O 5 ‘ ~"u a: . t.‘ q- ‘0'... ifif;.w- ‘v .. r N I .0 o ’ ... , ,-. .x. ‘-- 7. 340 A. V TLOSIS ‘or ”m DNFé‘O 01‘ I MICHIGAN Robert RIVER .1er Lummer .., . ‘ ‘ . , . . . I . . ._ |. ‘ I ‘ . O . - - O z 0 A. 00 . ‘-- ..;, “ll -. ‘ . . ' .. . . ,_. ‘ '-l I ‘- I .- '3 . ‘ ‘ . . a ‘ l .. -.I '0 " . .7 a .. r O i . v, . . I ‘l .. 0 “X ..6l._ . ...«,. .,' :41... ' o O . I: O .' O O ‘ - .. ‘ . . t 0' .1 3 . , . . ‘9.I . . -.. . ‘0 .. v.. ' I . a 'l O O . o l O . . I . . 0 ‘ I I ' O . . t \ . I . . ~.‘ .- - I ‘ . _- I . -‘ . .. _ -. .. -.- . . ‘ 0" '.. > I. 1. ' _ » . . - . _ , ' - ..- _.._ . ‘ ' n . . . . - .l 1‘ - .‘ b . _ .. ‘ .. . ‘ V - I 2". AJ‘ . . K. v . I ~ ' '70' u.... .. . Y O . ’ '. :‘, - , ‘ ‘ . A I. ‘ 0 .~ .' I 0 y . .. . g u . U . . ‘ L . V . ‘ ‘ > -.t | . O s ..| '.. 0' I I. ', . ;:.""' 0"}. _, _ ' .‘ ' ' '5 _ O . ' . ' .‘. -‘n. . I " ‘ " ‘u$£t:.. , , "a" "04:. Q. Iu‘ooa.. THE FFFET OF 'OVERLJAD Wx'u-UJUP' ON SPEED AND ACCURACY IN BASEBALL Tth’ilNG by Robert Clark bummer AN ABSTRACT (F A THESIS Submitted to the College of Education of Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Health, Physical Education, and Recreation 1957 1/ / . Apprwglflé ’74” “a vL---.{<(./l----4?fi;-t .1... .-... Robert Clark Lummer ABSTRACT Statement 9: the Ergblgg. The purpose of this study was (1) to determine if “overload warmup" increases the speed of throwing; (2) to determine if varying loads in "overload warmup" alters the speed of thrOWing; and (3) to determine the effect of "overload warmup" on the accuracy of throwing. Methodology. Sixteen subjects, volunteers.from the physical education service courses at nichigan State University, threw a regulation 'weight baseball (5 ounces) after'warmup with both a regulation and overweight ball. The four balls used in "overload warmup" weighed 7, 9, ll, and 13 ounces. Each subject used all four weighted balls at four testing periods. Scores for velocity were timed by an electric clock accurate to l/lOO's of a second. Accuracy was measured by the hits on the target ranging from S to O. Simultaneous scores for velocity and accuracy were taken of ten throws for each testing session. The results were treated statistically by analysis of variance for’several matched groups. Those proving significant by this method ‘were then tested for significance by the "t" test. / Conclusions. The following conclusions have been drawn from I the data collected . 1. "Overload'warmup" had no effect on the speed of throwing. Robert Clark Lummer 2. An increase was found, however, in the mean velocity scores for all four weighted balls. 2. Warming up with an overweight ball had no harmful effects on the speed of throwing. 3. Warming up with the nine ounce ball resulted in increased accuracy, regardless of the effect on velocity. THE WFECT OF 'DVFRLOAD WARMUP' ON SPEED AND ACCURACY IN BASEBALL THRONING by Robert Clark Lummer A THESIS Submitted to the College of Education of Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Health, Physical Education, and Recreation 1957 5/3 5/5 7 ‘n .._ f} /' -;’- f) / I" Q. ACKN ON Li‘DG EXILENTS A study of this nature involves the co-operation of mam! people. The writer is most grateful to all the subjects who took their time to participate in each of the testing periods, Mr. Leo Folsom for his help in administering the tests, and Dr. Wayne D. Van Hues whose advise and guidance was so helpful in the writing of this study. The author also wants to formally thank his wife, Emily, whose patience and understanding were invaluable toward the success of this study . ii TABLEEE’CONTKR CHAPTER I. THE PROJLEJ AN) DEFINITION QF TEnLS J35) The Problem , . , . . Statement of the problem Need.forifluzstudy . . Limitations of the study Definition of Terms Used. "Overload Jarmup" . . II. REIATPI) LITERATURE . . . Baseball Throw . . . . Studies Related to “eight III. METHODOLOGY. . . . . . Equipment. . . . . . Timing device. . . . Target . . . . . . ‘Wiring device. . . . Baseballs . . . . . Throwing area. . . . Subjects . . . . . . Sample . . . . . . iii TS Training 0‘ U'l F’ 5" Lu C1) 12 12 12 TRBLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) C HAPI‘m PKG ' III. Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Testing . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Records . . . . . . . . . . . l7 tatistical techniques . . . . . . 17 IV . HES 'JLTS 1'.ng .‘LECALISIS CF DATI’x . . . . . 18 V eloc i ty . . . . . . . . . . . 18 neswlts of tnc onaer of thrOW. . . . 13 hesllts of the daily trials . . . . l9 . : . .- r) 1-) 1.0011551”)... o o o I e o o o O o C. ‘i if“ 1' I)", 1“. .ulI‘aCur o o o o o o o o o o o “—- ~ ,1 .. n‘ . - 1 r. " — . ‘~‘ —\ If ud“l;JD of two oxdcl t: -n.4~. . . . 22 hesults of day to day trials . . . . 23 id'- Jiscuss 3n . . . . . . . . . . 25 V. SU.Qth, CCKCLUSLOAS hhb nflidunfiKDQTIONS . 27 Summalg. . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . 28 Recommendations . . . . . -. . . . 29 BIBL: 0:11 132.2 e o o o o o o o o o o o o o 33 IL'I.;1~M\:D labs o o o o o o o o o e o I o o 33 LJST OF FIGJRES FLGJRE PAGE 1 Target . . . . . . . . . . . 1h CHAETS I II III Comparison Comparison Comparison of of of (I? 1T CF Cfllifs t4 V I" 'u Digit. 4 i elocity Mean Scores . . . . 23 Day to De.“ Trials (Velocity). . 20 V Accuracy Kean Scores . . . . 2h ". :n .. / . .. . D611; {,0 110.5. TI 4.01:; \:~CC14I<3.L'-5 ) o o 2h CMWEI THE PROBLEJ AND DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED In recent years studies by Chuil, Wilkinsz, Zorbas and KarpovichB, and Capen,4 have shown either increases in speed of move- ment or no harmful effects after a program of weight training. Another facet of the speed of movement problem worthy of investiga- tion is the effects of warmup with an object, (i.e., bat or bats, baseball, shotput, etc.) with a weight in excess of the regulation weight used in competition. HagermanS studied the effects of warming up with an eleven ounce baseball on the subsequent speed of throwing a baseball (five ounces). The mean speed of throwing increased for the regulation pitching distance. While his results were not statis- tically significant it was felt the problem was worthy of further study. lfdward Chui, "The Effect of Systematic Weight Training on Athletic Power," Research Quarterly, 21:188-1911, October, 1950. 2Bruce M. Wilkins, ”The Effect of Weight Training on Speed of Movement," fieseargh Quarterly, 23:361-369, October, 1952. 3N. B. Zorbas and Peter V. Karpovich, "The Effect of Weight Lifting Upon Speed of Muscular Contraction," Research Quarterly, 22:11.5, May, 1951. L‘Eiward K. Capen, "The Effect of Systematic Weight Training on Power, Strength and Endurance," fieseargh Quarterly, 21:83-93, May, 1951. sRandall L. Hagerman, "The Effect of 'Overload Warmup' on the Speed of Throwing," (unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1956), pp. 18. I THE PROBLEM Statement gf the prdblem. The purpose of this study was (l) to determine if "overload warmup" increases the Speed of throwing; (2) to determine if varying loads in “overload warmup" alters the speed of throwing; and (3) to determine the effect of "overload 'warmup“ on the accuracy of throwing. Negg_for the study. It is generally agreed that one of the 6,798,? assets of a successful baseball pitcher is a good fast ball. In order to make his full repertoire of pitches - curve, drop, slider or change of pace - more effective he should possess a fast ball that will keep the batters off stride by alternating the speed with which he throws. If this is not accomplished the batters will regulate the timing of their swing to meet the oncoming ball. In order to prevent this occurrence it is the responsibility of the pitcher to throw at an accelerated rate at strategic points through- out a batting situation. While this is an acknowledged and widely 6George Sisler, Sisler 22 Baseball (New Iork:.David McKay Company, Inc., l95h), p. I30. 7Christy Mathewson, Pitching 33.3 Pinch (New York: 0. p. Putnam's Sons, 1912), p. 5. 8John J. MbGraw' H2! to Play Baseball (New York: Harper and Bros. Publishers, l9lh), p. 35. 9Nilliam T. Lai, Championship Baseball (New York: Prentice- Hall, Inc., 19Sh), p. 60. 3. advocated resource of a pitcher very little work has been undertaken to determine if it is possible for a pitcher to increase his speed. It was the purpose of this study to determine if the "overload warm- up" method might be a technique to accomplish this task. Limitations of; the study. In order to facilitate the testing due to the number of subjects and the time element, in daily schedul- ing and overall length of the project, the pitching distance from the "pitching rubber” to the target was reduced to 110 feet from the reg- ulation 60 feet 6 inches. The reason for, this adjustment was the amount of time lost in missing the target as experienced in the earlier study