Influence of reaction time in table tennis players

Introduction Successful performance in table tennis depend upon the skill to react to an external stimuli. The reaction time (RT) is the time spent from the moment the subject perceives the stimulus to the moment it begin the response. In table tennis players (TTP) the velocity to response to a visual stimulus (VS) is very important (Bootsma et al., 1990). The aim of this study was to compare the RT after a VS between the athletes that was positioned lowers (L500) and uppers (U500) 500 Italian rank position. Methods Twenty male subjects (22.5 ± 4.09) with at least three years of experience were selected. Before the tests the athletes performed a standardized warm up. The TTP performed five test: squat jump (SJ), countermovement jump (CMJ), reactivity in lower limbs (RLL), reactivity in upper limbs (RUL) and reactivity in fingers (RF). The RLL, RUL and RF after VS was performed for dominant and non-dominant limb. The vertical jump capacity and the RT were recorded using OptoJump Next system (Micrograte, Bolzano). To compare the data, the athletes were divided in two groups in according to the Italian ranking (lowers and uppers the 500 rank position, 8 and 12 respectively). The statistical analysis were performed using Prism (GraphPad Software, San Diego). Results It was found that in the SJ test the subjects L500 performed a high jump vs the U500 (39.82±6.01cm and 34.63±5.29cm respectively; p=0.02; ES=0.92). We have also found that the TTP had a lower RT in dominant lower limb between L500 and U500 (0.63±0.02s, 0.66±0.03s respectively; p=0.04; ES=1.2), but we have found an opposite trend in dominant upper limb between L500 and U500 (0.42±0.02s, 0.40±0.03s respectively; p=0.04; ES=1). However, we have not found a significant statistical difference in CMJ (p=0.10), in dominant RLL (p=0.56), in non-dominant RUL (p=0.52), in dominant RF (p=0.86), and in nondominant RF (p=0.26) between L500 and U500. Discussion The strength (vertical jump capacity) and the reactivity (particularly in nondominant limb) in lower limbs could influence the ability of TTP. Disagreeing with what we expected, the TTP L500 had an upper RT in dominant upper limb. The RT in upper limbs is not critical because in Donovan et al. study (2006) found that the difference between trained and non-trained athletes was the hit velocity and no the RT. The well trainer subjects performed lower RT (Welford, 1988). Based on these finding, it is important to train the TTP on lower limb RT after a VS. If the athletes is fast moving with lower limbs, they will prepare before to perform the hit. In this way the TTP could perform a good hit because they have more time to prepare it. Reference Bootsma RJ et al., 1990. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 16, 21–29. Donovan OO et al., 2006. J Sports Sci Med. 5, 5–12. Welford AT, 1988. Ann NY Acad Sci. 515, 1–17.