Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Judo is a dynamic and complex sport, and therefore talent programs may benefit from a multidimensional approach to identify clear and reliable performance characteristics in order to monitor and train athletes. However, from both a practical and theoretical point of view, understanding on this topic is limited. This systematic review therefore aimed to (1) identify which multidimensional performance characteristics can discriminate between different performance levels of judoka and (2) find the gaps in literature. To categorize the findings the Groningen Sport Talent Model (GSTM) was applied. A systematic search of MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science was performed following the PRISMA guidelines. In total 23 studies with good to excellent methodological quality were included. All performance characteristics of the GSTM (anthropometrical, physiological, technical, tactical, and psychological) were represented in the included studies. There is strong evidence to suggest that a broad set of physiological characteristics is needed to manage the demands of judo combats. Additionally, there is strong evidence that performance characteristics related to grip fighting discriminate between judoka of different performance levels and higher performance level judoka are characterized by the ability to throw their opponent and to variate in technique. The findings of this review can be used as a basis for talent development and identification in judo, and to optimize training programs. Future research should focus on increasing the understanding of psychological characteristics of judoka and the multidimensional talent trajectory by conducting longitudinal studies.

Keywords

Combat sport fitness martial arts talent development technical skills

Introduction

A dynamic and complex sport such as judo, requires the consideration of a wide variety of variables in order to understand the performance development trajectories of athletes.¹ Identifying performance characteristics for the specific sport is often one of the first steps of researchers.^2,3 Based on the identified performance characteristics, benchmarks can be created which are useful for professionals involved in a sport. Ideally, these benchmarks help them identify and develop athletes towards elite performance. Even more than in sports in which performance can be expressed in time (e.g., speed skating, athletics) or other discrete measures (e.g., distance, weight, etc.), talent identification in dynamic and complex sports, such as judo, is relatively difficult and shows the importance of a multidimensional approach.^4,5

Judo is a combat sport including high-intensity intermittent actions.⁶ Athletes require optimal physical attributes in order to achieve technical-tactical development and success in competition.⁷ Judo matches have a 4-min time limit and during a tournament, medallists typically fight five to seven matches. The aim is to score an ippon (full point) to end the match early. This can be done with a variety of tachi-waza (standing techniques) or ne-waza (ground techniques).⁸ However, if neither of the athletes score during regular time, the result is decided by a ‘Golden Score’ period without time limitation. Therefore, depending on the points scored, judo matches can last from a few seconds up to 20 min or more. A typical match lasts 3 min, with 5 to 10 s rest periods in between the 20 to 30 s lasting periods of action.^9,10 Thus, judoka must be prepared for many competition situations due to the variability in match duration and content.

Next to the dynamic and complex nature of judo as a sport in itself, also the competition format of judo comes with challenges regarding the talent identification process. Previous results in competitions give judoka no guarantee for future success.^11–13 In competitions, judoka face their opponents head-to-head in a knock-out system and scores are given by a referee supported by a jury. The outcome can therefore be influenced by the draw, referee as well as by the home advantage.^14,15 Interestingly, a loss against the later winner does not necessarily mean a judoka is worse or less talented than the later silver medallist. Therefore, coaches should not identify their talents based on solely competition performance. Taken the requirements of judo into account, professionals involved in talent programs in judo would benefit from a clear overview of performance characteristics that underly judo performance to base their talent identification and development.¹⁶ Such an overview could be used by coaches as guidance for their talent programs and training (e.g., monitor development of judoka).

