Objective: Analyze physical fitness variables and body composition to define patterns or similarities in performance using principal component analysis. Materials and Methods: Sixty-eight players participated in the study, divided into three groups according to their age: Under-13 (n = 23), Under-15 (n = 27) and Under-17 (n = 18). A comparative cross-sectional study was performed. The variables analyzed were squat jump, countermovement jump, countermovement jump with arms, hamstring strength, COD-Timer 5-0-5, COD-Timer 5 + 5, speed (5, 10, 15 m), and running anaerobic sprint test. Body composition variables were skinfold thickness, diameters, and circumferences. Results: For the squat jump, 10.4% of the variability in speed (η2 = 0.104) and 12.5% of the variability in jump height (η2 = 0.125) are explained by category, both with moderate effect sizes. For the countermovement jump, 10.8% of the variability in speed (η2 = 0.108) and 13.2% of the variability in jump height (η2 = 0.132) are explained by category, both with moderate effects. For the running anaerobic sprint test power test, a large effect size was determined for each of the six times, indicating that at least 57.4% of the variability in time is explained by category. Conclusions: Two control groups were identified according to category (Under-13, Under-15, Under-17), revealing that principal component 1 and principal component 2 were significant in the performance of anthropometric variables such as residual mass, bi-styloid diameter, arm span, and residual mass, and physical variables, specifically related to COD-Timer 5 + 5, COD-Timer 5-0-5, and speed.
Becerra-Patiño et al. (Mon,) studied this question.