This study presents the differences of competition between mini-basketball with the traditional rules (5-a-side) and minibasket with rule modifications (3-a-side) such as: reduced number of players on court, compulsory participation in 2 of the match's 4 periods, reduced court size, placing the free throw line at 3m from the basket, and including a three-point line. The sample that was selected included 47 mini-basketball players, and the study was carried out using a quasi-experimental design without a control group. The aim was to determine the effect of rule modifications on the participation of the player with the ball. It was demonstrated that the degree of individual participation is greater in mini-basketball with modified rules

Alarcón López, Francisco

Cárdenas Vélez, David

Escobar Molina, Raquel

Piñar López, Maria Isabel

Torre Ramos, Elisa

Diposit Digital de Documents de la UAB

Mª Isabel Piñar López. Facultad de Ciencias de la Actividad Física y el Deporte. Carretera de Alfacar s/n,18071.Granada.E-mail: maribelpinar@ugr.es, * Universidad de Granada**  Universidad Católica San Antonio de MurciaUniversitat de les Illes BalearsUniversitat Autònoma de BarcelonaRevista de Psicología del Deporte2009. Vol. 18 - suppl., pp. 445-449ISSN: 1132-239XPARTICIPATION OF MINI-BASKETBALL PLAYERS DURINGSMALL-SIDED COMPETITIONSMª Isabel Piñar*, David Cárdenas*, Francisco Alarcón**, Raquel Escobar*& Elisa Torre*KEY WORDS: Mini-basketball, participation, small-sided games, competitionABSTRACT: This study presents the differences of competition between mini-basketball with the traditional rules (5-a-side) andminibasket with rule modifications (3-a-side) such as: reduced number of players on court, compulsory participation in 2 of thematch’s 4 periods, reduced court size, placing the free throw line at 3m from the basket, and including a three-point line. Thesample that was selected included 47 mini-basketball players, and the study was carried out using a quasi-experimental designwithout a control group. The aim was to determine the effect of rule modifications on the participation of the player with theball. It was demonstrated that the degree of individual participation is greater in mini-basketball with modified rules.IntroductionStudies have been done in which the mainaim has been to adapt the equipment and thegame as fully as possible to children’s needs,although for the most part, this has been donein non-competitive situations. Exceptions arefound in studies of other youth sports such asthat by Schmid (1983) in football; Martens,Rivkin and Bump (1984) in baseball for under-10 players; Rupnow and Engelhorn (1989) ingirls’ softball; and Buekers and Billiet (1998) involleyball.Modification of the equipment in basketballhas been shown to produce advantages inlearning skills and improving performance(Isaacs & Karpman, 1981). The research byHaywood (1978) and Isaacs and Karpman(1981), with children from 9-11, from 9-12, andfrom 7-9 years of age also showed that using asmaller ball improved their performance in theshot. Chase, Ewing, Lirgg, and George (1994)demonstrated that 9-12 year-old boys and girlsfelt more competent and their self-efficacy wasgreater when shooting at lower baskets, andthey likewise obtained better scores. Although little research has been carriedout on the duration and type of participation inbasketball competitions, Parkin (1980; cited byWeidner, 1998) found that with 9-11 year-oldboys, the best-qualified players obtainedpossession of the ball 30-160 times, while forthe least qualified it ranged from 12-82 times.Engelhorn (1988) obtained similar results forgirls, as did Ortega, Cárdenas, Sainz de Barandaand Palao (2006) for boys, showing the vastdifferences in participation by 14-15 year-oldplayers. Keeping in mind that competition is aneducational setting, and with the aim ofincreasing and varying players’ types ofparticipation in mini-basketball, a modificationof some of the rules was proposed. The presentstudy assesses the effect of a series of