Researchers have tried to capture the complex nature of judo by identifying anthropometrical and physiological characteristics of (youth) judoka. For example, reference values for coaches to monitor their judoka in training are given for hand grip strength, vertical jump ability and aerobic capacity.¹⁷ In addition, performance characteristics that seem to play a role in judo success of youth judoka (e.g., speed and maximum strength) have been identified.¹⁸ On the other hand, a recent review about the role of psychological characteristics in judo shows that research on this topic is limited.¹⁹ Therefore, the extent to which psychological characteristics play a role in judo is not entirely clear. Furthermore, studies integrating a broader view than solely anthropometrical, physiological or psychological characteristics are scarce.²⁰

From previous research, it can be concluded that a wide set of performance characteristics is needed to be successful in judo. Talent programs benefit from clear and reliable performance characteristics of judoka. If it is known what characterizes judoka of high performance level, this knowledge will help professionals involved in judo identify, select and develop their athletes in an more evidence based manner. Nevertheless, understanding on this topic is limited, both from a theoretical and practical point of view. A solution is to bring knowledge about diverse performance characteristics of judo together in a systematic review and identify which performance characteristics can discriminate between different performance levels of judoka, and find the gaps in literature. For such a review, the Groningen Sport Talent Model (GSTM), can be used to structure the findings. The GSTM is designed after Newell's constraints-led approach, and is a theoretical model on talent development to describe that sport performance and the development thereof results from the interconnection between the individual (multidimensional performance characteristics), task and environment.^21,22 It illustrates how sports performance of a talented athlete develops over time based on biological maturation and self-regulation through learning and training. The multidimensional performance characteristics of the judoka can be divided into five domains: anthropometrical, physiological, technical, tactical and psychological characteristics. It is assumed that these characteristics can largely determine the progression of a judoka. Therefore, if professionals involved in talent programs in judo can use the multidimensional performance characteristics that discriminate between judoka of different performance levels to provide the most optimal environment for their athletes to learn, they can increase the chances of realizing the potential of their judoka.^23,24

Thus, to get insight into the multidimensional performance characteristics that distinguish judoka of contrasting performance level, this systematic review aims to (1) identify which multidimensional performance characteristics can discriminate between different performance levels of judoka and (2) find the gaps in literature. It is hypothesized that elite judoka outperform lower performance level judoka on multiple performance characteristics. Moreover, it is hypothesized that most literature is focused on anthropometrical and physiological characteristics, and less research has focused on psychological, technical, or tactical characteristics of judoka.

Method

Study design

The guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses (PRISMA) statement were followed to conduct this systematic review with the focus on multidimensional performance characteristics of judoka of different performance level.²⁵

Search strategy & eligibility criteria

A systematic search of MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science was performed (search date: 12-12-2022). The search of MEDLINE and PsycINFO was performed via EBSCOhost. The search strings consisted of index terms and keywords related to: (1) judo, (2) performance characteristics (e.g., anthropometrical, physical, technical, tactical and psychological), and (3) athletic performance (See Table 1 for the implemented search strategy).

Table 1.

Overview of search strategy of this systematic review.

Judo	Judo OR Judoka OR Martial Arts
Performance characteristics	Ability OR Anthropometry OR Body Composition OR Performance OR Characteristics OR Skill OR Physiological OR Technical OR Technique OR Tactical OR Tactics OR Indicator OR Physical OR Task OR Adaptation, Psychological OR Exercise OR Exercise Test OR Muscle, Skeletal OR Muscle Strength OR Psychological Phenomena OR Psychology, Sports OR Psychomotor Performance
Athletic performance	Athletes OR Athletic performance OR Aptitude OR Talent OR Development OR Identification

In the first category, the term ‘Martial Arts’ was included to make sure to find all studies related to judo. Martial Arts is a collective term to describe self-defence sports that involve hand-to-hand combat. It includes sports as judo, jiu jitsu, karate, taekwondo, and sambo. Sports other than judo are out of the scope of this review. The third category ‘athletic performance’ was added to exclude studies using the concepts of judo (e.g., fall prevention, self-defence courses) in non-athletes.

The three search strategy terms were applied as keywords in the search engine of the databases. If possible, the categories were applied to all fields in the database search engine. The search terms were combined using the AND operator. If necessary, terms were adapted to fit the index terms of the search engine. For example, to search the PsycINFO-database, terms were adapted to the corresponding index terms of the APA Thesaurus of Psychological Index Terms. An overview of the elaborate search strategy per database can be found in Supplementary File 1.

