Available via license: CC BY
Content may be subject to copyright.
14
of Physical Culture
and Sports
PEDAGOGY
The effects of massed and distributed drills, muscle strength, and
intelligence quotients towards tennis groundstroke skills of sport
students
Djoko NugrohoABCDE, Mohammad F. HidayatullahABCDE, Muchsin DoewesABCDE,
Sapta K. PurnamaABCDE
Faculty of Sports, University of Sebelas Maret, Indonesia
Authors’ Contribution: A – Study design; B – Data collection; C – Statistical analysis; D – Manuscript Preparation;
E – Funds Collection
Abstract
Background
and Study Aim
Basic forehand and backhand technical skills are the main requirements that must be mastered in
playing tennis. Physical condition and intellectual intelligence were found to be the factors that
affect the quality of tennis. On the other hand, limited learning time, and the number of teaching
staff and facilities are classic challenges in the implementation of learning. This study describes the
different effects of massed and distributed exercise, arm strength, and intellectual on the forehand
and backhand skills of sports students.
Material and
Methods
A quasi-experimental method with two group pretest and posttest design approached the 64
volunteers of male sports students (age 19.3±1.7, BMI 20.17±1.47), who had attended the tennis
course. The sample is divided into 2 groups of Massed Practices (MP) and Distributed Practices
(DP) according to the score of the upper-arm strength and intelligence test. The anthropometrics
were evaluated through digital microtome stature, the arm strength was evaluated with a push-up
test and the kinesthetic perception was conrmed with the intelligence quotient (IQ) test. The
prerequisite test employed Kolmogorov-Smirnov, while Bivariate analysis utilized the Independent
Sample T-test and Paired Sample T-test of the SPSS 20.0 version.
Results The study showed that MP and DP had different positive contribution values to the tennis drive
(p=0.003, p<0.05), while distributed gave a better contribution to the tennis drive with a signicant
value (p=0.001, p<0.05). The high arm muscle strength provides high accuracy in groundstroke
(p=0.003, p<0.05), also for the high score on the intelligence test signicantly affect the accuracy of
tennis strokes (p=0.000, p<0.05).
Conclusions The results showed that there are differences in exercise methods, arm muscle strength, and
intelligence quotient against tennis drive punches.
Keywords:massed, distributed, arm strength, intelligence quotient, tennis
Introduction1
Tennis is one of the most popular racket sports
across ages and genders [1]. It requires the linkage
of bio-motor components including strength, speed,
power, agility, and coordination [2], which is applied
in a short-term and continuous explosive action that
lasts for a long match duration [3]. Tennis has similar
characteristics in competition load, intensity, and
duration with other racket games [4], therefore, it
is categorized as a high level of sports competition
[5]. A tennis match can be played individually and
in pairs, and has no time limit, so a four-hour match
is possible [6]. In line with the statement, therefore
high levels of physical, psychological, and technical
efciency are very crucial [7].
The basic technique of tennis stroke is divided
into two groups of techniques, namely defensive
punch, and attack punch techniques [8]. Defensive
techniques are classied as push or slice and block
© Djoko Nugroho, Mohammad F. Hidayatullah, Muchsin Doewes,
Sapta K. Purnama, 2023
doi:10.15561/26649837.2023.0102
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
punches, while attack punch techniques include
drive, lob, spin, and overhead punches/smashes
[9]. The serve, forehand drive, backhand drive,
and volley are included in the basic techniques of
stroke that must be mastered in tennis [10] through
an appropriate training method [11]. The type of
strokes is divided into groundstrokes, volleys, and
overhead strokes [12]. The groundstroke is a crucial
technique made by swinging a racket to produce a
striking controllable force with high accuracy target,
against a ball that has bounced off from the ground.
The groundstroke can be done through forehand or
backhand style on the side of the body [13], which
is stated in the current study it requires a high level
of footwork coordination and swing accuracy [14].
Forehand strokes are dened as strokes made to the
right of the player for a right-handed hitter, while
Backhand is a stroke made by swinging the racket
from the player’s left [15]. The implementation of
forehand and backhand strokes in court tennis on
groundstroke is carried out in three stages, namely
backswing, forward swing, and follow-through [16].
15
2023
0101
The ndings of the current study explain that
there is a positive relationship between training
methods based on each individual’s physical,
psychological, and technical abilities towards
improving the forehand and backhand abilities of
beginner athletes [17]. It is understood that the
training model which is based on the characteristics
of each individual, provides better effectiveness.
However, due to the limitation of learning time
provided in 1 meeting session, accompanied by
a large number of students, many obstacles were
found in the learning process. In addition, the
classic problem the form of limited teaching staff
and training facilities, makes students have a long
waiting time in carrying out independent practicum
tasks one by one so that learning outcomes cannot
be obtained optimally. Based on the facts, learning
with effective strategies is needed to develop
backhand and forehand drive skills in students.
