Home arrow Articles arrow Water Polo arrow Validation of a tactical evaluation process in water polo
Validation of a tactical evaluation process in water polo
A proposal, validation and application of a tactical evaluation process in water polo was presented. Water polo is an aquatic sport of team, subject to some norms and institutionalized, that is practiced in a pool between two assemblies of seven players of field (six players and goalkeeper) and with the purpose to introduce the ball in the contrary goal posts. The tactical evaluation is the calculation of the performance of the situations of play, that is comprised of a first phase of quantification of the tactical indicators and a second of an exploration of the efficacy, in each one of the three situational frameworks (context in which develops a situation of play delimited by the regulation and the number of players implied).
 The aim of this study was to investigate the difference inside the values of efficacy between sexes and between the condition of winner and loser. Some coefficients have been previously used and their validity was proven using data from the European Water polo Championship celebrated in Seville in August 1997.
 The independent variables were: the sex, the condition of winner and the condition of loser, while the dependent variable was the different coefficients of offensive and defensive efficacy in each one of the three situational frameworks.
 The methodology of observation has been systematized and prepared of natural type, Anguera (1978), since the people observed (players) and the investigators carried out a normal behavior by a subjective and indirect method, Blázquez (1990), where the observer was a participant of passive type, according to Anguera (1978), and remains like a strange one, being anonymous for the observed.
 
 After obtaining the matches that met the adequate conditions we proceeded to its quantification. To the data produced we applied them the coefficients of offensive and defensive efficacy, with whose numerical values originated we carried out a factorial analysis by varimax rotation to verify the utility of the measurements of each one of them. The result was that of the eighteen proposed, twelve served for said end, with which for the final evaluation we utilized only that dozen. The six rejected were the corresponding to the offensive concreteness and defensive production in each one of the three situational frameworks.
 
 1. Coefficient of offensive efficacy in numerical equality (COENE)= (nº goals scored + nº penalty goal scored) x 100 / nº possessions. (COENE > +).
 
 2. Coefficient of offensive concreteness in numerical equality (COCNE)= {nº shots carried out - (nº goals scored + nº penalty goal scored)} x 100 / nº possessions. (COCNE > -).
 
 3. Coefficient of offensive resolution in numerical equality (CORNE)= (nº goals scored + nº penalty goal scored) x 100 / nº shots carried out. (CORNE > +).
 
 4. Coefficient of defensive efficacy in numerical equality (CDENE)= (nº goals received + nº penalty goal received) x 100 / nº actions without possession. (CDENE < +).
 
 5. Coefficient of defensive production in numerical equality (CDPNE)= {nº shots received - (nº goals received + nº penalty goal received)} x 100 / nº actions without possession. (CDPNE < -).
 
 6. Coefficient of defensive resolution in numerical equality (CDRNE)= (nº goals received + nº penalty goal received) x 100 / nº shots received. (CDRNE < +).
 
 7. Coefficient of offensive efficacy in counterattack (COEC)= (nº goals scored + nº penalty goal scored) x 100 / nº counterattack. (COEC > +).
 
 8. Coefficient of offensive concreteness of the counterattack (COCC)= {(nº shots carried out - (nº goals scored + nº penalty goal scored)} x 100 / nº counterattacks. (COCC > -).
 
 9. Coefficient of offensive resolution of the counterattack (CORC)= (nº goals scored + nº penalty goal scored) x 100 / nº shots carried out. (CORC > +).
 
 10. Coefficient of defensive efficacy of the defensive adjustment (CDEDA)= (nº goals received + nº penalty goal received) x 100 / nº defensive adjustment. (CDEDA < +).
 
 11. Coefficient of defensive production of the defensive adjustment (CDPDA)= {nº shots received - (nº goals received + nº penalty goal received)} x 100 / nº actions without possession. (CDPDA < -).
 
 12. Coefficient of defensive resolution of the defensive adjustment (CDRDA)= (nº goals received + nº penalty goal received) x 100 / nº shots received. (CDRDA < +).
 
 13. Coefficient of offensive efficacy in numerical superiority temporary static (COENSTS)= (nº goals scored + nº penalty goal scored) x 100 / nº possessions. (COENSTS > +).
 
 14. Coefficient of offensive concreteness in numerical superiority temporary static (COCNSTS)= {nº shots carried out - (nº goals scored + nº penalty goal scored)} x 100 / nº possessions. (COCNSTS > -).
 
 15. Coefficient of offensive resolution in numerical superiority temporary static (CORNSTS)= (nº goals scored + nº penalty goal scored) x 100 / nº shots carried out. (CORNSTS > +).
 
 16. Coefficient of defensive efficacy in numerical inferiority temporary static (CDENITS)= (nº goals received + nº penalty goal received) x 100 / nº actions without possession. (CDENITS < +).
 
 17. Coefficient of defensive production in numerical inferiority temporary static (CDPNITS)= {nº shots received - (nº goals received + nº penalty goal received)} x 100 / nº actions without possession. (CDPNITS < -).
 
 18. Coefficient of defensive resolution in numerical inferiority temporary static (CDRNITS)= (nº goals received + nº penalty goal received) x 100 / nº shots received. (CDRNITS < +).
 The statistical techniques employed have been the following: we carried out an analysis factorial by means of a test of varimax rotation to verify that coefficients were the better for each situation. Once rejected the ones that did not permit us to measure it desired we proceeded to perform the parametric test of analysis of variance (ANOVA) to observe if exist differentiate significant among sexes, condition of winner and condition of loser, and the coefficients of offensive and defensive efficacy. The analysis was executed with a level of confidence of the 95%, and carried out by means of the statistical package SPSS version 12.0 (environment Windows).
 The results showed, excepting four of the sixty values of efficacy studied, two between sexes (P<0.001) and two between winning (P<0.022) and losing (P<0.050) women, there was not significant differences between sexes neither between the condition of winner and loser in a same sex or among sexes.
 
< Prev
[ Back ]