The 11th International Scientific Conference

eLearning and Software for Education

Bucharest, April 23-24, 2015
10.12753/2066-026X-15-221

EFFICIENCY EVALUATION METHOD FOR PUNCH STRIKES IN COMBAT

SPORTS BASED ON CINEMATIC PARAMETERS
Irina BIEL, Dan DELIU, Mariana CORDUN
UNEFS, 140 Constantin Noica St., Bucharest, Romania
irina_baitel@yahoo.com, anjvb@.hotmail.com, mariana_cordun@dr.com

Abstract. For analyzing, evaluating and comparing striking techniques used in combat sports it is
necessary a closeacquaintanceshipbecause is useful to take into account the most relevant aspects of
every studied technique.We propose an evaluating method of punch strikes based on objective
measurements and analyzing of the determinant cinematic parameters for the efficiency of any
strike.We made data aquisition regarding the position of the body segments in the three orthogonal
planes using MOVEN Xsens equipment on four subjects on different weight categories, multiple kick
box national champions. The data have been adapted for a biomechanical analysis of the studied
technique, accurately estabilishing the temporal frames of the sequences that constitute the technique
itself. For the chosen sequence (from the beginning of the elbow extension to fist impact with the target)
we calculate the average speed of the fist, the fists impact acceleration (as a proportionality factor of
striking force), the difference between the hips and shoulders lines and the upper speed of the fist.
Related with the balance of the cinematic parameters in the efficiency of the strike, we quoted with 10,
9, 8 and 7 points the values placed on the upper limit of the scale and with lower quote, appropriate
with the described values range.in this manner we evaluated all the strikes applied by each subject and
we calculated the average score for each other. On the other side, we build a strike for each subject
starting from the medium values of the parameters individually computed. We evaluated these
modellated strikes, too using the scale described above and the score was close (differences lower than
5%) to the average score of the strikes for each subject. This is a confirmation of the fact that our
evaluation scale is an objective one, the values ranges corresponding for each score being rationally
established. A major plus of this scale is that is so designed to be not dependent of subjects weight
category.
Keywords: cinematic analysis; MOVEN; direct punch; evaluation

I. INTRODUCTION
When executing a technique, both technical and physical preparation is needed. Physical
preparation assures the amount of energy needed for a performant technique, whilst the technical
preparation assures the proper use of that energy, incresing its efficiency by a good inter and intramuscular coordonation[6].
For obtaining information about the correlation between these aspects, we intend to evaluate
the punching techniques executed by subjects. This evaluation must take account of the determinant
factors of an efficient execution, but it should be influenced by the anthropometric parameters of the
subjects as little as possible, as it has to be as general as it can. In this purpose, we propose an
evaluation method of the punch hits used in combat sports that has the kinematic analysis of the
technique on its basis. From studying speciality literature[1],[2] as well as from personal studies[3],
we have identified a series of kinematic parameters that do not depend on the subjects weight (or
others somatic values).
For this study weve chosen the direct punch, known in box and kick box as cross. This is the
most common techique used in competitions, and the first one thaught in a dojo. The motric activity is

266

compound of a succesion of motrical acts on whose synchronization depends the executions

efficiency. In this particular hit (the cross), the actions starts with the foot (the one on the same side
with the arm) pushing into the ground. The pivot, the implication of the knee and hip, bending the
lower and upper body through the abdominal muscles, the bodys slueing, the rise of the arm to the
sagittal plane and the extension of the elbow, all these have as a finality the transfer of the striking
energy to and through the fist at the impact with the target; the elbows extension continues a bit after
the impact, then it follows the retreat of the fist in the initial position[4].
On this effect, weve chosen the movement sequence that will be analysed and the kinematic
parameters based on which the evaluation will be done. We will refer to the movement sequence held
between the starting moment of increasing the elbows extension (the departure of the fist towards the
target), and the final moment identified by the recording of the minimum value of the fists
acceleration. The kinetic parameters viewed in the hits evaluation are: the punchs average speed
(vmed), the puchs acceleration at the impact (amin), the difference between the hips line and the
shoulders line at the impact (ls lu) and the maximum speed of the fist (vmax) recorded in the
described movement sequence.
Based on these kinetic parameters and on their matter in the efficiency of a full-contact
punch[4],[5], [6] weve established an evaluation scale that shows a hierarchy of thehits. Hereby,
weve considered the punchs average speed on the first movement sequence (from the beginning of
the elbows extension until the contact with the target) to be a very important factor, marked with 10
points. With 9 points weve marked the minimum value of the fists acceleration, as a proportionality
factor in calculing the impact force of the hit on one hand, and as a measure of the fists speed before
the impact, on another hand. With 8 points weve marked the difference between the values of the
angles described by the hips line and shoulders line, having the significance of the kinetic linking of
the lower and upper body. For this parameter too, the minimum value will get the maximum score.
With 7 points weve marked the maximum momentary speed of the fist, recorded during the elbows
extension. For each parameter we have defined value intervals corresponding with a certain score:
a min[m/s2]