Several studies illustrate the existence of
training methods that can be used to improve
tennis skills with limited time, a minimal number
of coaches, and facilities, including Massed practice
(MP) and Distributed Practice (DP). Massed practice
(MP) is known as a method of setting a practical
presentation turn for students in performing
basic technical movements repeatedly without
interspersed with rest periods [18]. Meanwhile,
practice (DP) distributed is a method of practicing
the various form of basic technique movements
learned by providing a break between execution and
rest time to alternate with other training partners
through simultaneous instructions [19]. The study of
movement skills explained that the massed practice
method gave students more advantages in a longer
implementation time to carry out basic technical
exercises continuously. However, differences in
physical conditions, movement skills, and other
individual aspects were found to be obstacles to
achieving learning outcomes. Therefore, another
study concluded that the massed practice method
will get optimal results for groups of students who
have the same quality of physical condition and
skills, but unfortunately are less than optimal for
novice students [20]. The study of motion learning
explains the positive results of distributed practice
implemented in classes that have heterogeneous
physical conditions and abilities, one of the ndings
is that the intensity of the exercise starts from low
according to the ability of each student. On the other
hand, several motor learning studies have conrmed
that the implementation of distributed practice
requires a long training time, and it is found that
the results are less effective to be given to classes
that have limited time, trainers, and facilities [21].
Coaches can use a variety of training methods and
approaches to independently improve their tennis
skills. However, the selection of learning methods
should also pay attention to other supporting
aspects such as differences in the characteristics
of physical conditions, skills, and intelligence.
The study of biomechanics explains that there is a
signicant effect between the strength of the swing
force produced on the arm and wrist, the speed of the
ball, and the level of accuracy produced [22]. Another
study conrmed that according to the principle of
impulse-momentum, the swing strength of a tennis
racket can be optimally produced by transferring
the force through contraction of the knee joint
on the fulcrum, leg, hip, and shoulder followed by
swinging the arm, and wrist which is carried out
by synchronizing the movement simultaneously
[23]. This illustrates that the strength of the swing
force on the racket is largely determined by several
aspects, one of which is the strength of the hand
muscles.
In line with this explanation, another
study conrmed that a series of simultaneous
coordination movements in running, followed
by hitting the ball rmly toward the desired
target, requires high kinesthetic perception
which is inuenced by intellectual intelligence
[24]. Neurophysiology studies explain that the
ability and speed of the brain in understanding
and interpreting stimuli received in the central
nervous system, to be immediately transmitted to
the motor nerves in producing motor movements,
is largely determined by cognitive abilities [25].
Several measuring instruments described in the
literature to determine a person’s level of cognitive
intelligence are through the intelligence quotient
(IQ) test [26]. In line with this opinion, human
movement studies explain the ndings of the motor
learning process of basic skills, where students who
have low cognitive levels experience problems in
understanding the basic movement tasks given
[27], so have difculty displaying the motion tasks
into the form of psychomotor basic movements
optimally [28]. Based on the explanations of several
studies above which conrm that the basic forehand
and backhand movement abilities are determined
by elements of physical condition, biomechanical
motion, and cognitive intelligence [11], hence the
study to identify the difference in inuence between
massed and distributed methods in cases of learning
with limited time, trainers and existing facilities
at the Universitas Sebelas Maret is indispensable.
This research aims to investigate the inuence
of training methods, arm muscle strength, and
intelligence quotient (IQ) on tennis groundstroke
skills in forehand and backhand of sports students
at Universitas Sebelas Maret Surakarta. The results
of this study are expected to provide additional
literature regarding tennis coaches in schools in
designing and modifying training models to improve
basic technical skills for forehand, and backhand,
including serve and smash.
16
of Physical Culture
and Sports
PEDAGOGY
Materials and Methods
Participants
This research was conducted at the Faculty of
Sport Science, Universitas Sebelas Maret (UNY)
which is located at Manahan Surakarta. The
population taken in this study were 80 male sports
student volunteers (age 19.3±1.7, BMI 20.17±1.47,
RHR 63.4±8.2bpm), who have attended tennis
lectures, passed the inclusion criteria and had
no injury reports for the exclusion criteria. The
sampling technique used purposive sampling which
was carried out by taking subjects based on arm
strength and intellectual quotient (IQ) score. The
study begins with lled-out research approvals on
anthropometric, health and physiological aspects,
including the absence of cardiovascular risk, then
signed a written consent under Indonesian law
and university policies approved by the University
Research Ethics (Approval Number KE/FK/112/
EC/2021).
Research Design
The samples were categorized into 2
experimental groups namely the Massed Practices
(MP) and Distributed Practice (DP) groups using
ordinal pairing techniques based on the T-score
of the arm muscle strength test and Intellectual
Question test at the pre-test. Subsequently, all
groups performed training drills of forehand and
backhand groundstroke based on a training zone
in moderate intensity at the initial stage, then
increasing to the sub-maximum intensity at the nal
intervention according to the training guidelines of
5 minutes x 7-repetitions x 60%-80 % Intensity, with
a rest between sets of 3 minutes and a rest set of 5
minutes repetitively. Upon completing the 6-week
training drills, all groups were given the post-test
intervention of the tennis drive test according to
the Hewitt Tennis test protocol delivered for 3 times
attempts, then the score recorded is the highest.
