This study aims to analyze the content of men"s unemployed fencing team épée matches. To achieve this objective, video footage from a total of 5 matches, comprising 45 rounds, was analyzed. The matches were selected from the 52nd national men"s and women"s fencing championship, the 2023 president"s cup national men"s and women"s fencing championship, and the 61st National categorized fencing championship for men"s unemployed teams. Data processing was conducted using the SPSS/PC Window V23.0 program. The analysis focused on scoring areas and regions based on technical types in men"s unemployed team épée matches. The results of the analysis led to the following conclusion: Firstly, there was a statistically significant difference in scoring areas based on technical types in men"s unemployed team épée matches(p<.05). Secondly, a statistically significant difference was observed in the scoring regions based on technical types in men"s unemployed team epee matches(p<.05). Thirdly, the scoring areas showed a statistically significant difference among men"s unemployed fencing teams(p<.05). Fourthly, no statistically significant difference was found in the scoring regions in épée team matches among men"s unemployed fencing teams. Fifthly, there was a statistically significant difference in the areas where points were conceded among men"s unemployed fencing teams(p<.05). Sixthly, no statistically significant differences were found in success rates, failure rates, and simultaneous hits in épée team matches among men"s unemployed fencing teams. In summary of the analysis, the team from the K Fencing Association demonstrated that the majority of their points were scored in the C region. They predominantly utilized simple techniques, achieving a significant number of points in the torso area. This indicates a monotony in scoring region, techniques, and areas. It is necessary to develop individual skill training programs and game management tactics that can utilize the entire piste and employ techniques for scoring evenly across various areas.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jeong et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: