£1 oy~·-~*WW+m~~Vfi»~*~W~~·+ID ~~~~-~+mfi»·Y~·-~~¥tiW·*·fi~M·Y~~·~~~*•W+ m~M1JV+mfil~,
oa
o
·~·M'li~*fr~Hi'J+m~M1JVfr.~l~~!l':r~'o/}~~ '+m~M1J~ ~•~+mfi»·•~•·~~~*•~M·V~~•~~~*•+m~~•+,ti» , --=:o
~~§t *
Mi
~* frM
~ ¥f~fs£1Htf' ·
~~§t
:I'*
M'i
~-t
til~V
~ ~ 1£1~ff'
1'l ~¥
-t~ff'
•1£1~ff' ·
~~§H~?"ttil~V?Jr*r;l¥r~1£1~tf'+m1rf±~¥l!-~~,-::o
~Ut*Mli~*f'Mr;l ~*·V~¥tiW•*•·~~:rr•w~-tti»V~~*··~~~-tfi»V~*~~ ~*•*m*'**~¥~~~,-:•w~~ti»*w~~••ow~#~M~~*l 1'l~~~~~WI¥,#~~~W~#I~W·*W~•~+mw~n~W~W~~~ T~··00~~~~·~~9E##·1~~~~Y6+m±~~·~~+~*f~~* ss~~~*o~V~~~•~~~*•w,*••~+~~~•+m•»~~~·*~ ~~~-t•»•~•~~~*•w,*•*m*'**~¥~~~u~~~§~~**
¥
tf:rw
<r
~ ~n~ '*~*
¥
*
11-J;f
'7f
~ ~:,~~-'
~:. ~ '*~ S3~ 3d n>iJN . fit
~.Ji
~z-£ I ' ( L0'900Z) tl'!f £iii 1f.
6£iii
fr:l-'if(J1-~¥W~AH1l*f'l J. NCKU PE RES ' 39
%'
3 ,!!Jl ( 2006.07) ' 13-25!
The Study of Serves & Receive active/passive tactic on Elite man's
Table Tennis Game of Winning Rate in Taiwan
King-hai Chen* ' Shu-ling Hou** ' Chin-neng Chen***
·Chang Jung Christian University*,**, National Cheng Kung University***
·Abstract
The purpose of this study is to analyze the relation between serves, receives active/passive tactic and winning rate of the best male table tennis players in Taiwan, and to compare with the difference between winners and losers' each tactic. We do research on 9 top ranking male players in the tournament of table tennis in Taiwan in 2004 participating in this study and data collected from 36 table tennis competitions. We observe by video cameras which photo game results of contestants. All data is analyzed by descriptive statistics. Pearson product-moment correlation and t test. The results as follows: 1. Serves active/passive tactic of the best male table tennis players in Taiwan are relative to winning rate. Serves active tactic are notably relative to winning rate. There are not obvious relative between serces scoring rate and serves passive tactic. 2. Receives active/passive tactic of the best male table tennis players in Taiwan are relative to winning rate. Receives active tactic are notably relative to winning rate. There are not obvious relative between receives scoring rate and receives passive tactic.3. The performances of serves active/passive tactic between winners and losers. There are significant differences in serves active tactic. Winners are notably better than losers. And others have no significant level betweem winners ane losers. 4.The performances of receives active/passive tactic between winners and losers. There are significant differences in receives active tactic. Winners are notably better than losers. And others have no significant level betweem winners ane losers.
Key words table tennis, serve, receive, active/passive tactic