The initial phase of the study began by providing
the participants with informed consent, and the
Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q)
[29], to identify injury recording proles and
readiness for physical intervention at Sports Court,
followed by the anthropometrical measurements,
such as age, height, weight, and body mass index
(BMI) using a digital microtome stature with an
accuracy of 0.1 mm [30] and the resting pulse rate
was taken under the palpation method in a sitting
position by the Polar-H10 Chest Heart Rate Monitor
The tennis drive as a dependent variable was
measured using the Hewitt Tennis test protocol [31],
while the arm strength as an independent variable
was tested using the 60 seconds Push-up test
protocol [32], and intelligence quotient (IQ) was
conducted using the Intelligent Structure Test (IST)
2000-Revised by a psychological specialist [33]. The
forehand and backhand drive was conducted 3 times
with 10 ball shots each attempt toward the selected
target area to achieve the scores that have been
determined according to the Hewitt test protocol.
The push-up test was conducted in 60-seconds with
3-times attempts respectively. The IST consists of
nine sub-tests that have a total of 176 question
items. Each sub-test has a different time limit and is
carried out briey and administered manually [34].
One of the sub-tests that is relevant to a person’s
IQ in tennis is the WU sub-test, which consists of
exercises in the form of blocks, and aims to measure
spatial imagery, three-dimensional, analytical, and
constructive technical abilities.
At the scoring stage, each sub-test is checked
using the answer key provided. For all subtests (SE,
WA, AN, RA, ZR, FA, WU, & ME), except for the 04-
GE subtest, each correct answer will be given a score
of 1, and incorrect answers will be given a score of
0. The provision of different score ranges is given
specically to the 04-GE sub-test, where several
values are provided including 2, 1, and 0. The total
score will be classied as a Raw Score (RW), then
compared with the norms that have been provided
to produce a Standardized Score (SW), which
will become the standard of interpretation. The
score will be classied as a Raw Score (RW), then
compared with the norms that have been provided
to produce a Standardized Score (SW), which will
become the standard of interpretation. These nine
subtests are interrelated with each other; therefore,
the implementation of the test must be carried out
quickly accompanied by the overall interpretation
of the results.
Statistical Analysis
The data description employed the Statistical
Product and Service Solution (SPSS) program for
Windows, while the prerequisite test was performed
using the Shapiro-Wilk method, homogeneity
of variances. A Three-way ANOVA design with a
2x2x2 factorial design was used to determine the
difference in inuence between groups pre-and
post-treatment and to identify which variable has
the greatest impact on the treatment groups. The
data were delivered as mean ± of standard deviation
(SD), with a 95% condence interval and statistical
signicance was accepted as p < .05.
Results
The prole of anthropometrical-, health,
nutritional, physiological, as well as psychological
respondents, can be seen in the following results.
The above result (Table 1) concluded that the
respondents are in a healthy and t state as indicated
in the productive age group (18.27±1.09 yr.), have a
normal level of body mass index (21.45±1.13kg/m2),
were not in fatigue (pulse 65.75±7.35bpm) and had
normal intellectual scale as reported in the normal
17
2023
0101
values for (102.8±3.63) and a normal distribution
for muscular strength with (31.8±2.58) respectively.
Simultaneously, a qualitative measurement was
also conducted to obtain characteristics of the
discrimination of arm muscle strength, intelligence
quotient (IQ), and tennis drive including average
grades, standard deviations, minimum values,
maximum values, range of values, and the total
number of acquisitions from measurement test
results of each variable. The descriptive analysis of
expected variables could be seen in the following
table 2.
The results showed (Table 2) the different values of
the research variables’ mean and standard deviation
with a signicance level. The mean of Intelligence
Quotient (IQ) differences in the pretest and post-
test showed a value (r=90.50±13.11,) for Massed
Practices (MP) group, while the group of Distributed
Practice (DP) shows a mean value pretest and post-
test with (r=90.82±12.25), thus could be concluded
that the different value of Intelligence Quotient (IQ)
for both groups in pretest are distributed in a similar
level. In the Arm Strength variables, the MP group
showed a mean value of (r=26.2±4.06), while the DP
group’s mean value was (r=25.85±3.74). It implies
that there is no contrast difference in the mean
value for both groups as shown in the similar value.
On the backhand drive value, the MP group
showed a mean value (r=16.85±5.74), while the DP
group had a mean of pretest and post-test value
(r=16.17±2.49). Thus, it explains a signicant
difference in mean value both in the pretest and
posttest for both groups have no signicantly
different value. For the Forehand drive, the MP group
had a mean value of (r=13.85±1.21), while the DP
group had a mean value (r=15317±1.91). It indicates
that both groups have no signicantly different mean
of value in the pretest and posttest for forehand
drive. In addition, Prerequisite calculations were
also carried out in this study to identify whether
the data were normally distributed. The following
are the results of the normality calculation for
Table 1. Characteristics of Age, BMI, Resting Heart Rate, IQ, and Strength
Variable n Massed (MP) Distributed (DP)
Mean±SD Mean±SD
Age (years) 64 18.23±1.17 18.31±1.02
BMI (kg/m2) 64 21.12±1.56 21.78±1.25
Resting Heart Rate (pulse/minute) 64 63.4±8.2 68.1±6.4
Intellectual Scale (Score) 64 102.18±3.43 103.23±3.84
Arm Strength 64 31.37±2.32 32.23±2.84
MP - Massed Practices group; DP - Distributed Practice group
Table 2. Prole of Arm Strength, IQ, and Tennis Drive.