Studies were deemed eligible for this systematic review if they met the inclusion criteria presented in Table 2. Studies were only included if they were dated after January 2010 to adjust for rule changes made by the International Judo Federation (IJF) to promote more ‘positive’ judo.²⁶ This review focuses on performance characteristics of competitive judoka of at least sub-elite level. Therefore, studies that included only lower level judoka, according to the classification guidelines of Swann, Moran, & Piggott (2015), were excluded.²⁷ Judoka were divided into semi-elites (e.g., part of talent-development program), competitive elites (e.g., regularly compete at highest level but no success yet), successful elites (e.g., compete and have success at highest level) and world-class elites (e.g., sustained success at highest level). Also, studies on Paralympic judo athletes were excluded since the rules and regulations of Paralympic judo are adapted to visually impaired competitors. These athletes most likely possess highly developed qualities like balance and touch proprioception.²⁸ Therefore, their performance characteristics potentially differ from regular judoka and a specific review is needed.

Table 2.

Eligibility criteria of this review.

Inclusion	Written in English
	2. Studies on judo
	3. Focus on one or more performance characteristics of GSTM
	4. Participants were judoka
	5. Studies between January 2010 – December 2022
Exclusion	Unclear performance level or none of the participants were competitive judoka of at least sub-elite level
	2. The study included one sample of judoka of similar performance level
	3. Unclear (measurement of) performance characteristic
	4. Focus on Paralympic athletes or not solely judoka
	5. Focus on training/intervention program or test validation
	6. Focus on weight loss, nutrition, or supplements
	7. Focus on injuries

Study selection and data extraction

The study selection and data extraction was conducted in a few phases. First, the results of database searches were exported to EndNote (version 20.2) software. The software of EndNote automatically removed duplicates of imported studies. Secondly, two authors (S.S. & F.S.) independently screened studies on title and abstract structured by the software of Rayyan, using the inclusion criteria as guideline. Third, the same two authors independently performed a full text screening based on exclusion criteria and afterwards discussed conflicting decisions to reach a consensus. If consensus was not reached, a third author (M.E.G.) was consulted to assess the study. During the full text screening phase, relevant data was extracted from the included studies to determine the final in- or exclusion of the study.

Additionally, if screened studies included citation of possible relevant studies, these were screened at the abstract level. When this screening showed the potential of inclusion, full text was retrieved and reviewed. Moreover, studies that were found through secondary search, such as in the reference list of a systematic review on a similar topic, were added to the full text assessment if they met inclusion criteria.

Quality assessment

Two authors independently assessed all included studies on overall methodological quality based on the “Guidelines for critical review form – Quantitative Studies” by Law et al. (1998).²⁹ All scores were compared, and conflicted scores were discussed among authors until consensus was reached. In case of remaining conflict, a third author assessed the study. The guidelines of Law et al. consist of 16 items that aim to objectively assess a scientific research article on various components (e.g., sample, reliability, validity, data analysis, practical implication, limitations). If the criteria was met, the outcome on an item was identified as 1. If the criteria was not met, the item was scored as 0. Due to ambiguities or items that were not applicable to the studies included in this review, a number of adjustments were made to the assessment tool (see Supplementary File 2). A total score was calculated in percentage to allow for comparison between studies. Total scores below 50% were considered low methodological quality. Total scores between 51% to 75% indicated good methodological quality. An excellent methodological quality was achieved with total scores above 75%. This methodological quality assessment method and corresponding cut-off scores were used in three systematic reviews with similar aims.^2,30,31 Studies that were considered of low methodological quality, were excluded from this systematic review. Four categories were used to interpret the level of evidence for the ability of a performance characteristic to discriminate between judoka of different performance levels, according to the categories of van der Fels et al. (2015).^32,33 If at least three studies with excellent methodological quality reported consistent results, this was interpreted as ‘strong evidence’. Alternatively, more than four studies of at least good methodological quality and no more than 25% find opposing results, also indicated ‘strong evidence’. Consistent findings reported by two out of three studies, or by at least two studies of good methodological quality were ranked as ‘weak evidence’. There was ‘insufficient evidence’ when more than 25% of studies found opposing/inconsistent results. When only one study was available on a performance characteristic, ‘no evidence’ was considered to be demonstrated.

