Wednesday, December 20, 2017

ACTIVITY PROFILE BETWEEN WINNERS AND LOSERS IN MALE SILAT OLAHRAGA CLASS E SEA GAMES 2015



ACTIVITY PROFILE BETWEEN WINNERS AND LOSERS IN MALE SILAT OLAHRAGA CLASS E SEA GAMES 2015

Abstract
            The purpose of this study is to describe and investigate the activity profile between winners and losers in male silat olahraga SEA Games 2015. The category of the silat olahraga that has been notated was from men’s class E. In that class category, four matches have been selected, which were quarterfinal pool B (Thailand vs. Singapore), quarterfinal pool B (Malaysia vs. Indonesia), semifinal pool B (Singapore vs. Malaysia), and final match Malaysia vs. Vietnam. There were a lot of skills and techniques that were used during the silat olahraga SEA Games 2015. As example, the common techniques or motion categories that been used in this competition were punch, kick, sweep, topple, block, catch, dodge and many more. All these motion categories have been chose as it were used in order to analyze the performance of the winners and losers in men’s Class E silat olahraga. The data was collected and analyzed by using IBM Statistic SPSS 20.The notational analysis was used to record all the selected outcomes to compliment this study such as hit target, hit elsewhere and miss opponent indicators.

Introduction
            ‘Silat’ is a term used to describe a form of martial art practiced throughout the Malay Archipelago. Silat is known as one of the martial arts that originated from Indonesia. It is called as a tradition practiced in southern Thailand, Singapore, Vietnam, Brunei, Philippines and Malaysia. Silat is one of the sports that included in the Southeast Asian Games and other region-wide competitions. Silat is a fighting and survival art combination. Silat is a form of several factors such as education from a tradition, self-defense, spiritual and ritual components and now it has established as a sport around the world. Nowadays, Silat also has evolved on the African continent, Western countries and other big countries. In the other word, Silat has been famous entire of the world. It is widely implemented in the form of art and sport competitions such as Southeast Asian Games and other region-wide competition (Shapie & Elias, 2016).
            According to Apsif (2013), Persekutuan Pencak Silat Antarabangsa (PERSILAT) is the only international organization of Pencak Silat in the world. It was established in Jakarta on March 1980. While in Malaysia, PESAKA is the National Silat Federation and was founded by Silat Seni Gayong Malaysia, Silat Cekak Malaysia, Silat Lincah Malaysia and Seni Gayung Fatani Malaysia. Other organisations of Silat are Persekutuan Silat Brunei Darussalam (PERSIB) and Persekutuan Silat Singapura (PERSISI). On 23rd to 24th September 1979, during the 14th SEA Games, Indonesian Pencak Silat Federation (IPSI) has presented Silat Olahraga. The first competition of Silat Olahraga has been held in Singapore at 1980. In order to develop the rules of Silat Olahraga event, more pencak Silat procedures are based on the karate, kempo and jujitsu moves for perfection. 
            In 1982, Pencak Silat has presented two new categories which are Silat Seni and Silat Olahraga. Afterward, the term of the categories has changed into Tunggal, Ganda, Regu and Tanding (Olahraga Pencak Silat/Silat Olahraga).  Southeast Asean Games (SEA Games) is a sport event among 11 countries of Southeast Asia included Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Timor-Leste and Vietnam. This event will be held every two year. There are three rounds in total of fighting. Two minutes for every round, with 1 minute rest between each round. For the basic commands, the ‘wasit’ which is referee will state the command 'Sedia', meaning 'ready'. Then, he will shout 'Mulai', meaning 'begin'. Immediately the 'gong' will be struck. When the wasit wants to stop the fight, he will shout 'Berhenti', meaning 'stop' ("The silat olahraga ", 2013).

Material and Methods

Match Analysis
            The video has been used to analyze the data collected in four matches from Men’s Class E Quarter Final, Men’s Class E Semi Finals and Men’s Class E Final SEA Games 2015. The video consumed from the YouTube Channel. Both winner and loser participants in this Men’s Class E matches will be classified and notated. The outcomes data used were hit target, hit elsewhere and miss opponent.
Motion Categories
            Silat exponent’s motions were coded into 14 different types of categories and were defined as follows:

1.    Punch
a.    The punch ‘tumbuk’ attack is done by a hand with a closed fist hitting the target. In silat punching is often used to fight the opponent. It can be a straight punch ‘tumbuk lurus’ or uppercut ‘sauk’ to the exponent body’s (Mohamed Shapie, Oliver, O'donoghue, & Tong, 2013).

2.    Kick
a.    The kick ‘tendang / terajang’ is an attacking movement which is performed with one leg or two legs simultaneously. A kick can be aimed at any target. It can be front kick ‘tendang depan’, side-kick ‘depak’ or semi-circular side kick ‘tendang lengkar’ (Mohamed Shapie et al., 2013).

3.    Block
a.    The blocking movements begin with the posture position ‘sikap pasang’: the exponent stands straight with his hands around his body or close to his chest. Blocking or parrying ‘tangkisan’ can be done using arms, elbows and legs with the purpose to block off or striking back at any attack (Mohamed Shapie et al., 2013).

4.    Catch
a.    The catch ‘tangkapan’ is done by using the hand to obstruct the opponent from carrying out an attack. The silat exponent is able to prevent himself from being attacked by pointing the attack which he has caught to another direction. A catch which twists or drags the opponent is forbidden. Also, a catch which could break the part which is being held such as the leg and waist is also forbidden. These regulations exist to protect the silat exponent’s (Mohamed Shapie et al., 2013).

5.    Topple
a.    There are various ways of toppling down one’s opponent. For example, a silat exponent ‘pesilat’ can either push, shove the opponent’s back leg from the bag or from the side, shove, hit, kick, strike or punch to make the opponent lose his balance. Every fall is considered valid as long as the silat exponent topples his opponent down without wrestling or he is able to overpower the opponent whom he has brought down (Mohamed Shapie et al., 2013).

6.    Sweep
a.    Swiping ‘sapuan’ involves attacking an opponent’s leg which is on the ground to unstabilise him and bring down to the ground. A silat exponent can perform this attacking movement either with his right or left leg, Hence, front sweep ‘sapuan depan’ is done by swinging the leg to the front to push an opponent’s front leg, while back sweep ‘sapuan belakang’ is carried out by swinging the leg backward to hit the back leg (Mohamed Shapie et al., 2013).

7.    Evade/Dodge
a.    The evade ‘elakan’ technique is carried out by silat exponent when he tries to evade an attack. This technique does not require the silat exponent to touch the opponent in fending off the attack. They are many ways of carrying out his defensive movement such as dodging ‘gelek’, retreat ‘mundur’, evasion to the side ‘elak sisi’, bending ‘elak serung’, jumping ‘lonjak’, ducking ‘susup’ and etc (Mohamed Shapie et al., 2013).

8.    Self-Release
a.    Self-release ‘lepas tangkapan’ technique is a technique to unlock any clinch or catch from an opponent (Mohamed Shapie et al., 2013).

9.    Block and Punch
a.    The blocking technique is used to block any hand or leg attack from the opponent and followed by counter attack using the hand to punch the opponent (Mohamed Shapie et al., 2013).

10.  Block and Kick
a.    The blocking technique is used to block any hand or leg attack from the opponent and followed by counter attack using the leg to kick the opponent (Mohamed Shapie et al., 2013).

11.  Block and Sweep
a.    The blocking technique is used to block any hand or leg attack from the opponent and followed by counter attack using sweeping technique to the opponent (Mohamed Shapie et al., 2013).

12.  Fake Punch
a.    An action which a silat exponent intends to confuse the opponent using a fake punch to break his opponent’s defensive posture (Mohamed Shapie et al., 2013).

13.  Fake Kick
a.    An action which a silat exponent intends to confuse the opponent using a fake kick to break his opponent defensive posture (Mohamed Shapie et al., 2013).

14.  Others
a.    Both silat exponents are either in posture position ‘sikap pasang’ or coming close to each other using silat step pattern ‘pola langkah’. All the activities are considered high intensity except for others which at that time both silat exponents are in low intensity periods (Mohamed Shapie et al., 2013).  

Statistical Analysis
            All the notated data were transferred into SPSS for more detailed analysis. Statistical analysis was conducted using IBM Statistic Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS) version 20.  A descriptive analysis was used to determine the difference of performance between winners and losers in silat matches.
 