Variable Groups Number (n) Mean±SD
Intelligence Quotient (IQ)
MP Posttest
MP Pretest 64 92.83±12.51
88.17±13.71
DP Posttest 64 91.71±11.98
DP Pretest 89.93±12.52
Arm Strength
MP Pretest
MP Posttest 64 29.8±4.40
22.5±3.73
DP Pretest 64 28.6±4.17
DP Posttest 23.1±3.32
Backhand Drive
MP Pretest 64 21.63±3.97
MP Posttest 12.27±6.26
DP Pretest 64 20.89±3.35
DP Posttest 13.52±5.98
Forehand Drive
MP Pretest 64 21.73±4.38
MP Pretest 11.98±5.76
DP Posttest 64 20.98±4.61
DP Posttest 12.27±5.15
MP - Massed Practices group; DP - Distributed Practice group
18
of Physical Culture
and Sports
PEDAGOGY
hypothesis testing using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov
Z (KS-Z) test with a signicance level of α=0.05 as
follows (Table 3).
Based on the results of the normality test
(Table 3) using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov Z (KS-Z)
test can be concluded that the variables including
the arm muscle strength, intelligence quotient
(IQ), and forehand dan backhand drive are shown
in the normal distribution indicating the value
greater than 0.05 (p >0.05). Thus, the sample and
variables in this study were indicated as a normally
distributed population. The Paired Sample T-test
was conducted to identify the different values of a
variable before and after manipulation in the groups
as well as to examine the different values between
the two research groups. The result can be seen in
the following table 4.
Table 4 shows the statistical calculation of
2x2x2 factorial on variable arm muscle strength,
Intelligence quotient (IQ) on forehand and
backhand abilities. In general, it can be found that
there are differences in the degree of signicance of
the Arm Strength, Intelligence quotient (IQ) prole
on the Forehand and Backhand abilities in both the
Massed Practice (MP) and Distributed Practice (DP)
groups. The results in the MP group in the sample
with low arm strength and IQ showed low forehand
results with a signicance value of p = 0.017. Similar
results were also shown in the MP group in the
sample with high arm strength and IQ, showing also
high forehand results with a signicance of p=0001.
Furthermore, the MP group in the sample with high
arm strength and low IQ showed low forehand skills
with a signicance of p=0.007. Meanwhile, students
with high arm strength, however, have a low scale
IQ, and showed forehand skills on a moderate scale,
Table 3. The Normality of Forehand, Backhand drive, arm strength, and Intelligence Quotient (IQ)
Variable Groups Number (n) Signicance (p>0.05)
Forehand Drive
MP Pretest 64 0.556
DP Pretest
MP Posttest 64 0.917
MP Posttest
Backhand Drive
MP Pretest 64 1.207
DP Pretest
MP Posttest 64 0.109
MP Posttest
Push-Up
MP Pretest 64 0.009
DP Pretest
MP Posttest 64 0.671
MP Posttest
Intelligence Quotient (IQ)
MP Pretest 64 0.062
DP Pretest
MP Posttest 64 0.724
MP Posttest
*Signicance (p >0.05)
Table 4. Paired T-Test
Variables Group Arm Strength IQ Tennis Skill Signicance (p<0.05)
Forehand
MP Low Low Low 0.017
MP High High High 0.001
MP Low High Low 0.007
MP High Low Moderate 0.001
Backhand
DP Low Low Low 0.024
DP High High High 0.001
DP Low High Low 0.002
DP High Low Low 0.001
Signicance (p<0.05)
19
2023
0101
with a signicance of 0.001. In addition, in the DP
group, it was also seen that the sample with low
strength and IQ was found to have low backhand
skills with a signicance of 0.024. The same pattern
was also shown in the group of students with
high arm strength and IQ, conrmed to have high
backhand skill with a signicance of 0.001. In the
case of the group of students with low strength and
high IQ, it was found to have low backhand skill
with a signicance of 0.002, as well as students with
low strength and high IQ, were proven to have low
backhand with a signicance of 0.001.
Based on the statistical calculations above, it
can be concluded that there are scientic evidence
ndings regarding differences in the strength of
inuence and the correlation between arm muscle
strength, and intelligence quotient on forehand
and backhand groundstroke abilities in the exercise
group using the Massed Practice and Distributed
Practice Group methods. The calculation of the
signicance value shows that high arm strength and
intelligence quotient give signicantly better results
for forehand skills, compared to the group that has
hand strength and low intelligence quotient in both
study groups of Massed Practice and Distributed
Practice. However, it can also be recommended that
the results of this study can be generalized to groups
of samples in the population with different numbers
to obtain additional new data.
Discussion
The results showed that arm strength signicantly
inuences the accuracy of groundstroke drive in
tennis. The result is also strengthened by a similar
study that states there is a signicant contribution
of the differences in training methods, and arm
muscle strength towards the groundstroke ability
in tennis drive. Similar nding is also stated by the
current study that describes arm muscle strength as
known to be an important factor to obtain optimal
propulsion when making strokes in court tennis
[1]. The study on Human Kinetics explained that
greater arm muscle strength produces a strong hit
with a high ball speed, the effect of the ball’s gravity
becomes low, and hence the ball is more controlled
to be directed at the desired target [4]. In line with
the ndings, the effect of arm strength on force
production was also explained in a biomechanical
study which conrmed a positive correlation
between a high level of arm strength on providing
greater racket swing force [35], shortening the
braking force of the ball while contact with the
strings, thus produce in a greater ball bounce effect
with a faster ball velocity [13]. It is expressed by the
strength and conditioning study conrms that a
high arm strength level provides a stable handgrip
and stronger swing force on the racket [36], hence
producing better racket control in both attacking
and defending a position [21].