Score

<50

-49.9 - -40

-39.9 - -30

-29.9 - -20

-19.9 - 10

Table 1. Evaluation scale for medium velocity of the fist

v med[m/s]

Score

>8

10

7.5 - 7.99

7 - 7.49

6.5 - 6.99

6 - 6.49

5.5 - 5.99

Table 2. Evaluation scale for minimum acceleration of the fist

267

ls-lu[]

Score

> 15

15 25

25 35

< 30

Table 3. Evaluation scale for the difference between shoulders and hips line
v max [m/s]

Score

>13

12 12.99

11 11.99

10 10.99

9 9.99

8 8.99

Table 4. Evaluation scale for maximum velocity of the fist

The points are totalled and the top is created. In case of equality, the hit with a better average
speed gets priority, as this is the most important factor for its efficiency. If there is still a case of
equality, the next most important parameter is considered. If all the parameters obtain an equal score,
then all the absolute values will be compared, in order of their importance.
II. RESEARCH DESIGN
2.1 Hypothesis
Applying our evaluation scale there can be realized a hierachy of the punch hits used in combat
sports based on their efficiency (the precision criterion beeing considered fulfilled). The kinetic
parameters analysed (the average speed, the fists maximum speed and minimum acceleration, the
differece in degrees between the shouldersand hips line in the moment of impact) of the direct punch
do not depend on the weight category of the subjects, but they are individual kinematic variables
2.2

The description of the research

Within the Ciprian Sora Sport club were tested four sportsmen, multiple kick box national
champions, all from different weight categories (63, 69, 81 and 100 kg). Equipped with the MOVEN
equipment, the subjects have applied ten (each) full contact cross hits into a 40 kg suspended boxing
bag (for the fourth subject there were analysed five hits). The hitting frequency of the bag was chosen
by each subject.
MOVEN equipment consists in 17 miniatural inertial sensors (each one containing an
accelerometer, a gyroscope and a magnetometer) situated in strategic locations of the suit for
movement measure of each body segment. Two Xbus master unitshave the role of interconnecting the
movement sensors, charging them and recieving the data, ensuring the aquisitions sincronization. Each
Xbus master is paired with one wireless reciever which control the data flow between Xbus master and
the computer.MVN Studio software pack is the control center of the system and can be used both for
real time viewing and for recording and off line replay of previous recorded sessions. [7]

268

III. THE DATA PROCESSING

Using the soft devoted to the equipment, the position acquisitions of the segments in each
plane (the acquisition rate beeing 100 Hz) provided by the MOVEN equipment were exported in
.mvnx format and then processed in Excel 2010. For each hit weve calculated the following
parameters:
The fists position in space and its displacement in time between two succesive
acquisitions;
The arm-forearm intersegmentar angle, to mark out the beginning of the elbows
extension;
The fists acceleration, to find out the moment of impact with the target;
The duration of the studied movement sequence;
The lenght of the travelled trajectory by the fist in this movement sequence;
The fists average speed in the described movement secuence;
The fists maximum speed;
The shouldersand hips line and the difference in degrees between them in the moment of
impact;
Next, we have calculated the score obtained by each hit using the evaluation scale described
before and the average score of each subjects hits. Then, for each subject weve configured a hit,
starting from the time variation of the analyzed parameters average value and weve calculated the
obtained score using the same evaluation scale. By comparing the configured hits score with the
average score of each subjects hits, its been remarked a difference smaller than 5%.
Strike
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
L8
L9