rulechanges (space, time played, and number ofplayers) on player participation in offensivephases.MethodThe sample was selected from playerstaking part in the Andalusian (Spain) Mini-basketball Championships for 9-11 yearolds. Eight teams (4 boys’ and 4 girls’) tookpart, each with a maximum of 12 and aminimum of 10 players, for a total of 92players (48 boys and 44 girls). For thesecond part  of the study,  each teampresented 6 players who had taken part inthe Championship, which would be a totalof 48 (24 boys and 24 girls); however,during the research period one gir ldropped out, reducing the sample numberto 47. The study was a quasi-experimentaldesign without a control group, as thewhole group was considered theexperimental group. The objective was todetermine the effect of the modificationsof the space, the time, and the number ofplayers on player participation in offensivephases.Independent Variables .  Modif i cat ion ofplaying space. The court dimensions werereduced to 15 meters long by 10 meterswide. Modification of each player’s playingt ime. The playing t ime of a l l  theparticipants was balanced. The matchconsisted of four 10-minute periods, andeach player had to play in two periods, onebefore and one after the half-time break. Modification of the number of players perteam. The number of players was reducedto a total of 6 per team so that 3 of themplayed on court in each period, making thematch 3-a-side. Dependent Variable.  Amount o fPiñar, M.I., Cárdenas, D., Alarcón, F.&  Escobar, R. Small-sided competitions in mini-basketballRevista de Psicología del Deporte. 2009. Vol. 18 - suppl., pp.  445-449446Piñar, M.I., Cárdenas, D., Alarcón, F.&  Escobar, R. Small-sided competitions in mini-basketballRevista de Psicología del Deporte. 2009. Vol. 18 - suppl., pp.  445-449 447Table 1. Number of participative actions per offensive phase in each type of competition.Variable Type of competition M SD Standard Error1 ActionTraditional 2.71 7.8 0.793Modified 18.51 9.4 0.6542 ActionTraditional 2.45 2.4 0.204Modified 5.10 3.7 0.3123 ActionTraditional 0.231 0.5 0.046Modified 0.483 0.9 0.0814 ActionTraditional 0.021 0.1 0.012Modified 0.042 0.2 0.017participation (defined as number of participatingactions) of the experimental subjects per offensivephase .  The number of t imes a playerobtained the ball in offensive phases wascounted.Two mini-basketball championshipswere recorded, the first organized by theSpanish Basketball Federation under thetraditional mini-basketball rules, and thesecond was organized by the authors withthe previously described modified rules oftime, space, and number of players. Thesame teams competed in bothchampionships and played against the sameopponents and in the same order, althoughin the second championship, there wereonly 6 players per team. For the statisticalanalysis, comparison of means and studentt-test for independent or paired sampleswere appl ied as necessary for thequantitative variables.Results  The mean values and the standarddeviations for the amount of participation inthe offensive phase according to the type ofcompetition are shown in table 1; it isdemonstrated that with modified games theplayers participated more often per attackphase, especially in the “1 action” and “2actions” categories. The relationshipsbetween the type of competition and thenumber of participative actions by theexperimental subjects per attack phase are asfollows: 1 action: texp=-7.035 (142) df andp=.000; 2 actions: texp=-7.889 (142) dfp=.000; 3 actions: texp=-0.0813 (142) dfand p=.004; and 4 actions: texp=-1,000(142) df and p=.319.Discussion With regard to the results ,  i t  isdemonstrated that in both types ofcompetit ion players most frequentlyparticipate only once in each offensivephase. This may be due to the highernumber of counterattacks in the modifiedgames,  s ince this type of attack ischaracterized by its quickness, thereby notgiving many opportunit ies to pass.However, in the 5-a-side game, where ithas been shown that the number ofcounterattacks is lower (Piñar, 2005), this448 Revista de Psicología del Deporte. 