On the other hand, the ndings of this study
which state that there is no relationship between IQ
scores of sports students on forehand and backhand
skills are interesting to study further. These ndings
are debilitating neuro-cognitive studies that stated
the existence of a positive inuence between the
level of intelligence on tennis skills. It is stated that
intellectual intelligence has a prominent inuence
on the psychomotor intelligence of athletes [37].
Cognitive intelligence plays a role in the process of
understanding and interpreting stimuli captured by
the central nervous system [38], activating motor
sensors, and executing movements as a reaction
to stimuli with high coordination movements [39].
In this regard, neurophysiological ndings also
conrm that team sports athletes with high IQs tend
to have good basic sports movement skills [40], and
have a better quality of movement coordination in
performing complex sports skill movements. It is
highlighted by the motor learning study that the
intelligence of students both during practice and
competing proves to have a signicant impact as
a performance-determining factor for students in
displaying a high level of movement skills [41].
Similar study conrmed that arm power can
be signicantly improved through the direct
groundstroke drill that involves an arm muscle
contraction in both directions of forehand
and backhand alternately in the proper dose
continuously [42]. Human motion study illustrated
that a forehand drive movement skill in tennis
is anatomically also inuenced by antagonist
muscle including a backhand motion that involves
a posterior extension and abduction movement
[43]. Consequently, it is required to implement
an agonist and antagonist training method that
continues to activate intramuscular coordination in
both massed and distributed methods [44]. In line
with the ndings, the groundstroke skill is necessary
for further review in the perception of the training
methods, arm strength prole, and intelligence
quotient that is assumed to be one of the scientic
breakthroughs in training to improve the ability of
tennis skill effectively and efciently.
The study ndings that explained there was no
signicant effect between intellectual intelligence
on forehand and backhand abilities in this study,
it was assumed that due to the limitations of
the dependent variable, which only involved an
intelligence test (IQ), contrarily does not involve
other variables such as the Emotional Intelligence
test (EQ). This opinion is based on growth and
development studies which explain that intellectual
intelligence has a signicant reciprocal relationship
to psychomotor abilities, and has a dominant
role in forming mental attitudes, concentration,
and focus when displaying motor skills [45]. The
sports psychology study also explains that sports
movement skills are not only inuenced by IQ but
20
of Physical Culture
and Sports
PEDAGOGY
also positively correlated to emotional intelligence
[46]. Since tennis skills are affected by other
variables including psychological domains that
were not included in this study [47], it can be said
that the measurement of tennis skills that only
involves intellectual intelligence in this study is
assumed not signicantly correlated. This opinion
is reinforced by the recent nding, which reveals
that students with good IQ, supported with EQ and
optimal muscle strength, have better groundstroke
abilities [48].
The differences effect of exercise methods, arm
strength, and IQ against tennis drive, however, require
further scientic study. Another research expresses
that traditional training drills improve the accuracy
and stability more signicantly of adolescent
tennis players’ strokes [49], meanwhile, the effect
of machine-assisted training drills improves the
stability of backspin strokes more signicantly
than topspin strokes [50]. It is strengthened by a
current study that found signicant differences
in the groundstroke forehand ability between the
drill training model employing a machine and a
feeder [51]. In terms of the biomechanical aspects,
a study shows a signicant difference that athletes
who use the foot position in a close stance provide
better hitting accuracy and control compared with
an open stance position during the groundstroke
forehand driver [52]. This biomechanical approach
can be used as a reference for learning basic stroke
techniques by involving other bio-motor aspects,
besides distributing proper methods of training
according to the athlete’s characteristics.
In the implementation of tennis training, it is
necessary to pay attention to supporting factors
such as the type of training method that is suitable
for the athlete’s characteristics, physical condition
prole [53], and basic skills to be able to provide
training loads according to abilities.
Determination of the right training method,
cannot be separated from a series of learning
processes or training processes that have been
carried out in the form of special exercises, then
gradually increased according to the development of
the athlete’s ability. The achievement of the quality
of motion in groundstroke skills is inuenced by
several factors, namely basic movement abilities,
exercises that have been experienced, a training
environment with conducive feedback, and
responsive trainers packaged with repetition of
exercises and strengthening techniques [54]. In
essence, groundstroke skills can only be learned
or trained with certain requirements, including
practicing these skills continuously for a certain
sufcient period. This means that mastering tennis
skills certainly takes time in practice and must
be done continuously and systematically. One of
the novelties and uniqueness of this study is that
there is no correlation between IQ on forehand
and backhand groundstroke abilities, while several
studies explain that IQ is one of the determinants of
the success of groundstroke skills. This difference in
ndings certainly cannot be generalized, therefore
research involving more comprehensive samples
and variables is needed to nd out whether there
are new ndings related to the relationship between
these variables and the tennis groundstroke ability
of sports students.
