires while in Manual Training Method the tester is not able to provide the balls with same speed at same place for long time. Hence, the subjects got comparatively more practice while Training with Throwing Machine than that of the Manual Training Method. Thus the result showed significant difference. The findings of the study are in agreement with the findings of Thirunaunkkarasu & Reams. A significant difference between post experimental performances in table tennis skill test scores between Throwing Machine Training Method Group & Control Group may probably be due to a group practicing table tennis with advance gadget whereas the other group did not practice the skill of table tennis with such methods. In sports, especially in table tennis a group which practices with the latest training gadgets is likely to perform better than the Control Group. An insignificant difference between Manual Training Method & Control Group was obtained and this may probably be due to casual approach adopted by the experimental group being taught by adopting Manual Training Method. As the performance was not related to assignment of marks/grades to the students, the likely a reason is casual attitude. Fath, Judish A. (1969). “A study of the effects of two different methods of teaching in gymnastics” completed research in health, physical education and recreation 11: p. 159. Merrifield, Mary V. (1977). “A comparative study of two methods of teaching beginning swimming” completed research in health, physical education and recreation 19: p. 117. Reams, David N. (1977). “A comparison of the effectiveness of two methods of teaching selected sports activities to third and sixth grade children” completed research in healthy, physical education and recreation 19: pp. 235-236 Thirunaunkkarasu, C. (1992). “A comparative study of effects of teaching football laws through programmed instruction and conventional instruction” (unpublished master‟s thesis, Jiwaji University, 1992. Trudy, Barton K.A. (1973). “A comparison of two teaching techniques with respect to learning of beginning basketball skills by seventh grade girls” completed research in health, physical education and recreation 15: p. 111.

International Umpire, ITTF Racket Controller, Assistant Professor, Lakshmibai National Institute of Physical Education, Gwalior (MP)