t1
[ms]
70
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80

L1
[m]
0.537
0.600
0.510
0.620
0.580
0.560
0.620
0.650
0.580

a min
[m/s]
-39.75
-28.95
-32.84
-44.43
-35.73
-25.39
-21.08
-23.60
-25.75

cot
[]
156.2
160.6
158.4
153.9
163.5
153.1
172.2
151.9
144.0

lu
[]
86.8
90.3
100.8
89.4
99.0
92.2
88.6
89.7
92.6

ls
[]
94.9
95.6
105.1
98.6
107.4
98.6
99.1
101.6
93.9

ls-lu
8.1
5.3
4.3
9.2
8.4
6.4
10.5
11.9
1.3

vmed
[m/s]
7.7
7.5
6.4
7.8
7.2
7.0
7.8
8.1
7.2

vmax
[m/s]
12.4
13.1
11.2
13.7
12.7
11.6
12.9
12.8
12.1

Table 5. Kinematic parameters for direct hits cross subject S.C. 63 KG

Score
Strike
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
L8
L9

10
vmed
7.7
9
7.5
9
6.4
4
7.8
9
7.2
8
7.0
8
7.8
9
8.1
10
7.2
8

9
a min
-39.75
8
-28.95
7
-32.84
8
-44.43
9
-35.73
8
-25.39
7
-21.08
7
-23.60
7
-25.75
7

8
ls-lu
8.1
8
5.3
8
4.3
8
9.2
8
8.4
8
6.4
8
10.5
8
11.9
8
1.3
8

7
vmax
12.4
6
13.1
7
11.2
5
13.7
7
12.7
6
11.6
5
12.9
6
12.8
6
12.1
6

Total
31
31
25
33
30
28
30
31
29

Table 6. Computed score for every hit based on kinematic parameters - SUBJECTS.C

269

Strike
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
L8
L9
L10

t1
[ms]
110
100
100
100
110
110
100
110
120
110

L1
[m]
0.77
0.72
0.68
0.73
0.73
0.76
0.75
0.74
0.79
0.78

a min
[m/s]
-22.72
-20.11
-35.96
-47.63
-25.94
-42.35
-31.58
-39.37
-20.5
-31.71

cot
[]
166.3
168
145.6
147
150.1
155.2
150.6
152
148.3
150

lu
[]
80.7
91.9
92.6
96.4
103.2
98
87.9
90.5
92.8
96.4

ls
[]
89.1
94.7
95.1
97.9
98.8
97
95.1
95.8
92.7
97.4

ls-lu
[]
2.1
2.8
2.5
1.5
-5.6
-1
7.2
4.7
0.1
1

vmed
[m/s]
6.97
7.19
6.77
7.29
6.61
6.95
7.5
6.7
6.53
7.08

vmax
[m/s]
12.75
12.92
11.87
12.66
12.04
12.87
13.1
12.19
12.65
12.89

Table 7. Kinematic parameters for direct hits cross Subject S D.I. 81 KG

Score
Strike
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
L8
L9
L10

10
vmed
6.97
7
7.19
8
6.77
7
7.29
8
6.61
7
6.95
7
7.5
9
6.7
7
6.53
7
7.08
8

9
a min
-22.72
6
-20.11
6
-35.96
7
-47.63
8
-25.94
6
-42.35
8
-31.58
7
-39.37
7
-20.5
6
31.71
7

8
ls-lu
2.1
8
2.8
8
2.5
8
1.2
8
-5.6
8
-1
8
7.2
8
4.7
8
0.1
8
1
8

7
vmax
12.75
6
12.92
6
11.87
5
12.66
6
12.04
6
12.87
6
13.1
7
12.19
6
12.65
6
12.89
6

Total
27
28
27
30
27
29
30
28
27
29

Table 8. Computed score for every hit based on kinematic parameters Subject D.I.
Strike
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
L8
L9
L10

t1
[ms]
90
80
70
90
80
80
80
80
80
80

L1
[m]
0.46
0.48
0.44
0.52
0.45
0.50
0.45
0.52
0.53
0.51

a min
[m/s]
-18.35
-31.87
-25.03
-17.43
-30.25
-28.78
-29.05
-29.02
-32.04
-19.58

cot
[]
142.5
148.1
168
148.2
138
140
169.6
138.5
148.1
149.5

ls
[]
79.4
85.2
87
87
78.3
89.8
85
84.5
82.4
81.3

lu
[]
98.9
90.7
96.3
92.8
80.4
92.3
93.1
90.8
84
82.1

ls-lu
[]
19.5
5.5
6.3
5.8
2.1
2.5
8.1
6.3
1.6
1.2

vmed
[m/s]
5.15
5.96
6.29
5.75
5.65
6.30
5.00
6.45
6.58
6.39

Table. 9. Kinematic parameters for direct hits cross subject

270

vmax
[m/s]
9.15
10.61
10.08
10.13
9.36
10.49
10.41
10.43
10.91
10.22

.A. 69 KG

Score
Strike

10
vmed

9
a min

8
ls-lu

7
vmax

L1

7.38
8
7.79
9
6.4
6
6.65
7
6.4
6
7.42
8
6.82
7
7.13
8
7.96
9
7.37
8

-27.4
6
-62.2
9
-28.79
6
-37.16
7
-49.48
8
-38.88
7
-35.6
7
-48.72
8
-22.18
6
-43.77
8