Conclusions
The results of this study can be concluded that
there is a correlation between exercise methods and
arm muscle strength, but there is no correlation with
intelligence quotient against tennis drive punches.
But in this study, it is necessary to further identify
the quality of physical condition, and the psychology
of students to determine the achievement of court
tennis according to the characteristics of the gender.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conict of interest.
References
1. Fett J, Ulbricht A, Ferrauti A. Impact of
Physical Performance and Anthropometric
Characteristics on Serve Velocity in Elite
Junior Tennis Players. Journal of Strength and
Conditioning Research. 2020;34(1): 192–202.
https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000002641
2. Putri A, Ardisasmita MN. Gambaran kekuatan, daya
tahan otot, power, kelentukan, kecepatan reaksi, dan
daya tahan jantung paru atlet cabang olahraga tenis
meja Jawa Barat pon XVIII/2012 riau berdasarkan
standar koni pusat [Description of strength,
muscular endurance, power, exibility, reaction
speed, and cardiopulmonary endurance of athletes
in table tennis, West Java, pound XVIII/2012 Riau
based on the central koni standard]. Jurnal Ilmu Faal
Olahraga Indonesia. 2021;2(2): 40. (In Indonesian).
https://doi.org/10.51671/jifo.v2i2.101
3. Sawali L. Drills forehand training strategy on
the stroke of forehand drive ability in tennis.
International Journal of Physical Sciences
and Engineering (IJPSE). 2018;2(2):11–20.
https://doi.org/10.29332/ijpse.v2n2.133
4. Martínez-Gallego R, Guzmán JF, Crespo M,
Ramón-Llin J, Vučković G. Technical, tactical
and movement analysis of men’s professional
tennis on hard courts. The Journal of Sports
Medicine and Physical Fitness. 2018;59(1).
https://doi.org/10.23736/S0022-4707.17.07916-6
5. Saavedra JM, Porgeirsson S, Kristjansdottir H,
Halldorsson K, Gudmundsdottir ML, Einarsson IP.
Comparison of training volumes in different elite
sportspersons according to sex, age, and sport
21
2023
0101
practised. Montenegrin J Sport Sci Med. 2018;7(2).
https://doi.org/10.26773/mjssm.180906
6. Leite JV de M, Barbieri FA, Miyagi W, Malta E de
S, Zagatto AM. Inuence of Game Evolution and
the Phase of Competition on Temporal Game
Structure in High-Level Table Tennis Tournaments.
Journal of Human Kinetics. 2017;55(1): 55–63.
https://doi.org/10.1515/hukin-2016-0048
7. Zhang S, Mao H. Optimization Analysis of
Tennis Players’ Physical Fitness Index Based
on Data Mining and Mobile Computing.
Wu W (ed.) Wireless Communications
and Mobile Computing. 2021;2021: 1–11.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/9838477
8. Behzat Turan M, Dişçeken O, Kaya M. The
Impact of Cognitive-based Learning and Imagery
Training on Tennis Skills. Universal Journal
of Educational Research. 2019;7(1): 244–249.
https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2019.070131
9. Đurović N, Dizdar D, Zagorac N. Importance
of hierarchical structure determining tennis
performance for modern defensive baseliner. Coll
Antropol. 2015;39:78–85.
10. Basiri F, Farsi A, Abdoli B, Kavyani M.
The Effect of Visual and Tennis Training
on Perceptual-Motor Skill and Learning of
Forehand Drive in Table Tennis Players. Journal
of Modern Rehabilitation. 2020;14(1): 21–32.
https://doi.org/10.32598/JMR.14.1.3
11. Avilés C, Las Heras S, Ávila A. Motor
learning and tennis basic stroke teaching for
3 and 4-year-old boys and girls. ITF Coaching
& Sport Science Review. 2019;27(77): 3–6.
https://doi.org/10.52383/itfcoaching.v27i77.101
12. Colomar J, Baiget E, Corbi F. Inuence
of Strength, Power, and Muscular Stiffness
on Stroke Velocity in Junior Tennis Players.
Frontiers in Physiology. 2020;11: 196.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2020.00196
13. Suprunenko M. Biomechanical substantiation
of motor and punch action formation in tennis by
taking into account the formation of promising
skills and abilities. J Phys Educ Sport. 2021;21(1):25–
30.
14. Delgado-García G, Vanrenterghem J, Muñoz-García
A, Molina-Molina A, Soto-Hermoso VM. Does stroke
performance in amateur tennis players depend on
functional power generating capacity? The Journal
of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness. 2019;59(5).
https://doi.org/10.23736/S0022-4707.18.08518-3
15. Larson EJ, Guggenheimer JD. The effects
of scaling tennis equipment on the forehand
groundstroke performance of children. J Sport Sci
Med. 2013;12(2):45–51.
16. Genevois C, Reid M, Rogowski I, Crespo M.
Performance factors related to the different tennis
backhand groundstrokes: A review. Journal of Sports
Science and Medicine. 2014;14:45–52.