Result
Quarterfinal THA (Loser) vs SIN (Winner)

Action
Outcome
Hit Elsewhere
Hit Target
Miss Opponent
Not Available*
Total
W
L
T
W
L
T
W
L
T
Block
2

2
9
2
11




13
Block and Kick

1
1
1

1




2
Block and Punch




1
1
2
2
4

5
Block and sweep
1
1
2







2
Kick
12
19
31
4
8
12
4
13
17

60
Fake Kick
5

5
1
4
5

6
6

16
Punch
19
10
29
19
6
25
9
9
18

72
Fake Punch











Self-Release



2
7
9
2
4
6

15
Topple
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
2
3

7
Sweep
8
1
9
3

3
2
6
8

20
Catch
4
1
5
5
1
6
9
2
11

22
Dodge
1

1
16
5
21
2
2
4

26
Others









34
34
Total


87


96


77
34
294
Table 1
*Note: W – Winner. L – Loser. T – Total.

 Quarterfinal MAS (Winner) vs INA (Loser)

Action
Outcome
Hit Elsewhere
Hit Target
Miss Opponent
Not Available*
Total
W
L
T
W
L
T
W
L
T
Block



1
5
6
2
2
4

10
Block and Kick







1
1

1
Block and Punch







1
1

1
Block and sweep











Kick
9
1
10
11
4
15
3
14
17

42
Fake Kick



4
3
7
1

1

8
Punch



2
2
4

1
1

5
Fake Punch
1
1
2
7
5
12
2
8
10

24
Self-Release



3
1
4




4
Topple



2

2
1
5
6

8
Sweep



1

1
2
1
3

4
Catch



4
9
13
1

1

14
Dodge



6

6




6
Others









14
14
Total


12


70


45
14
141
Table 2
*Note: W – Winner. L – Loser. T – Total.

Semifinal SIN (Loser) vs MAS (Winner)

Action
Outcome
Hit Elsewhere
Hit Target
Miss Opponent
Not Available*
Total
W
L
T
W
L
T
W
L
T
Block



6
1
7

1
1

8
Block and Kick











Block and Punch











Block and sweep











Kick
8
5
13
8

8
3
16
19

40
Fake Kick



2
1
3

`1
1

4
Punch
1
2
3
2
4
6

4
4

13
Fake Punch



2

2
1

1

3
Self-Release











Topple



3

3




3
Sweep
2

2
4
1
5

3
3

10
Catch



1
1
2
2
1
3

5
Dodge



11
1
12




12
Others









18
18
Total


18


48


32
18
98
Table 3
*Note: W – Winner. L – Loser. T – Total.

Final MAS (Winner) vs VIE (Loser)

Action
Outcome
Hit Elsewhere
Hit Target
Miss Opponent
Not Available*
Total
W
L
T
W
L
T
W
L
T
Block

4
4
6
2
8
3
5
8

20
Block and Kick
1
1
2
2
1
3
1

1

6
Block and Punch
1

1







1
Block and sweep











Kick
5
11
16
3
5
8
1
7
8

32
Fake Kick




1
1

1
1

2
Punch
2
2
4

5
5

1
1

10
Fake Punch




1
1

3
3

4
Self-Release
1
1
2
2
1
3

10
10

15
Topple
1

1
10

10

4
4

15
Sweep



1

1
3
1
4

5
Catch

4
4
11

11




15
Dodge

3
3
3

3
1

1

7
Others









15
15
Total


23


54


41
15
133
Table 4
*Note: W – Winner. L – Loser. T – Total.