2009. Vol. 18 - suppl., pp.  445-449Piñar, M.I., Cárdenas, D., Alarcón, F.&  Escobar, R. Small-sided competitions in mini-basketballhigh value together with the valuesobtained for the number of passes peroffensive phase, leads us to think that theball is monopolized by one or at most twoplayers for a long time. This is normal, aschildren of this age need to satisfy theiregocentric need for ball possession withouthaving the obligation to share it resultingin teammates having no opportunity topossess the ball. For this reason, the moreplayers there are, the fewer chances ofplaying with the ball and learning from itor acquiring educational experiences withit Thus, this confirms the need to take partin a reduced and simplified competitionwith the aim of offering active and directparticipation with the ball, a necessaryrequirement for improving game skills(American Sport Education Program,2001; Chase et al., 1994; Cruz, Boixados,Torregrosa & Mimbrero, 1996; Dias, Cruz& Danish, 2000;  Martens et al., 1984;Ortega et  a l . ,  2006;  Piñar ,  Cárdenas,Conde, Alarcón & Torre, 2007).ReferencesAmerican Sport Education Program. (2001). Coaching youth basketball. Champaign, IL: HumanKinetics.Chase, M. A., Ewing, M. E., Lirgg, C. D., & George, T. R. (1994). The effects of equipmentmodification on children's self-efficacy and basketball shooting performance. ResearchQuaterly for Exercise and Sport, 65,2, 159-168.Cruz, J., Boixados, M., Torregrosa, M. & Mimbrero, J. (1996). ¿Existe un deporte educativo?:Papel de las competiciones deportivas en el proceso de socialización del niño. Revista dePsicología Del deporte, 9-10, 111-132.Dias, C., Cruz, J.F. & Danish, S. (2000). El deporte como contexto para el aprendizaje y laenseñanza de competencies personales. Programa de intervención para niños yadolescentes. Revista de Psicología Del deporte, 9 (1-2), 107-122.Englehorn, R. (1988). The relationship between player skill level and offesive player activity ingirls youth basketball. Journal of Applied Research in Coaching and Athletics, 3(3), 204-219.Haywood, K. M. (1978). Children´s basketball performance with regulation and junior-sized baskets. St.LouisUniversity of Missouri. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 164 452).Isaacs, L. D. & Karpman, M. B. (1981). Factors effecting children's basketball shootingperformance: A log-linear analysis. Carnegie School of Physical Education and HumanMovement, 1, 29-32. Martens, R., Rivkin, F. & Bump, L. A. (1984). A field study of traditional and nontraditionalchildren's baseball. Research Quaterly for Exercise and Sport, 55 (4), 351-355.Ortega, E., Cárdenas, D., Sainz de Baranda, P. & Palao, J.M. (2006). Differences incompetitive participation according player's position in formative basketball. Journal ofHuman Movement Studies, 50, 103-122.Piñar, M. I. (2005). Incidencia del cambio de un conjunto de reglas de juego sobre algunas de las variablesque determinan el proceso de formación del jugador de minibasket (9-11 años). Tesis doctoral nopublicada. Universidad de Granada.449Revista de Psicología del Deporte. 2009. Vol. 18 - suppl., pp.  445-449Piñar, M.I., Cárdenas, D., Alarcón, F.&  Escobar, R. Small-sided competitions in mini-basketballPiñar, M. I., Cárdenas, D., Conde, J., Alarcón, F. & Torre, E. (2007). Satisfaction in minibasketballplayers. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 4, 122-125.Rupnow, A. & Engelhorn, R. (1989). Effect of substitution rules on player participation in youthsoftball and baseball. Journal of Applied Research in Coaching and Athletics, 4(4), 233-244.Schmid, C. C. (1983). The effectiveness of improving soccer skills and tactis through the use of small-side andlimited area scrimmages. Tesis doctoral, Universidad de Oregón (1981). MicroformPublications.Weidner, J. A. (1998). The Effects of a modified Ball in developing the volleyball pass and set for high-schoolstudents. [Tesis Doctoral]. Northern Illinois University.