17. Yahya Y, Ali K, Tuba B. The effect of
differential learning method on the
international tennis number level among
young tennis player candidates. Educational
Research and Reviews. 2020;15(5): 253–260.
https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2020.3919
18. Fuentes-García JP, Pulido S, Morales N, Menayo
R. Massed and distributed practice on learning the
forehand shot in tennis. International Journal of
Sports Science & Coaching. 2022;17(2): 318–324.
https://doi.org/10.1177/17479541211028503
19. Alfonso-Asencio M, Gea-García GM, Menayo R.
Induced variability, speed of the ball, and learning
backhand shot for amateur tennis players. J Sport
Heal Res. 2021;13(1):100–108.
20. Murphy AP. Methods of external and internal
training load monitoring in elite tennis environments.
J Aust Strength Cond. 2013;21(213):34–40.
21. Nanang Himawan Kusuma M. Mathematical
simulation approach to diagnose performance
limiting factor of shot put technique. Journal of
Physics: Conference Series. 2021;1778(1): 012038.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1778/1/012038
22. Abdelkader G, Arguz A, Himawan Kusuma MN,
Erkmen N, Calişkan O, Madani R. Kinematical
characteristics of accurate penalty-kicking
for turkish football players in goalkeeper
confrontation. Acta Kinesiol. 2021;2:112–9.
https://doi.org/10.51371/issn.1840-
2976.2021.15.2.15
23. Kusuma MNH. Biomekanika olahraga [Sports
biomechanics]. Unsoed Press; 2019. (In Indonesian).
24. Spampinato D, Celnik P. Multiple
Motor Learning Processes in Humans:
Dening Their Neurophysiological Bases.
The Neuroscientist. 2021;27(3): 246–267.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1073858420939552
25. Furley PA, Memmert D. The role of working
memory in sport. International Review of Sport
and Exercise Psychology. 2010;3(2): 171–194.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2010.526238
26. Bowman JK, Boone RT, Goldman S, Auerbach
A. The Athletic Intelligence Quotient and
Performance Outcomes in Professional Baseball.
Frontiers in Psychology. 2021;12: 629827.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.629827
27. Himawan Kusuma MohN, Hidayat R, Listiadi
AD, Widanita N, Anggraeni D, Komarudin. The
effectiveness of multilateral drills on cognitive and
psychomotor ability for male sport students. Annals
of Tropical Medicine & Public Health. 2021;24(03).
https://doi.org/10.36295/ASRO.2021.24347
28. Sönmez V. Association of Cognitive, Affective,
Psychomotor and Intuitive Domains in
Education, Sönmez Model. Universal Journal
of Educational Research. 2017;5(3): 347–356.
https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.050307
29. Society C. Physical activity readiness questionnaire.
ACSM’s Guidel Exerc Test Prescr.; 2002.
30. Markowitz JS. Body Mass Index (BMI). In: Mortality
and Its Risk Factors Among Professional Athletes. Cham:
Springer International Publishing; 2018. P. 39–49.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77203-5_5
31. Yapıcı A, Akyüz Ö, Doruk M. The Relationship
Between Biomotoric Properties and Hewitt Test
Performance in 13-15 Years Old Tennis Players. Journal
22
of Physical Culture
and Sports
PEDAGOGY
of Education and Training Studies. 2018;6(12a): 13.
https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v7i1.3685
32. Hashim A, Arifn A, Hashim AT, Yusof
AB. Reliability and Validity of the 90o Push-
Ups Test Protocol. International Journal of
Scientic Research and Management. 2018;6(06).
https://doi.org/10.18535/ijsrm/v6i6.pe01
33. Haqiyah A, Mulyana M, Widiastuti W, Riyadi DN.
The Effect of Intelligence, Leg Muscle Strength, and
Balance Towards The Learning Outcomes of Pencak
Silat with Empty-Handed Single Artistic. JETL (Journal
of Education, Teaching and Learning). 2017;2(2): 211.
https://doi.org/10.26737/jetl.v2i2.288
34. Shvetsova MN, Dolinskaya LA, Lukinova
AV, Sotnikova MS, Solntseva AS. Design of
The Learning Environment Considering the
Gender Characteristics of Students. Ryabov VV
(ed.) SHS Web of Conferences. 2020;79: 03013.
https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20207903013
35. Egesoy H, Oksuzoglu AY, Ilhan A. The effect of
static and dynamic core training on some motoric
charactristic and tennis service velocity of tennis
athletes. Int J Life Sci Pharma Res. 2021;1:45–50.
36. Kwon S, Pster R, Hager RL, Hunter I, Seeley
MK. Inuence of tennis racquet kinematics on
ball topspin angular velocity and accuracy during
the forehand groundstroke. J Sport Sci Med.
2017;16(4):56–62.
37. Winter DA. Biomechanics and Motor Control
of Human Movement. 1st ed. Wiley; 2009.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470549148
38. Cioncoloni D, Rosignoli D, Feurra M, Rossi S,
Bonifazi M, Rossi A, et al. Role of brain hemispheric
dominance in anticipatory postural control strategies.
Experimental Brain Research. 2016;234(7): 1997–2005.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-016-4603-y
39. Cheron G, Petit G, Cheron J, Leroy A,
Cebolla A, Cevallos C, et al. Brain Oscillations
in Sport: Toward EEG Biomarkers of
Performance. Frontiers in Psychology. 2016;7.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00246
40. Mutha PK, Haaland KY, Sainburg RL. The Effects of
Brain Lateralization on Motor Control and Adaptation.
