Comparative Analysis of Aerobic Capacity in Handball and Basketball Players: An Empirical Study Utilizing the Yo-YoIR1 Test

The realm of sports science persistently seeks to delve into the intricacies of athletic performance and fitness, with aerobic capacity, or VO₂ Max, being a pivotal parameter that underlines an individual's potential to undertake sustained physical activity. Typically gauged through maximal oxygen uptake during exercise, VO₂ Max serves as a vital benchmark in discerning the endurance capabilities of athletes (Smith, 2019). In the dynamic and high-octane domains of handball and basketball, where agility and endurance are paramount, a comprehensive understanding of aerobic capacities can provide significant insights into optimizing training programs and improving overall performance. Both handball and basketball are characterized as high-intensity sports necessitating players to exhibit a harmonious blend of strength, speed, and aerobic endurance (Krustrup & Bangsbo, 2001). Handball players are often subjected to frequent bursts of sprinting interspersed with brief recovery periods, testing their aerobic and anaerobic thresholds (Michalsik, Aagaard, & Madsen, 2015). Meanwhile, basketball players need to maintain a high level of aerobic fitness to endure the prolonged periods of play, characterized by intermittent sprints, jumps, and rapid directional changes (McInnes, Carlson, Jones, & McKenna, 1995). Given these specific demands and potential disparities in training regimens, this study aims to conduct a comparative analysis of the aerobic capacities of handball and basketball players, thereby shedding light on the variances and possibly influencing future training protocols. Leveraging the Yo-YoIR1 test, a reliable and validated tool for assessing aerobic capacity (Bangsbo, Iaia, & Krustrup, 2008), this research seeks to empirically evaluate the Aerobic Capacity in a cohort of 30 players - 15 each from handball and basketball disciplines hailing from a noted physical education institute.

A total of 30 male handball and basketball players participated in this study, with 15 from each cohort from LNIPE, NERC, Guwahati, Assam. The participants' demographic characteristics are detailed in Table 1.

The Yo-Yo intermittent recovery 1 test was used to assess the Aerobic capacity of all the participants(Bangsbo et al. 2008).

Participants were informed about the details of the Yo-Yo IR1 test and provided their written informed consent.The required equipment, including cones, measuring tape, Bluetooth speaker with the Yo-Yo test audio, and recording sheets, was prepared.A suitable, flat, non-slippery handball surface at LNIPE, NERC, Guwahati was chosen, free from obstacles. The test area was set up with two cones placed 20 meters apart, with a 5-meter distance marked behind one of the cones for the recovery period(Figure 1).

Figure 1: Yo-Yo intermittent recovery 1 test Track

Participants were given an overview of the Yo-Yo IR1 test procedure. A standardized 10–15-minutes warm-up was conducted, including light jogging, dynamic stretches, and short sprints.

At the start signal, participants ran from one cone to the other (20m) at a pace set by the audio beeps. Upon reaching the second cone, they turned and waited for the next beep. At the next beep, they ran cone in the 5m recovery area (Figure 1). The speed and frequency of the beeps gradually increased as the test progressed. If participants failed to reach the cone in time with the beep on two consecutive attempts, the test was concluded for that individual.

The last successful shuttle completed by each participant was recorded. The total distance covered by each participant was calculated based on the number of shuttles completed. The total distance covered by each participant was calculated using the formula: Distance (Meters) =2×20m×number of shuttles completed.

A cool-down routine, including light jogging and static stretching, was provided to all participants.

An independent t-test was used to compare the means of the two groups. The significance level was set at p<0.05.

The table no 2: provides the results of a two-sample t-test that assumes equal variances. Mean of Handball Playerson the Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level-1 is 1362.67 meters and Basketball Players is 1242.67 meters.From the result, Handball players, on average, ran about 120 meters more than Basketball players in the test. The calculated t-statistic (2.365) is greater than the critical t-value for the two-tailed test (2.048). The two-tailed p-value of 0.025, which is less than the achieved by Handball Players and Basketball Players in the Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level-1. In practical terms, Handball Players, on average, achieved a greater distance than Basketball Players in the Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level-1. This difference isn't just due to random sampling variability and is statistically significant at the 0.05 significance level.

DISCUSSION

The Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level-1 has been widely recognized as an effective means to assess an athlete's aerobic capacity and endurance (Krustrup et al., 2003). In this context, the results of our t-test comparing Handball and Basketball players reveal interesting insights. Handball players, on average, achieved a greater distance (1362.67 meters) than Basketball players (1242.67 meters) in the test. This suggests that the aerobic capacity, as measured by the Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level-1, might be higher in Handball players than Basketball players within our sample. Aerobic capacity is crucial in sports that require sustained efforts over prolonged periods, and our findings align with the nature of handball, which demands continuous running, change of directions, jumps, and throws (Michalsik et al., 2015). Handball matches typically consist of two 30-minutes halves with a 10-minutes break, requiring sustained efforts from the players. Basketball, though also demanding, consists of shorter intervals of play and more frequent breaks, which might not push the aerobic system as intensely as handball (Karcher & Buchheit, 2014). Furthermore, the variance observed in the results of Handball players was slightly higher than that of Basketball players, hinting that there might be a broader range of aerobic capacities within the

Based on the conducted t-test, there is a statistically significant difference in the aerobic capacities of Handball and Basketball players, with Handball players demonstrating superior performance in the Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level-1. This could be attributed to the inherent demands of handball that might necessitate a higher level of aerobic fitness. However, it's crucial to consider the specific demands and requirements of each sport while interpreting such differences. Future research could delve deeper into the training methods and physiological demands of each sport to provide a comprehensive understanding of the observed differences.

1. Bangsbo, J., Iaia, F. M., & Krustrup, P. (2008). The Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test: A useful tool for evaluation of physical performance in intermittent sports. Sports Medicine, 38(1), 37-51. 2. Krustrup, P., & Bangsbo, J. (2001). Physiological demands of top-class soccer refereeing in relation to physical capacity: effect of intense intermittent exercise training. Journal of Sports Sciences, 19(11), 881-891. 3. McInnes, S. E., Carlson, J. S., Jones, C. J., & McKenna, M. J. (1995). The physiological load imposed on basketball players during competition. Journal of Sports Sciences, 13(5), 387-397. 4. Michalsik, L. B., Aagaard, P., & Madsen, K. (2015). Locomotion characteristics and match-induced impairments in physical performance in male elite team handball players. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 36(07), 590-599. 5. Krustrup, P., Mohr, M., Amstrup, T., Rysgaard, T., Johansen, J., Steensberg, A., ... & Bangsbo, J. (2003). The yo-yo intermittent recovery test: physiological response, reliability, and validity. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 35(4), 697-705. 6. Michalsik, L. B., Madsen, K., & Aagaard, P. (2015). Technical match characteristics and influence of body anthropometry on playing performance in male elite team handball. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 29(2), 416-428. 7. Karcher, C., & Buchheit, M. (2014). On-court demands of elite handball, with special reference to playing positions. Sports Medicine, 44(6), 797-814. 8. Gorostiaga, E. M., Granados, C., Ibáñez, J., & Izquierdo, M. (2006). Differences in physical fitness and throwing velocity among elite and

Assistant Professor, LNIPE, NERC, Guwahati, Assam