Participation of Minibasketball players during small-sided competitions

This study presents the differences of competition between mini-basketball with the traditional rules (5-a-side) and
minibasket with rule modifications (3-a-side) such as: reduced number of players on court, compulsory participation in 2 of the
match’s 4 periods, reduced court size, placing the free throw line at 3m from the basket, and including a three-point line. The
sample that was selected included 47 mini-basketball players, and the study was carried out using a quasi-experimental design
without a control group. The aim was to determine the effect of rule modifications on the participation of the player with the
ball. It was demonstrated that the degree of individual participation is greater in mini-basketball with modified rules

Piñar López, María Isabel

Escobar-Molina, Raquel

Institutional Repository of the University of Granada

Participation of mini-basketball players during small-sided competitions

Repositorio Institucional Universidad de Granada

            Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=235116466029  Red de Revistas Científicas de América Latina, el Caribe, España y PortugalSistema de Información CientíficaMª Isabel Piñar, David Cárdenas, Francisco Alarcón, Raquel Escobar, Elisa TorrePARTICIPATION OF MINI-BASKETBALL PLAYERS DURING SMALL-SIDED COMPETITIONSRevista de Psicología del Deporte, vol. 18, núm. 3, 2009, pp. 445-449,Universitat de les Illes BalearsEspaña   How to cite      Complete issue      More information about this article      Journal's homepageRevista de Psicología del Deporte,ISSN (Printed Version): 1132-239XDPSSEC@ps.uib.es; DPSSEC@uib.esUniversitat de les Illes BalearsEspañawww.redalyc.orgNon-Profit Academic Project, developed under the Open Acces InitiativeMª Isabel Piñar López. Facultad de Ciencias de la Actividad Física y el Deporte. Carretera de Alfacar s/n,18071.Granada.E-mail: maribelpinar@ugr.es, * Universidad de Granada**  Universidad Católica San Antonio de MurciaUniversitat de les Illes BalearsUniversitat Autònoma de BarcelonaRevista de Psicología del Deporte2009. Vol. 18 - suppl., pp. 445-449ISSN: 1132-239XPARTICIPATION OF MINI-BASKETBALL PLAYERS DURINGSMALL-SIDED COMPETITIONSMª Isabel Piñar*, David Cárdenas*, Francisco Alarcón**, Raquel Escobar*& Elisa Torre*KEY WORDS: Mini-basketball, participation, small-sided games, competitionABSTRACT: This study presents the differences of competition between mini-basketball with the traditional rules (5-a-side) andminibasket with rule modifications (3-a-side) such as: reduced number of players on court, compulsory participation in 2 of thematch’s 4 periods, reduced court size, placing the free throw line at 3m from the basket, and including a three-point line. Thesample that was selected included 47 mini-basketball players, and the study was carried out using a quasi-experimental designwithout a control group. The aim was to determine the effect of rule modifications on the participation of the player with theball. It was demonstrated that the degree of individual participation is greater in mini-basketball with modified rules.IntroductionStudies have been done in which the mainaim has been to adapt the equipment and thegame as fully as possible to children’s needs,although for the most part, this has been donein non-competitive situations. Exceptions arefound in studies of other youth sports such asthat by Schmid (1983) in football; Martens,Rivkin and Bump (1984) in baseball for under-10 players; Rupnow and Engelhorn (1989) ingirls’ softball; and Buekers and Billiet (1998) involleyball.Modification of the equipment in basketballhas been shown to produce advantages inlearning skills and improving performance(Isaacs & Karpman, 1981). The research byHaywood (1978) and Isaacs and Karpman(1981), with children from 9-11, from 9-12, andfrom 7-9 years of age also showed that using asmaller ball improved their performance in theshot. Chase, Ewing, Lirgg, and George (1994)demonstrated that 9-12 year-old boys and girlsfelt more competent and their self-efficacy wasgreater when shooting at lower baskets, andthey likewise obtained better scores. Although little research has been carriedout on the duration and type of participation inbasketball competitions, Parkin (1980; cited byWeidner, 1998) found that with 9-11 year-oldboys, the best-qualified players obtainedpossession of the