Discussion
            From the four videos that has been analyzed, the results has been keyed into IBM SPSS Statistics 20 to get the descriptive statistics of frequencies. Table 1 is the frequencies of the motion categories notated onto quarterfinal game of class E, which was Thailand vs. Singapore game. Singapore won the game with the best results of hit target on punching value, which is 19 to be compared to Thailand which only committed 6 punches on the targeted area. The total frequencies of overall motion categories in the game is 294. However, based on the mean that has been calculated and has shown in Table a in appendices, Singapore scored 1.78 while Thailand has scored 1.91. This is due to the frequencies of miss opponent of the outcomes from the Thailand athlete were very high in value to be compared to Singapore athlete. To add this reason, Singapore has won the game with less amount of the mean value to be compared to Thailand due to the accuracy of the motion categories were higher. This can be referred to Table 1, it showed that the results that has been obtained from the Hit Target – dodge, Singapore has higher value than Thailand and Thailand has low accuracy in kicking. 
            To seek for the reliability in notating this video, another notation results of the same video from other researcher has been taken to get the Cronbach's Alpha value. The optimum Cronbach's Alpha value that will reach the reliability of the study is ≥ 0.8. Therefore, in this study, the results from table d and table e in appendices showed a positive value that remain optimum and reliable.
            The second video notated was quarterfinal match, Malaysia vs. Indonesia. In this match, Malaysia has won the game with the total score of 5:0 from the Jurors. In this analysis, the frequencies of the winner are likely high and more accurate than the loser. This can be seen in table 2 that showed the frequencies of all notated motion categories. The overall total that has been obtained in the analysis was 141. The mean score of the Malaysia team was higher than the loser due to the loser’s attacking contact in the match was really low. In this analysis, it shown that the winner has a lot advantages in winning than the loser. The reliability in the analysis showed in table i and table j give the positive value which the Cronbach's Alpha value for the winner was 1.0 and loser analysis was 0.98 which were very reliable.   
            The third notation analysis was the semifinal match of Singapore vs. Malaysia. Singapore was pathetically lost to Malaysia with the mean value of 1.94 against 2.39. This was shown in table f in appendices which made it rational that Malaysia was likely being outstanding in the match. The frequencies value of the winner for the hit target outcomes that are shown in table 3 are all higher than the loser’s outcome of hit target. The reliability of this study were also positive in achieving the optimum value of Cronbach's Alpha that has shown in table n and table o.
            The last notation of class E SEA Games 2015 silat olahraga match was the final match, which was Malaysia against Vietnam. Still, Malaysia has won the match and made him the winner of this class category. Therefore, the final results of the performance shown that the winner was very consistent in maintaining his best performance. This can be seen in table 4, the frequencies of the motion categories that contributed in the match. The winner was accurate to hit the target so well that he can achieve so high in value of topple and catch the opponent. As for the mean value of both winner and loser were 2.65 and 1.94 respectively. The reliability of the study has been analyzed and it shown that the winner’s reliability achieved 0.928 and the loser’s achieved 0.929 which made this study very reliable.
 
Conclusion
            In conclusion, the accuracy of motion categories to the targeted area leads to best performance of an athlete. This study has shown that the Malaysian athlete is consistently accurate in every movement he did in each game. Therefore, it has made him gained the game point and also won with best performance and better results. The losers are much likely losing the accuracy in targeting the target area of their opponent. Losers are also tend to have high frequencies in missing the target to the opponents. The best example to prove that the winners’ activity profile are better than the losers’ are the results of the Malaysian athlete in this Class E categories.  

Recommendation
            Overall, it is recommended for pesilat either winner or loser to improve their motion skill to expertise. Coaches need to emphasize the skill related fitness of and athlete to enhance their performance. There is a limitation of this case study as the findings here only represent only four silat match, so the findings cannot be generalized to all silat competition. However, the purpose of this study was to analyze the winners’ and losers’ in Class E motion skill in silat match. Furthermore, the system developed is useful in future study in silat. This was the first study to provide descriptive detailed information of a silat match, increasing the knowledge base and providing a methodology that can be used in future research and by coaches.

References
Anuar, A. W. (1992). Teknik dalam seni silat melayu [in malay] (technique in silat melayu). Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.

Anuar, A. W. (1993). Silat olahraga: The art, technique and regulations. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.

APSIF. (2013). Pencak silat around the world. Retrieved from http://apsif.com/blog-item.html

Gibson, T. H. (2015). Silat 101. Black Belt, 53(2), 53-53.

Mohamed Shapie, M. N., Oliver, J., O'Donoghue, P., & Tong, R. (2013). Activity profile during action time in national silat competition. Journal of Combat Sports & Martial Arts, 4(1), 81-85.

Parnabas, V., Shapie, M. N. M., & Parnabas, J. (2015). Motives of taking part in malay silat, karate-do and taekwondo. / motywy uprawiania malezyjskiego silatu, karate i taekwondo. Ido Movement for Culture. Journal of Martial Arts Anthropology, 15(3), 22-26.

Shapie, M. N. M., & Elias, M. S. (2016). Silat: The curriculum of seni silat malaysia. Revista de Artes Marciales Asiaticas, 11, 122-125.