using similar methods. While fast balls are not the only pitch to be possessed by a pitcher, this investigation tested only this type of pitch and the effect on it as a result of "overload warmup". Members of the Michigan State University varsity baseball team were excluded from the experiment as it was felt their extra team practice sessions between testing periods would influence any score made. The daily throwing they participated in at practice sessions might tend to build up their throwing ability and speed. Each subject was instructed before each testing period to throw at his maximum. Since there was no way to insure this factor it must be considered here in analyzing the data. The tester, however, feels that each subject did his very best and had that assurance from the subject after all the testing was completed. II DEFINITION OF TERMS GSE) "Overload Warm_up" - refers to the pre—testing period in which the subject throws the weighted baseballs immediately prior to the testing with the regulation baseball. CHAPTER II RELAT L‘D LIT Elu'LT UliE In this chapter the existing research on throwing and the most_pertinent literature on weight training will.be reviewed. The examination of the various authors' findings will put emphasis on methodology and results. Very little has been done in the'way of determining the effect of using extra'weights in increasing the velocity of throwing. As a result of observation, interviews and experience the author knows more has been done than is recorded in the research literature. Many individuals in seeking to better their ability or advantage have used weight training in warmup. Some of these are well-known methods, such as swinging several bats before taking a turn at the plate, pitchers carrying lead balls in their pitching hand between innings and‘wearing tennis shoes in practice swimming sessions. Others are kept as trade secrets by persons who feel it is to their advantage. Little of this material, however, has been studied under controlled conditions or reported in the research literature. gee! . I BASEBALL THRON Slater-Hamel and Andres10 compared the velocities of fast balls and curve balls to obtain data. on the demands of a batter in respect to the speeds of pitched balls. Six members of the Indiana University pitching staff were tested during the 1950-51 season in the school gymnasium. Each subject threw twenty fast balls and twenty curve balls for score against an electronic device, which measured the velocity. Copper electrodes were attached to the fingers and the balls were coated with a conducting silver which closed the circuit when held together. Upon release of the ball the circuit was opened that started the clock while sound waves picked up by a speaker unit were used to stop the clock when the ball hit its target. Each subject was allowed his customary warmup and neces- sary rest between pitches and threw from the regulation pitching distance of 60 feet 6 inches. The results of this study showed that the mean duration of flight (0.147 seconds to 0.59 seconds for fast balls and 0.514 seconds to 0.70 seconds for curve balls) gave the batter approximately half that time to decide on his swing. Hagermanll, at Michigan State University, evaluated the influ- ence of a warm-up period with a weighted ball (11 ounces) on the ‘ 10A. T. Slater-Hammel and E. H. Andres, "Velocity Measurement of Fast Balls and Curve Balls," Research Quarterly, 23:95-97, March 1952. nRandall L. Hagerman, ”The Effect of 'Overload Warm-Up' on the Speed of Throwing ," (unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1956), pp. 18. 7. velocity of a thrown baseball. Eight subjects threw fifteen pitches for score against an electric timer, which started upon release of the ball from the pitchers fingers and closed upon impact with a target simulating the area'bf a strike zone. The recorded scores ‘were thrown after a warmup with a regular baseball and then after a *warmup'with a weighted ball of eleven ounces. The student's "t" ;yielded a 2.06 score while 2.635 was necessary to be significant at 'the 5% level of confidence. In a study to determine the differences in relative speeds of 12 found the overhand fast ball to be the 'various pitched balls, Kenny .fastest in 85% of the cases tested. Using twenty-one subjects, ranging from high school to professional in experience, he had each Inan throw five pitches in each of six categories - overhand fast, overhand curve, underhand fast, underhand curve, sidearm.fast, and sidearm curve. The subjects could throw in any order they desired and could switch from one type of pitch to another before completing five in one category. Velocity was measured by a synchronous timer to l/lOO's of a second. Another interesting result of the study is that in h2% of the cases the subjects threw faster using a type of 'throwing style different from what they normally use. Only a discussion of the method used by Carlson;3‘will be introduced here since his problem was to develop an objective test —¥ 12James D. Kenny, "A Study of Relative Speeds of Different 'Pypes of Pitched Balls,“ (unpublished master's thesis, State University om'lowa, 1938), pp. 27. 13Roy Luverne Carlson, "A Study of the Baseball Throw as a Pre- ciictive Index of Athletic Ability," (unpublished Master's thesis, IJniversity of Southern California, l9hl), pp. 82. for predicting success in athletics using the baseball throw for accuracy as an index. The subjects threw from a distance of 3h feet ‘With a.regulation baseball ten times for score after.five practice ;pitches. Seven pieces of canvas 5 3/h inches apart and 3h 1/2 inches :from.front to back served as the target. The first had a circular liole 36 inches in diameter and each piece decreased in diameter by asix inches to the last which was intact. At the bottom of each (:anvas there was a compartment into which the balls fell after strik- :ing the canvas and thus enabling a score to be secured at the end of 'the ten throws. As only accuracy was being measured this was very :feasible and satisfactory. II 'WEIGHT TRAINING Studying the effects of systematic weight training on strength, athletic power, and muscular and circulatory-respiratory endurance, Capen1h found that training with.weights improved scores in power events significantly even though a control group scored higher on the initial test and practiced them.during the testing period. The experimental group of forty-two sophomores trained using barbells and dumbbells, while the control group for the study consisted of twenty-nine freshman in a Physical Education conditioning course. 'The‘weight training group showed greater general improvement in Inuscular strength and also excelled in all final.scores in muscular and circulatory-respiratory scores though not significantly. lhfldward K. Capen, "The Effect of Systematic Weight Training on Power, Strength and Endurance," Research Quarterl , 21:83-93, may 1950. Chuils, in an experiment to ascertain some of the pertinent facts concerning the effects of systematic weight training on athletic power'disclosed that weight training seemed to increase the amount of potential power in subjects tested. Data was secured from body 'weight, Sargent jump, standing broad jump, eight pound shot, twelve pound shot, and sixty-yard dash of twenty-three subjects performing ‘weight training exercises and twenty-two controls before and after the experimental period.‘ In the shot put events the trained group showed overall improvement and training seemed to have a positive effect on power. The probability of increasing speed in sprint events through training with systematic weight exercises seemed likely since seventeen of the weight training group did show improve— ment. 'Wilkins concluded that the speed of movement of chronic (experienced) weight lifters is as great as that of others studied and improves as much or more with training.16 He also found that daily training with'weights may improve muscular endurance. Three groups were used to test the speed of movement of the arm. One was made up of members of an elementary weight lifting class, another of the members of the University of California weight lifting team and the last group consisted of students in elementary golfing and swim- 15Edward Chui, "The Effect of Systematic Weight Training on Athletic Power," Research Quarterly, 21:188-l9h, October, 1950. 16Bruce M. Wilkins, "The Effect of Weight Training on Speed of Movement," Research Quarterly, 23:361-369, October, 1952. .