ball 30-160 times, while forthe least qualified it ranged from 12-82 times.Engelhorn (1988) obtained similar results forgirls, as did Ortega, Cárdenas, Sainz de Barandaand Palao (2006) for boys, showing the vastdifferences in participation by 14-15 year-oldplayers. Keeping in mind that competition is aneducational setting, and with the aim ofincreasing and varying players’ types ofparticipation in mini-basketball, a modificationof some of the rules was proposed. The presentstudy assesses the effect of a series of rulechanges (space, time played, and number ofplayers) on player participation in offensivephases.MethodThe sample was selected from playerstaking part in the Andalusian (Spain) Mini-basketball Championships for 9-11 yearolds. Eight teams (4 boys’ and 4 girls’) tookpart, each with a maximum of 12 and aminimum of 10 players, for a total of 92players (48 boys and 44 girls). For thesecond part  of the study,  each teampresented 6 players who had taken part inthe Championship, which would be a totalof 48 (24 boys and 24 girls); however,during the research period one gir ldropped out, reducing the sample numberto 47. The study was a quasi-experimentaldesign without a control group, as thewhole group was considered theexperimental group. The objective was todetermine the effect of the modificationsof the space, the time, and the number ofplayers on player participation in offensivephases.Independent Variables .  Modif i cat ion ofplaying space. The court dimensions werereduced to 15 meters long by 10 meterswide. Modification of each player’s playingt ime. The playing t ime of a l l  theparticipants was balanced. The matchconsisted of four 10-minute periods, andeach player had to play in two periods, onebefore and one after the half-time break. Modification of the number of players perteam. The number of players was reducedto a total of 6 per team so that 3 of themplayed on court in each period, making thematch 3-a-side. Dependent Variable.  Amount o fPiñar, M.I., Cárdenas, D., Alarcón, F.&  Escobar, R. Small-sided competitions in mini-basketballRevista de Psicología del Deporte. 2009. Vol. 18 - suppl., pp.  445-449446Piñar, M.I., Cárdenas, D., Alarcón, F.&  Escobar, R. Small-sided competitions in mini-basketballRevista de Psicología del Deporte. 2009. Vol. 18 - suppl., pp.  445-449 447Table 1. Number of participative actions per offensive phase in each type of competition.Variable Type of competition M SD Standard Error1 ActionTraditional 2.71 7.8 0.793Modified 18.51 9.4 0.6542 ActionTraditional 2.45 2.4 0.204Modified 5.10 3.7 0.3123 ActionTraditional 0.231 0.5 0.046Modified 0.483 0.9 0.0814 ActionTraditional 0.021 0.1 0.012Modified 0.042 0.2 0.017participation (defined as number of participatingactions) of the experimental subjects per offensivephase .  The number of t imes a playerobtained the ball in offensive phases wascounted.Two mini-basketball championshipswere recorded, the first organized by theSpanish Basketball Federation under thetraditional mini-basketball rules, and thesecond was organized by the authors withthe previously described modified rules oftime, space, and number of players. Thesame teams competed in bothchampionships and played against the sameopponents and in the same order, althoughin the second championship, there wereonly 6 players per team. For the statisticalanalysis, comparison of means and studentt-test for independent or paired sampleswere appl ied as necessary for thequantitative variables.Results  The mean values and the standarddeviations for the amount of participation inthe offensive phase according to the type ofcompetition are shown in table 1; it isdemonstrated that with modified games theplayers participated more often per attackphase, especially in the “1 action” and “2actions” categories. The relationshipsbetween the type of competition and thenumber of participative actions by theexperimental subjects per attack phase are asfollows: 1 action: texp=-7.035 (142) df andp=.000; 2 actions: texp=-7.889 (142) dfp=.000; 3 actions: texp=-0.0813 (142) dfand p=.004; and 4 actions: texp=-1,000(142) df and p=.319.Discussion With regard to the results ,  i t  isdemonstrated that in both types ofcompetit ion players most frequentlyparticipate only once in each offensivephase. This may be due to the highernumber of counterattacks in the modifiedgames,  s ince this type of attack ischaracterized by its quickness, thereby notgiving many opportunit ies to pass.However, in the 5-a-side game, where ithas been shown that the number ofcounterattacks is lower (Piñar, 2005), this448 Revista de Psicología del Deporte. 