Cross-sectional study observes superior grip strength and manual dexterity in licensed League of Legends players, highlighting the importance of sensorimotor skills in competitive esports.
E-sports has rapidly evolved into a competitive discipline within digital platforms. Technological advances have led to a global increase in both players and audience. This study aimed to compare licensed and amateur League of Legends players in terms of gaming duration, manual dexterity, reaction performance, and finger and hand grip strength, and to examine the associations of these variables with competitive ranking. The study included licensed League of Legends (LoL) male players (licensed e-sports players, n = 30) and non-licensed male players (amateur players, n = 30). Participants’ physical activity levels were evaluated using the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ). Hand grip strength was measured with a Jamar hand dynamometer, pinch strength with a pinch meter, hand reaction speed with the Nelson Hand Reaction Test, and manual dexterity with the Moberg Pick-Up Test. Licensed e-sports players demonstrated longer daily playing time, greater hand grip strength, and higher manual dexterity compared to amateur players ( p = 0.010; p = 0.028; p = 0.009, respectively). No significant differences were observed between players regarding world ranking, hand reaction speed, pinch strength, or physical activity level ( p > 0.05). In the licensed e-sports players, hand reaction speed was correlated with both world ranking and manual dexterity ( p = 0.032/ r = 0.332; p = 0.045/ r = 0.341, respectively). Among all participants, world ranking was significantly positively correlated with manual dexterity and hand reaction speed ( p = 0.000/ r = 0.583; p < 0.000/ r = 0.546, respectively). The findings highlight the importance of sensorimotor skills for e-sports players. There is a need for randomized controlled trials to examine the effects of sensorimotor skill training on e-sports players.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sayaca et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: