Wednesday, 20 December 2017

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

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to investigate the performance indicator between winning and losing in silat olahraga male category class E, sea games 2015. The data were collected from 4 matches which were first match quarterfinal Thailand vs Singapore, second match quarterfinal Malaysia vs Indonesia, third match semifinal Singapore vs Malaysia, and last match final Malaysia vs Vietnam. A total of 14 performance indicators were selected as the variables in this study. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze the data. The result showed Malaysia had won in this match category that I choose and the motions that Malaysia used in these each match was more higher than the opponent team. Besides that, the result showed that Malaysia’s athlete that chosen in the tournament were preferred to play more kick ‘tendang’ than the other actions while less number of the actions that used in this match is dodge.

INTRODUCTION
Silat has a mixed history as it was formed from headhunting skills by natives from Indian, Chinese and Japanese martial arts. Silat bounds the martial arts of the Malaysian Archipelago, Indonesia and surrounding Southeast Asian areas. There are hundreds of different styles and schools but they tend to focus either on strikes, joint manipulation, throws, weaponry, or some combination. There are three types of Silat named as championship, showmanship and freestyle. Pencak silat was included in the 14th SEA Games 1987 held in Jakarta, Indonesia when IPSI presented it. The rules of silat olahraga have been arranged in the year 1973. The two opposing sides are corners at the points of the square arena which are labelled in blue and red at diagonal ends, while the other two corners, marked yellow, are neutral areas. Tunggal (single), Ganda (double), and Regu (team) categories that use the 10 by 10 meter performance arena (Anuar, 1993)
Other than that, this analysis also investigate the difference between the winners and losers Malaysia team in silat olahraga matches in 28th SEA Games Singapore 2015. There are total of 14 indicators used to analyze the match which are punch, kick, topple, sweep, block, block and kick, block and punch, block and sweep, fake kick, punch, fake punch, self-release, catch, dodge, and others. But there only 4 indicator been chosen to analyze the winning and losing factor. The notational data will take and recorded. Then the data will put in SPSS to find the mean, standard deviation and significant 2 tailed. The observation are involve in this study is to frequency find the the specific technique that need to analyze (Aziz, Tan, & Teh, 2002). The notational data will be notated based on hit on target, hit elsewhere and missing opponents.
Silat olahraga brings to light very different subjectivities, inter-subjectivities, and ways of objectifying the body in regional- and national-level practice (Wilson, 2009). In Malay dictionary, silat can be defined as a combination if art and intelligence to perform attack and defense with a beautiful form. The other source that defines silat is from the word of kilat (lightning) (Shamsuddin, 2005).

MATERIAL AND METHOD

            A publicy available video from the 28th SEA Games 2015 competition in Singapore were taken from Singapore Sports Council (Youtube) and used for this analysis. The videos taken were of male matches from class E which person with weight 65kg to 70kg. There were 14 types of indicators used to analyze the matches. The frequency, mean and standard deviation of the performance were calculated subsequently. The methods used for the analysis were video analysis and hand notational.

MOTION CATEGORIES

Punch
o   The punch ‘tumbuk’ attack is done by a hand with 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 exponent body’s (Anuar, 1992).

Kick
o   The kick ‘tendang’ or ‘terajang’ is an ataacking 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’(Anuar, 1992).

Block
o   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 attck (Anuar, 1992).

Catch
o   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 exit to protect the silat exponent’s (Anuar, 1992).

Topple:
o   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 bad or from the side, shove, hit, kick, strike or punch to make the opponent lose his balance. Every falls is considered valid as long as the sila exponent topples his opponent down without wresting or he is able to overpower the opponent whom he has brought down (Anuar, 1992).

Sweep
o   Swiping ‘sapuan’ involves attacking an opponent’s leg which is on the ground to unstable him and brings 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 leg, while back sweep ‘sapuan belakang’ is carried out by swinging the leg backward to hit the back leg (Anuar, 1992).
  
Evade/Dodge
o   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. (Anuar, 1992).

Self-Release
o   Self-release ‘lepas tangkapan’ technique is a technique to unlock any clinch or catch from an opponent (Anuar, 1993).

Block and Punch
o   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 (Shapie, Oliver, O’Donoghue, & Tong, 2013).

Block and Kick
o   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 (Shapie et al., 2013).

Block and Sweep
o   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 (Shapie et al., 2013).

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

Fake Kick:
o   An action which a silat exponent intends to confuse the opponent using a fake kick to break his opponent defensive posture (Shapie et al., 2013).
Others
o   Is the basic commands. The referee will say ‘Mulai’ meaning ‘Begin’ to start the game and ‘Berhenti’ also known as ‘Stop’ to stop the fight. (Shapie et al., 2013).

  
RELIABILITY OF OBSERVATION
The author analyzed all the activities and simultaneously classified each change of motion in a single match. Two observations were done separated by 48 hours. It requires experienced silat practitioners to analyze the data as the movement of both exponents is fast, needing close inspection. The classification of movement was subjective with work being classified according to the instruction given by the referee.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

            The observation generated data will be frequency counted. Mean and Standard Deviation (SD) for all the marker has been computed to locate the measurable factors that separated between winning and losing group. All the statistical data was conducted using (SPSS), Statistical Package Social Science version 21.


RESULTS

            The result has been showed in the table below. For the first table, it concludes all the result from the 14 motion categories that combine the winners and losers group. For the second table, it shows the specific skills that exponents used such as blocking, kicking, punching and also topple. There are four outcomes that will be used for the observation of the video matches which are hit target, miss opponent and hit elsewhere.

Table 1. Frequency of actions for Quarterfinal THA (Loser) vs SIN (Winner)
Action
Outcome
Hit Elsewhere
Hit Target
Miss Opponent
Not Available*
Total
L
W
T
L
W
T
L
W
T
Block

2
2
2
9
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
19
12
31
8
4
12
13
4
17

60
Fake Kick

5
5
4
1
5
6

6

16
Punch
10
19
29
6
19
25
9
9
18

72
Fake Punch











Self-Release



7
2
9
4
2
6

15
Topple
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
1
3

7
Sweep
1
8
9

3
3
6
2
8

20
Catch
1
4
5
1
5
6
2
9
11

22
Dodge

1
1
5
16
21
2
2
4

26
Others









34
34
Total


87


96


77
34
294

*Note: W – Winner. L – Blue. T – Total.

 Table 2. Frequency profile of Quarterfinal THA (Loser) vs SIN (Winner)
Exponent
Kick
Punch
Topple
Sweep
Total
Thailand
(Loser)
7
40
25
4
76
Singapore (Winner)
13
20
47
3
80






Table 3. Frequency of actions for 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



5
1
6
2
2
4

10
Block and Kick






1

1

1
Block and Punch






1

1

1
Block and sweep











Kick
1
9
10
4
11
15
14
3
17

42
Fake Kick



3
4
7

1
1

8
Punch



2
2
4
1

1

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

24
Self-Release



1
3
4




4
Topple




2
2
5
1
6

8
Sweep




1
1
1
2
3

4
Catch



9
4
13

1
1

14
Dodge




6
6




6
Others









14
14
Total


12


70


45
14
141

*Note: W – Winner. L – Loser. T – Total.

Table 4. Frequency profile of Quarterfinal MAS (Winner) vs INA (Loser)
Exponent
Kick
Punch
Topple
Sweep
Total
Malaysia (Winner)
19
3
7
1
30
Indonesia (Loser)
23
2
3
3
31




Table 5. Frequency of actions for Semifinal SIN (Loser) vs MAS (Winner)
Action
Outcome
Hit Elsewhere
Hit Target
Miss Opponent
Not Available*
Total
L
W
T
L
W
T
L
W
T
Block
5
5
10







10
Block and Kick











Block and Punch











Block and sweep











Kick
6
6
12
13
8
21
17
5
22

55
Fake Kick
4
1
5



1

1

6
Punch
8
2
10
3

3
2
1
3

16
Fake Punch
2
2
4







4
Self-Release











Topple
1
1
2







2
Sweep
4
3
7
3
3
6
3

3

16
Catch
4
3
7



1
1
2

9
Dodge
2
2
4







4
Others









18
18
Total


61


30


31
18
140

*Note: L – Loser. W – Winner. T – Total.

Table 6. Frequency profile of Quarterfinal MAS (Winner) vs SIN (Loser)
Exponent
Kick
Punch
Topple
Sweep
Total
Malaysia (Winner)
36
13
1
7
57
Singapore (Loser)
19
3
1
6
29





Table 7. Frequency of actions for Final MAS (Winner) vs VIE (Loser)
Action
Outcome
Hit Elsewhere
Hit Target
Miss Opponent
Not Available*
Total
L
W
T
L
W
T
L
W
T
Block
4

4
2
6
8
5
3
8

20
Block and Kick
1
1
2
1
2
3

1
1

6
Block and Punch

1
1







1
Block and sweep











Kick
11
5
16
5
3
8
7
1
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
1
2
3
10

10

15
Topple

1
1

10
10
4

4

15
Sweep




1
1
1
3
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

*Note: L – Loser. W – Winner. T – Total.

Table 8. Frequency profile Final MAS (Winner) vs VIE (Loser) :
Exponent
Kick
Punch
Topple
Sweep
Total
Vietnam
(Loser)
23
8
0
1
32
Malaysia (Winner)
9
2
11
4
26


DISCUSSION

Silat olahraga is a popular Asian martial art. This game is exceptionally intriguing in light of the fact that it includes an ability that was a mix of hand to hand fighting aptitudes, battling, and self-protection. The examination past is states that silat competitors tought to be extraordinary in both kicking and punching yet punching recurrence is lower than a kicking. However, silat competitors should create punching ability speedier and precise in light of the fact that punching is the high rate effective of hitting target contrast with kicking expertise in rivalry ( Shapie et al., 2013). From the first match result which is Singapore winning this match, Singapore is more used kicking skill than Thailand. That is why Singapore have  more point. Furthermore, Singapore do less mistake that can deduct her point than Thailand. Besides kicking, Singapore also do more block and kicking hit target to his opponent. Thailand also do more skill such as kicking and punching hit target but at the same time, Thailand do lot of mistake that deduct her point and finally got less point because of his mistakes. This is one of the different between winning and losing in silat olahraga. Competitor must wise to make strategy plan and technique during match (Anuar, 1992).
For the second match result which is Indonesia vs Malaysia category class E which Malaysia is winning this match, what can researcher observed from the video is Malaysia do more attacking than Indonesia. As researcher can see from the result, Indonesia makes a lot of miss opponent kick and punch to his opponent. Researcher can see the sample paired test at the table above show, there are totally different between winning and losing. This observation for the winner while for the loser is Indonesia make less attacking during match. Indonesia gives more opportunity to Malaysia to make more attacking during match. Silat competitors must improve their fitness level to improve the performance (Fong & Ng, 2011).
For the third match is Malaysia vs Singapore category  Class E. Malaysia is winning this game. This is because player from Malaysia corner use more kicking and sweep than the opponent from Singapore. Singapore player have low level of fitness, have low reaction time, speed and not aggressive like player from Malaysia .
  
CONCLUSION
            Since the ultimate indicator for team to success is by kicking and topple the other indicators seem to be superior creating chance to win the game. Although the result may vary due to total number of score given, this can be improved to the specific training especially in kicking and punch to improve the chance of scoring. Every team is prefer to more attacking than defending, this finding provide important information for coaches developing their defences mechanism and also their offense strategies.
There is also a range of frequency in attacking and defensive activities used by both of the exponents. The winning player used more kicks and topples than the loser. It may reflect greater skill or fitness or both but it is still doubtful that these are the only factors that influence the match.