‘. n, ovaiudllr .ul Eifl vi .. . lO. ming classes. Each group was tested before and after the experimental period of two months. The subjects rotated a bicycle crank at maxi- .mum speed with readings taken at fifteen second intervals for a period of seventy-five seconds. Among the conclusions also was that weight training had no slowing effect on the speed of arm movement over a semester's time. In trying to determine whether increased strength gained through weight training was accompanied by an increase in muscular co-ordination and speed of movement Masley, Hairabedian, and 130naldson found this to be probably true.17 Testing an experimental group and two controls, the first consisting of a beginning weight- lifting class and the latter of a volley ball group and members of a sports lecture course, results showed that speed and co-ordination ‘were increased greater from siX‘weeks of weight training than by the two controls without benefit of weight training. It was also con- cluded that weight training had no deleterious effect on the subjects. Davisla, studying the effects of weight training on swimmers, found that as a result of weight training all swimmers tested in- creased their speed in both the 25-yard and 50-yard dash. The in- vestigator tested for ten weeks devoting the first and last to time trials in the 25- and 50-yard dashes and the second through ninth 17John W. Masley, Ara Hairabedian, and Donald N. Donaldson, "Weight Training in Relation to Strength, Speed, and Coordination," ‘Research.Quarterly, 2h:308-315, October, 1953. 18Jack F. Davis, “The Effect of Weight Training on Speed in Swimming,“ 222 Physical Educator, 12:28-29, March, 1955. “game. ll. ‘week to intensive weight training With just one hour of swimming per week. The crawl stroke was used to determine what effect weight training might have on swimming. McCormic19 , in evaluating the influence of progressive re- sistance exercise on the upper extremities and its effects on 100— :yard crawl stroke performance, found no significant results as to the .benefits of weight training on speed of swimming. However, a second conclusion showed weight training had no deleterious effects on sprint swimming times in the 50- and lOO-yard distances. Two groups of five subjects each were matched by times for the lOO-yard crawl stroke. The experimental group participated in a weight training program while the controls did nothing but swim. l9Allyn L. McCormic, "The Effect of Progressive Resistance Exercise on the Upper Extremities and Its Effects on 100 Yard Swim- .ming Performance," (unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1956), pp. h9. CHAPTER III .METHGDDLOGY The purpose of this study was to determine if "overloai ‘warmup" increases the speed or accuracy of throwing and if varying vveights used in "overload warmup" alters the speed of throwing. In studying this problem the experinental method was elected as the 20 . . . type of research. Discussmn follows on the methods and procedures used in the scorin: of tzxe velocit; and exactness of the subjects' throws for this investiqation. ano:1,;11<)‘.1t the expeiir ente L]. period ruuch encouragement was afforded each man to have him perform at his maximum. I 1‘12 0 I mm T Eiminv'device. An electric timing clock, Chronoscope iiodel 3-121 , scaled to l/lOO's of a second was employed to record the speed of each throw. Activation of the clock beg> an with the release of the ball, causing two conztac t wires to "break" and close the circuit. When the ball in flight made contact with the target, the Mun-“m 20Research’ Methods Applied-P to Health,P ‘ sical Education and Recreation, (Revis ed Edit tion: .ashingt on, 5.0 er1can Kssoc1ation IorHeaIth, Physical Education and ttecreation, :1952) pp. 301-311;. “a 215tandard Precision Timers (Booklet No. 198, Springfield, 154335.: Standard Electric Time 50.5, pp. 15. 13. area of Which simulated the stroke zone, the circuit was opened and stopped the clock enabling a reading to be taken. Bait. The target proper was constructed of a 17 x 36 inch piece of five—ply plywood covered with a rubber matting and set off from the 312) x 56 inch frame that held it by four couplers wired to microswitches that stopped the clock when the target was contacted. (See Figure 1.) Since the contacts were so sensitive, the clock re- corded a score when any part of the target or frame was hit. In such instances where the clock was stopped when hit outside the target Scoring area a score of zero was given for the accuracy measurement and the recorded time used. The face of the target was painted with equidistant squares from the sides and given the value of five, four, three and two starting at the center and working toward the outside. The scoring