Singapore, S. (Producer). (2015a). Pencak silat (day 9) | 28th sea games singapore 2015. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEyyTGRaOd8

Singapore, S. (Producer). (2015). Pencak silat tanding class e-f quarter finals (day 7) | 28th sea games singapore 2015. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZVRSn_Vq68

Singapore, S. (Producer). (2015b). Pencak silat tanding class semi-final (day 8) | 28th sea games singapore 2015. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TP91oJ2epiM



Appendices

Statistics of Winner and Loser in Quarterfinal THA vs SIN

Winner
Loser
N
Valid
83
76
Missing
0
7
Mean
1.78
1.91
Std. Error of Mean
.120
.099
Std. Deviation
1.094
.867
Table a

Winner of Quarterfinal THA vs SIN

Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Punch
47
56.6
56.6
56.6
Kick
20
24.1
24.1
80.7
Topple
3
3.6
3.6
84.3
Sweep
13
15.7
15.7
100.0
Total
83
100.0
100.0

Table b

Loser of Quarterfinal THA vs SIN

Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Punch
25
30.1
32.9
32.9
Kick
40
48.2
52.6
85.5
Topple
4
4.8
5.3
90.8
Sweep
7
8.4
9.2
100.0
Total
76
91.6
100.0

Missing
System
7
8.4


Total
83
100.0


Table c

Reliability Statistics of Winner in Quarterfinal THA vs SIN
Cronbach's Alpha
Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items
N of Items
.992
.992
2
Table d

Reliability Statistics of Loser in Quarterfinal THA vs SIN
Cronbach's Alpha
Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items
N of Items
.991
.991
2
Table e

Statistics of Winner and Loser in Quarterfinal MAS vs INA

Winner
Loser
N
Valid
31
28
Missing
0
3
Mean
2.23
2.14
Std. Error of Mean
.129
.123
Std. Deviation
.717
.651
Table f

Winner of Quarterfinal MAS vs INA

Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Punch
2
6.5
6.5
6.5
Kick
23
74.2
74.2
80.6
Topple
3
9.7
9.7
90.3
Sweep
3
9.7
9.7
100.0
Total
31
100.0
100.0

Table g

Loser of Quarterfinal MAS vs INA

Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Punch
3
9.7
10.7
10.7
Kick
19
61.3
67.9
78.6
Topple
5
16.1
17.9
96.4
Sweep
1
3.2
3.6
100.0
Total
28
90.3
100.0

Missing
System
3
9.7


Total
31
100.0


Table h

Reliability Statistics of Winner in Quarterfinal MAS vs INA
Cronbach's Alpha
Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items
N of Items
1.000
1.000
2
Table i

Reliability Statistics of Loser in Quarterfinal MAS vs INA
Cronbach's Alpha
Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items
N of Items
.980
.980
2
Table j
 
Statistics of Winner and Loser in Semifinal SIN vs MAS

Winner
Loser
N
Valid
31
35
Missing
4
0
Mean
2.39
1.94
Std. Error of Mean
.165
.147
Std. Deviation
.919
.873
Table k

Winner of Semifinal SIN vs MAS

Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Punch
3
8.6
9.7
9.7
Kick
19
54.3
61.3
71.0
Topple
3
8.6
9.7
80.6
Sweep
6
17.1
19.4
100.0
Total
31
88.6
100.0

Missing
System
4
11.4


Total
35
100.0


Table l

Loser of Semifinal SIN vs MAS

Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Punch
10
28.6
28.6
28.6
Kick
21
60.0
60.0
88.6
Sweep
4
11.4
11.4
100.0
Total
35
100.0
100.0

Table m

Reliability Statistics of Winner on Semifinal SIN vs MAS
Cronbach's Alpha
Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items
N of Items
.937
.940
2
Table n

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's Alpha
Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items
N of Items
.991
.991
2
Table o

Statistics of Winner and Loser in Final MAS vs VIE

Winner
Loser
N
Valid
26
36
Missing
10
0
Mean
2.65
1.94
Std. Error of Mean
.166
.112
Std. Deviation
.846
.674
Table p

Winner of Final MAS vs VIE

Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Punch
2
5.6
7.7
7.7
Kick
9
25.0
34.6
42.3
Topple
11
30.6
42.3
84.6
Sweep
4
11.1
15.4
100.0
Total
26
72.2
100.0

Missing
System
10
27.8


Total
36
100.0


Table q

Loser of Final MAS vs VIE

Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Punch
8
22.2
22.2
22.2
Kick
23
63.9
63.9
86.1
Topple
4
11.1
11.1
97.2
Sweep
1
2.8
2.8
100.0
Total
36
100.0
100.0

Table r

Reliability Statistics of Winner in Final MAS vs VIE
Cronbach's Alpha
Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items
N of Items
.928
.929
2
Table s

Reliability Statistics of Loser in Final MAS vs VIE
Cronbach's Alpha
Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items
N of Items
.929
.943
2
Table t

1 Comments:

At December 20, 2017 at 8:24 PM , Blogger Muhammad Tajudin Ahmad said...

good information. well done !

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home