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 generalised to all silat competition. However, the purpose of this study was to analyse the winners motion skill during a 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. Furthermore, the other sports where the frequency and duration of high intensity activity periods fail to provide sufficient information to fully characterise the de minds of the sport.





REFERENCES

Anuar, A. (1993). Silat olahraga (2nd edn.). The art, technique and regulations: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, Kuala Lumpur.

Aziz, A. R., Tan, B., & Teh, K. C. (2002). Physiological responses during matches and profile of elite pencak silat exponents. Journal of sports science & medicine, 1(4), 147.

Shapie, M., Nizam, M., 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).

Shapie, M. N. M. (2011). Influence of age and maturation on fitness development, trainability and competitive performance in youth silat. Cardiff Metropolitan University.  

Wilson, I. D. (2003). The politics of inner power: The practice of pencak silat in west java. Murdoch University.  
Vincent, P., Nizan, M. S. M., & Julinamary, P. (2015). Motives of taking part in Malay Silat, Karate-Do and Taekwondo. Ido Movement for Culture. Journal of Martial Arts Anthropology15(3), 22-26.
D. Farrer. (2009). Seni silat haqq melayu: A sufi martial art Shadows of the prophet (pp. 3-42): Springer.
A. A. Wahab. (1989). Silat olahraga: The art, techniques and regulations: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.
Abidin, N. Z., & Adam, M. B. (2013). Prediction of vertical jump height from anthropometric factors in male and female martial arts athletes. The Malaysian journal of medical sciences: MJMS, 20(1), 39.
Harris RA. A hand notation system designed to record strike type and strike frequencies in Muay Thai (Thai boxing). University of Wales Institute, Cardiff. Unpublished Thesis: 2005.






internet
Singapore (2015). Pencak Silat Tanding Men's Class E Final VIE vs MAS 28th SEA Games Singapore 2015, Retrieved November 16, 2017, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGK1CSVk0qs&list=PLqAmVfhsW7xNxMAyka2XKKbmUHvAPLqv2&index=7
Singapore (2015). Pencak Silat Tanding Men’s Class E Semi-Final on Day 8 of 28th SEA Games Singapore 2015, Retrieved November 16, 2017, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L62CI3MJ-8A
Singapore (2015). Pencak Silat Tanding Men’s Class E-F Quarter Finals (Day 7) | 28th SEA Games Singapore 2015, Retrieved November 16, 2017, from  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZVRSn_Vq68


APPENDICES

Mean and Standard Deviation for Quarterfinal THA (Loser) vs SIN (Winner):

Statistics

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


Loser

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



Winer

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






Mean and Standard Deviation for Quarterfinal MAS (Winner) vs INA (Loser):

Statistics

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


Winner

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



Loser

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




Mean and Standard Deviation for Semifinal SIN (Loser) vs MAS (Winner)
 :

Statistics

Loser
Winner
N
Valid
29
60
Missing
31
0
Mean
2.34
2.13
Std. Error of Mean
.174
.122
Std. Deviation
.936
.947


Loser

Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Punch
3
5.0
10.3
10.3
Kick
19
31.7
65.5
75.9
Topple
1
1.7
3.4
79.3
Sweep
6
10.0
20.7
100.0
Total
29
48.3
100.0

Missing
System
31
51.7


Total
60
100.0




Winner

Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Punch
13
21.7
21.7
21.7
Kick
36
60.0
60.0
81.7
Topple
1
1.7
1.7
83.3
Sweep
10
16.7
16.7
100.0
Total
60
100.0
100.0






Mean and Standard Deviation for Final MAS (Winner) vs VIE (Loser)

Statistics

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


Winner

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




Loser

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





No comments:

Post a Comment