area for five measured 7 1/2 x ll inches, area four measured 22 x 15 inches on its outside border, area three measured 33 x 22 1/2 inches at its outside perimeter and area two measured 14).; x 30 inches. Wiring device. A wire extended from the target to a jack plug in the clock and a similar wire went from a jack plug in the clock to the subject allOWing sufficient length for flexibility in throwing and maneuvering. The wire was taped to the shoulder, forearm and Wrist of the subject and attached to the index finger and middle finger of the throwing hand. At the hand the Wire was separated into two sections, one being taped to the imex f'nger, as far as the tip, and the other taped half way up the middle finger with a segment ex- tending beyond, that was used to make contact with the first wire / \ tdcroswitchcs \uicroswitches w'ire to lg Clock .‘ ho feet to Subject TARGET DIAGRAM SHJAIWG VALJSS 3F SCOhIHG AREA USSD FQR SCORING ACCJRACY FIGURE I 15. effecting an open circuit when the ball was held in the pitching grip. This method proved very successful, as a previous endeavor to use conducting silver paint on the balls resulted in the paint chipping off constantly requiring frequent repainting. Checking it against a ball drop from a known height (10.08 ft.) the error was found to be 1.033 of a second,less than could be accurately read on the clock. Baseballs. In choosing the'weighted'balls to be used in the "overload warmup" it was decided to increase the regulation ball, Which as stated in the Official Baseball Aules, must weigh not less than five nor more than five and one—quarter ounceszz, by two ounce increments. Weights for tie four balls selected were set at seven, nine, eleven and thirteen ounces and were designated A, B, C, and B respectively. This was done so the subjects would not be aware of the weight of the hell they were throwing possibly influencing the results. The added weight was accomplished by drilling a hole in a regulation baseball, filling it with lead to the desired weight, and covering the lead with the cut out section of the cover. _Throwing area. The pitching distance'was reduced to forty feet in an effort to cut down on the number of wasted pitches encountered in the previous study by Hagerman23 when.balls missed the target area and did not produce a score. Since the subjects were not trained pitchers it was felt that this would add to the value of the study in not discouraging the subjects when their throws were not recorded by the clock on misses. 22Baseball Almanac (New York: A. S. Barnes and Company, Inc., 19149), p. E. 23Hagerman, lag. git. 15. II SUBJECTS Samplg. Sixteen'volunteers.from Physical Education service courses at Michigan State University served as subjects. The testing with the different weight balls was conducted in the Latin square order. Record cards were made up prior to selecting the subjects at which time the order of warmup with the four weighted balls was set. Subjects l-h threw ball A at the first session, subjects 5-8, ball A at the second session, subjects 9-12, ball A at the fourth session and subjects 13-L6, ball A at the third session. The remainder of the orders of throw evolved around this plan. When the subjects reported for the experiment their names were affixed to a card by alphabetical order starting at one and working through sixteen. The subjects were divided into four groups determined by the order in which they threw the weighted warmup balls. Each subject acted as his own control in that he daily threw both after the regular warmup and the "overload warmup" with each of the foui‘weighted balls. III PROCEDURE ‘Tgstigg. For purposes of securing the data necessary to determine the effects of "overload warmup" on the speed and accuracy of thrOWing, the following procedure was adhered to at all testing Periods. The testing was divided into four sections with each subject warming up with the regulation ball.for ten practice throws to a gloved catcher and then after three orientation throws with the normal 17. weight ball to become familiar with the wiring to his throwing arm and the target, ten throws for score were recorded on the electric clock. He then was given one of the weighted balls, according to the category he was placed in before the start of the testing, and threw the heavier ball for twenty—five times to a gloved catcher before proceeding with his recorded score. This process was