Journal of Motor Behavior. 2012;44(6): 455–469.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00222895.2012.747482
41. Rogasch NC, Dartnall TJ, Cirillo J, Nordstrom
MA, Semmler JG. Corticomotor plasticity
and learning of a ballistic thumb training
task are diminished in older adults. Journal of
Applied Physiology. 2009;107(6): 1874–1883.
https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00443.2009
42. Dovletmizovich Chermit K, Gennadievich
Zabolotniy A, Vladimirovna Shakhanova A,
Khangireevich Agirov A, Vasilyevna Chelyshkova
A. Symmetry and Asymmetry of Kinematic
Structure of Natural Human Locomotion. Indian
Journal of Science and Technology. 2016;9(39).
https://doi.org/10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i39/103427
43. Kolínský R, Zháněl J. Lateral differences in
maximal grip strength in Czech male tennis
players aged 11 – 12 in the context of injury
prevention. Studia Sportiva. 2019;13(1): 55–62.
https://doi.org/10.5817/StS2019-1-6
44. Salonikidis K, Zafeiridis A. The Effects of
Plyometric, Tennis-Drills, and Combined Training
on Reaction, Lateral and Linear Speed, Power, and
Strength in Novice Tennis Players. Journal of Strength
and Conditioning Research. 2008;22(1): 182–191.
https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e31815f57ad
45. Moura D, Oliveira da Silva T, Garcia V, Santos J.
Effects of a functional training program in physical
qualities of futsal athletes. Rev Bras Futsal E Futeb.
2018;124–9.
46. Hayashi CT. Foundations of Sport and Exercise
Psychology. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2016;2:34–41.
47. Kusuma MNH. Effect of cold water and contrast
immersion on physiological and psychological
responses of elite athletes after high-intensity
exercises. J Phys Educ Sport. 2021;21(6):3278–87.
48. Kichenok N. Methods of physical training of tennis
players for competitions. Scientic Journal of National
Pedagogical Dragomanov University. Series 15.
Scientic and pedagogical problems of physical culture
(physical culture and sports). 2021;6(137): 71–75.
https://doi.org/10.31392/NPU-nc.
series15.2021.6(137).16
49. Yeh IL, Elangovan N, Feczer R, Khosravani
S, Mahnan A, Konczak J. Vibration-Damping
technology in tennis racquets: Effects on vibration
transfer to the arm, muscle fatigue and tennis
performance. Sport Med Heal Sci. 2019;1(1):49–58.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smhs.2019.09.001
50. Cao Z, Xiao Y, Lu M, Ren X, Zhang P. of Eye-
closed and Weighted Multi-ball Training on the
Improvement of the Stroke Effect of Adolescent
Table Tennis Players. Journal of Sports Science and
Medicine. 2020;19:34–42.
51. Fekih S, Zguira MS, Koubaa A, Masmoudi L,
Bragazzi NL, Jarraya M. Effects of Motor Mental
Imagery Training on Tennis Service Performance
during the Ramadan Fasting: A Randomized,
Controlled Trial. Nutrients. 2020;12(4): 1035.
https://doi.org/10.3390/nu12041035
52. Martin C, Sorel A, Touzard P, Bideau B, Gaborit
R, DeGroot H, et al. Inuence of the forehand
stance on knee biomechanics: Implications
for potential injury risks in tennis players.
Journal of Sports Sciences. 2021;39(9): 992–1000.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2020.1853335
53. Nanang M, Fuad N, Didik R, Topo S, Panuwun
J. Effect of Alkaline Fluids to Blood pH and
Lactic Acid Changes on Sub Maximal Physical
Exercise. IOP Conference Series: Earth and
Environmental Science. 2018;197: 012049.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/197/1/012049
54. Krakauer JW, Hadjiosif AM, Xu J, Wong AL,
Haith AM. Motor Learning. In: Terjung R (ed.)
Comprehensive Physiology. 1st ed. Wiley; 2019. P.
613–663. https://doi.org/10.1002/cphy.c170043
23
2023
0101
Information about the authors:
Djoko Nugroho; (Corresponding Author); https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0350-7873; komarudinuny2022@
gmail.com; Faculty of Sports, University of Sebelas Maret; Solo, Jawa Tengah, Indonesia.
Mohammad F. Hidayatullah; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6870-6195; furqonhidayatulloh22@gmail.com;
Faculty of Sports, University of Sebelas Maret; Solo, Jawa Tengah, Indonesia.
Muchsin Doewes; https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4799-2353; muchsindws@gmail.com; Faculty of Sports,
University of Sebelas Maret; Solo, Jawa Tengah, Indonesia.
Sapta K. Purnama; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4598-2090; Saptakuntapurnama60@gmail.com; Faculty of
Sports, University of Sebelas Maret; Solo, Jawa Tengah, Indonesia.
Cite this article as:
Nugroho D, Hidayatullah MF, Doewes M, Purnama SK. The effects of massed and distributed drills, muscle
strength, and intelligence quotients towards tennis groundstroke skills of sport students. Pedagogy of Physical
Culture and Sports, 2023;27(1):14–23.
https://doi.org/10.15561/26649837.2023.0102
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en).
Received: 26.09.2022
Accepted: 29.11.2022; Published: 28.02.2023