4.9
8
10.1
8
4.8
8
-2.3
8
6.6
8
3.5
8
3.4
8
3.4
8
12.7
8
2.1
8

12.21
6
13.15
7
11.95
5
12.21
6
11.56
5
12.74
6
12.81
6
13.12
7
13.1
7
13.76
7

L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
L8
L9
L10

Total
28
33
25
28
27
29
28
31
30
31

Table 10. Computed score for every hit based on kinematic parameters - subject
Strike
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5

t1
[ms]
80
90
90
90
90

L1
[m]
0,6
0,61
0,6
0,61
0,6

a min
[m/s]
-46,8
-40,9
-59,0
-65,3
-77,2

cot
[]
141,4
147,4
156,5
144,2
158,4

lu
[]
170,9
164,0
159,4
168,0
152,3

ls
[]
179,1
175,3
172,2
173,2
163,8

ls-lu
[]
8,2
11,3
12,8
5,2
11,5

.A

vmed
[m/s]
7,54
6,78
7,0
6,8
7,0

vmax
[m/s]
13,51
12,41
12,7
12,3
12,4

Table 11. Kinematic parameters for direct hits cross subject C.S. 100 KG
Score
Strike

10
vmed

9
a min

8
ls-lu

7
vmax

L1

7.54
8
6,78
7
7,0
8
6,8
7
7,0
8

-46,8
8
-40,9
8
-59,0
9
-65,3
9
-77,2
9

8,2
8
11,3
7
12,8
7
5,2
8
11,5
7

13,5
7
12,4
6
12,7
6
12,3
6
12,4
6

L2
L3
L4
L5

Total
31
28
30
30
30

Table 12. Computed score for every hit based on kinematic parameters subject C.S.
Subject

vmed

a min

ls-lu

vmax

S.C., 64
kg
.A.,
69 kg
D.I., 81
kg
C.S.
100 kg

7,4
8
7,13
8
7,16
8
7,02
8

-30.83
7
-39.42
7
-34.12
7
-57,84
9

7,26
8
5,38
8
2,82
8
9,8
8

12,5
6
12.67
6
12.6
6
12,67
6

Total

Media

Score for the

best hit

29

29.8

33

29

29

32

29

31,2

30

31

29,8

31

Table 13. Score computed for modelled hit, medium and maximum score obtained for every subject

271

IV.

CONCLUSIONS

It can be observed the fact the the difference between the modelled hits score and the
average score obtained for all the subjects hits is very small, less than 0,5 points (table nr. 13). Also,
all the subjects have about the same score, this confirming their value as sportsmen.
The small differences between the average values and the maximum scores value obtained
for each subject shows the efficiency of each subjects execution.
In conclusion, the evaluation scale proposed by us is an objective one, which can be used for
evaluating any punch hit by sportsmen of any weight category, considering that it is based on
kinematic parameters independent on the sportsmens somatic indicators. The proposed calculing
method of the kinematic parameters using the data acquisitions obtained by the MOVEN ecquipment
is an efficient and precise one.
Reference Text and Citations
[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]

Bardosi, Z., 1990. Kintematical Movement Evaluation of the Straight-line Karate Techniques.
Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium of the Society of Biomechanicsin Sports,
July 39, Prague, Czechoslovakia, p. 23-30.
Hofmann, M., Witte, K., Emmermacher, P., 2008. Biomechanical analysis of fist punch
Gyaku-zuki in karate. In: Kwon, Y.-H., Shim, J., Shim, J. K., & Shin, I.-S. (Eds.), Scientific
Proceedings of the XXVI International Conference on Biomechanics in Sports Seoul, Korea:
Seoul National University, pp. 576-579.
Biel I., Deliu, D., 2013. Kinematic analysisof cross strike applied in full contact system
using inertial navigation and surface electromyography. The International Congress of
Physical Education, Sports and kinetotherapy, 3rd Edition
Chou, L., Link, N., G., 2010. The Anathomy of Martial Arts: An Illustrated Guide to the
Muscle Used for each Strike, Kick and Throw,Ulysses Press, Berkeley, CA, pp. 18-21.
Walker, J., 1975. Karate Strikes. Am J Physics 43(10), p. 845-849.
The Martial Arts: An introduction to the arts themselves and the sciences that make them work
on Retrieved from http://www.kenponet.com/flame/thesis/jhawkins_thesis.pdf
http: //www.xsens.com/

272