PeerJ Reviewer Match - Service Accuracy and Fatigue in Tennis

Javascript is disabled in your browser. Please enable Javascript to view PeerJ.

Examining the changes in service accuracy related to increased fatigue in tennis players

Abstract

Background. A tennis player needs to serve well to win the match. An increase in fatigue in the body can lead to decreased serving performance due to its negative effects on the muscles. This study aims to examine the changes in service accuracy related to increased fatigue in tennis players.

Methods. Fifteen (15) trained male tennis players participated in the study voluntarily. The physical characteristics of the participants were as follows: age, height, body weight, and body mass index (BMI): 22.33 ± 1.44 years, 187 ± 1.78 cm, 75.40 ± 11.60 kg, and 23.75 ± 3.60 kg/m 2, respectively. Before the HIT-TURN test, at intensities corresponding to 60% (MI) and 80% (HI) of the average maximum values obtained from the test, Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE), Blood Lactate Concentration (BLC), and Serve Hit Points (SHP) were measured.

Results. There was a statistical difference between BL blood lactate value and MI fatigue, and between BL and HI fatigue (p<0.05). In terms of RPE results, there was a difference between BL and HI fatigue and between BL and HI (p<0.05). The service hit score tested at different fatigue levels had a difference compared to BL. When SHP values were analyzed, there was a significant difference between BL and HI and between MI and HI (p<0.05).

Conclusion. It is of great importance to train the players with high-intensity and intermittent training to cope with fatigue and not to decrease the percentage of hitting on the serve, especially in the later stages of the competition.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].