2009. Vol. 18 - suppl., pp.  445-449Piñar, M.I., Cárdenas, D., Alarcón, F.&  Escobar, R. Small-sided competitions in mini-basketballhigh value together with the valuesobtained for the number of passes peroffensive phase, leads us to think that theball is monopolized by one or at most twoplayers for a long time. This is normal, aschildren of this age need to satisfy theiregocentric need for ball possession withouthaving the obligation to share it resultingin teammates having no opportunity topossess the ball. For this reason, the moreplayers there are, the fewer chances ofplaying with the ball and learning from itor acquiring educational experiences withit Thus, this confirms the need to take partin a reduced and simplified competitionwith the aim of offering active and directparticipation with the ball, a necessaryrequirement for improving game skills(American Sport Education Program,2001; Chase et al., 1994; Cruz, Boixados,Torregrosa & Mimbrero, 1996; Dias, Cruz& Danish, 2000;  Martens et al., 1984;Ortega et  a l . ,  2006;  Piñar ,  Cárdenas,Conde, Alarcón & Torre, 2007).ReferencesAmerican Sport Education Program. (2001). Coaching youth basketball. Champaign, IL: HumanKinetics.Chase, M. A., Ewing, M. E., Lirgg, C. D., & George, T. R. (1994). The effects of equipmentmodification on children's self-efficacy and basketball shooting performance. ResearchQuaterly for Exercise and Sport, 65,2, 159-168.Cruz, J., Boixados, M., Torregrosa, M. & Mimbrero, J. (1996). ¿Existe un deporte educativo?:Papel de las competiciones deportivas en el proceso de socialización del niño. Revista dePsicología Del deporte, 9-10, 111-132.Dias, C., Cruz, J.F. & Danish, S. (2000). El deporte como contexto para el aprendizaje y laenseñanza de competencies personales. Programa de intervención para niños yadolescentes. Revista de Psicología Del deporte, 9 (1-2), 107-122.Englehorn, R. (1988). The relationship between player skill level and offesive player activity ingirls youth basketball. Journal of Applied Research in Coaching and Athletics, 3(3), 204-219.Haywood, K. M. (1978). Children´s basketball performance with regulation and junior-sized baskets. St.LouisUniversity of Missouri. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 164 452).Isaacs, L. D. & Karpman, M. B. (1981). Factors effecting children's basketball shootingperformance: A log-linear analysis. Carnegie School of Physical Education and HumanMovement, 1, 29-32. Martens, R., Rivkin, F. & Bump, L. A. (1984). A field study of traditional and nontraditionalchildren's baseball. Research Quaterly for Exercise and Sport, 55 (4), 351-355.Ortega, E., Cárdenas, D., Sainz de Baranda, P. & Palao, J.M. (2006). Differences incompetitive participation according player's position in formative basketball. Journal ofHuman Movement Studies, 50, 103-122.Piñar, M. I. (2005). Incidencia del cambio de un conjunto de reglas de juego sobre algunas de las variablesque determinan el proceso de formación del jugador de minibasket (9-11 años). Tesis doctoral nopublicada. Universidad de Granada.449Revista de Psicología del Deporte. 2009. Vol. 18 - suppl., pp.  445-449Piñar, M.I., Cárdenas, D., Alarcón, F.&  Escobar, R. Small-sided competitions in mini-basketballPiñar, M. I., Cárdenas, D., Conde, J., Alarcón, F. & Torre, E. (2007). Satisfaction in minibasketballplayers. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 4, 122-125.Rupnow, A. & Engelhorn, R. (1989). Effect of substitution rules on player participation in youthsoftball and baseball. Journal of Applied Research in Coaching and Athletics, 4(4), 233-244.Schmid, C. C. (1983). The effectiveness of improving soccer skills and tactis through the use of small-side andlimited area scrimmages. Tesis doctoral, Universidad de Oregón (1981). MicroformPublications.Weidner, J. A. (1998). The Effects of a modified Ball in developing the volleyball pass and set for high-schoolstudents. [Tesis Doctoral]. Northern Illinois University.

Participation of Minibasketball players during small-sided competitions

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Diposit Digital de Documents de la UAB

Institutional Repository of the University of Granada

Repositorio Institucional Universidad de Granada