followed at each of the testing sessions with a different weight ball being used by each group of subjects for the “overload warmup". The total test— ing time for each subject covered a four week period as all testing was accomplished on Saturday. Before each recorded group of scores the subjects were reminded to give a maximum effort with each of his throws. Records. All information was recorded on specially made 3 x 5 cards with a column for the time and accuracy score of the ten recorded throws with balls A, B, C, and 3 respectively. Statistical Technigges. Analysis of variance was used in de- termining the significance of the data for the weighted balls in both velocity and accuracy.2h Since the analysis was significant for the accuracy section of the study a student "t" was applied to each of the groups.25 This enabled the author to find out just where the signif- icance was applicable. th. L. C. Butsch fig! To Read_Statistics (Milwaukee: The Bruce Publishing Company, l9h65, p. IE9. 25 Ibid, p. 157. CHAPTER IV RESULTS AND ANALXSIS OF DATA The purpose of this study was to determine if "overload warmup" has any effect on the speed and accuracy of throwing. The problem was developed using four different weight balls, each in- creased over the regulation baseball (five ounces) by two ounce increments. Sixteen subjects, each acting as his own control, warmed up with each of the weighted balls as well as the regulation ball during four testing periods. The regulation ball was then thrown for score after the warmup was accomplished. This chapter is divided into two parts, the first giving the results and statistical analysis of the effects on speed of throwing and the second the results and statistical analysis of the effects on accuracy in thrOWing. I VELOCITY Results of the order 93 m. The results of the compiled data for the four groups in the order in which the balls were thrown (Latin square method) showed a mean increase for each (Chart I). However, this was not significant when an analysis of variance for several matched groups was applied. The graph shows thexnean scores of the sixteen subjects after a warmup with both the regulation and Weighted balls for the four groups. Results of the mean scores have 19. been converted into feet per second, from the original times in hundreds of a second, by the formula V = %w One standard deviation is represented by the line above and below the mean. Comparing the differences in the individual's mean scores (feet per second) for each of the four groups by analysis of variance for several matched groups26 the F value was found to be .709 between the groups. A F of 8.59 was necessary to be significant at the 5% level of confidence. 3y computing the analysis with a residual any variation in the rows was kept constant while testing the groups.27 The statistical computations can be inspected in Appe.dix C. hesults of the daily_trials. In order to determine the day to day effects on the velocity of the throws made by the subjects another analysis of variance was applied to these data. Only the scores after warmup with the regulation ball were used in this computation. The mean scores of the subjects throws on his first day of testing, re— gardless of the weight ball used in "overload warmup", were tabulated as well as the means of his throws for the second, third, and fourth days of testing (Chart II). The results between groups was significant (F = lh.9 , P = 1%). Significance at the 13 level was also found between the rows (F = 22.18, P = 15:3).28 26Allen L. Edwards, Statistical Analysis (New York: Rinehart and Company, Inc., 19%), p. 2T5. 27Ibid., p. 229. 23$ee Appendix C. Feet Per Second Per Second Feet 20. _- 7F ‘F 1— T T 9ch -— 1, -4—90 _ +— a _ T P e 1 90‘s 45‘ Afi d d— BO 69 A»: ‘9 .4 45 L. l i _ Tait ._ + 70 J- 0% — Z c 7 Ounce 9 Ounce 1; Ounce 1} Ounce CHART I COZ‘.'PA}=.ISO-‘-} OF Vl‘JIflCITY LEJaIJ SCORJ'S , hean Scores __ 7 A Regular Ball C) Mean Scores 90‘+ Overload Ball “#90 ‘f Standard ‘— Deviation / tO-T ~~80 - 11> ,. VO'L 4t7o 0% g _ z 0 Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day h CHART II COMPARISON or an TO DEAL TRIALS (VELOCITY) 21. Discussion. While the mean scores show an increase for each of the four groups after~warmup with the various weighted balls the standard deviation in each case overlaps into the mean score found after warmup with the regulation ball. The error of measurement, (