Results

Search & study selection

The search strategy resulted in 1772 studies identified through the described databases. A total of 556 duplicates were removed before screening. Next, after an extensive title and abstract screening, another 939 studies were excluded. The remaining 227 studies underwent a full text screening, which resulted in 20 that met the eligibility criteria. Four further studies were included through citation searching which resulted in 24 studies assessed on overall methodological quality. One study was excluded based on methodological quality which brought the total of included studies on 23. The PRISMA Flow diagram in Figure 1 shows the process of study selection.

Figure 1.

PRISMA flow diagram of study selection.²⁵

Quality assessment

The results of the overall quality appraisal of studies showed a good level of methodological quality among the included studies (see Table 3). Sixteen of the included 23 studies showed excellent (> 75%) and seven studies showed good (50–75%) methodological quality. Differences among studies were mainly observed with regard to ethical issues (item 6), method of analysis (item 11), clinical importance (item 12), implications (item 15) and limitations (item 16).

Table 3.

Results of the quality appraisal using the Critical Review Form – Quantitative Studies of Law et al. (1998).²⁹.

Author* (year)	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	Score (%)	Quality
1. Agostinho et al. (2021)	1	1	1	0	1	0	1	1	n/a	1	0	1	n/a	1	1	1	79	Excellent
2. Barbado et al. (2016)	1	1	1	1	0	1	0	0	n/a	1	0	1	n/a	1	1	1	71	Good
3. Blach et al. (2021)	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	n/a	1	0	0	n/a	1	1	1	86	Excellent
4. Bonitch-Gongora et al. (2013)	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	n/a	1	1	0	n/a	1	1	0	86	Excellent
5. Courel et al. (2014)	1	1	1	0	1	0	1	1	n/a	1	0	1	n/a	1	1	1	79	Excellent
6. Drid et al. (2015)	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	n/a	1	0	1	n/a	1	1	0	86	Excellent
7. Franchini et al. (2011)	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	0	n/a	1	1	0	n/a	1	1	0	71	Good
8. Ishii et al. (2018)	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	n/a	1	1	1	n/a	1	1	1	93	Excellent
9. Kim et al. (2011)	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	n/a	1	1	0	n/a	1	1	1	86	Excellent
10. Klys et al. (2020)	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	n/a	1	1	1	n/a	1	1	0	86	Excellent
11. Kons et al. (2018)	1	1	1	0	1	0	1	1	n/a	1	1	0	n/a	1	1	0	71	Good
12. Kons et al. (2022)	1	1	1	0	1	0	1	1	n/a	1	1	1	n/a	1	1	1	86	Excellent
13. Martins et al. (2019)	1	1	1	0	1	0	0	1	n/a	1	1	1	n/a	1	0	0	64	Good
14. Miarka et al. (2016)	1	1	1	0	1	0	1	1	n/a	1	1	0	n/a	1	1	0	71	Good
15. Monteiro et al. (2014)	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	n/a	1	0	0	n/a	1	0	0	71	Good
16. Morales et al. (2013)	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	n/a	1	1	1	n/a	1	0	1	86	Excellent
17. Nikolova et al. (2018)	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	n/a	1	0	0	n/a	1	0	1	79	Excellent
18. Stefanovsky et al. (2017)	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	n/a	1	0	1	n/a	1	0	1	86	Excellent
19. Sterkowicz-Przybycien et al. (2015)	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	n/a	1	1	1	n/a	1	1	1	100	Excellent
20. Suarez-Cadenas et al. (2016)	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	n/a	1	1	1	n/a	1	1	1	100	Excellent
21. Tirp et al. (2014)	1	1	1	0	1	0	0	1	n/a	1	1	1	n/a	1	1	0	71	Good
22. Wazir et al. (2017)	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	n/a	1	1	0	n/a	1	0	1	79	Excellent
23. Zaggelidis et al. (2012)	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	n/a	1	1	0	n/a	1	1	1	93	Excellent

Note. * Only the first mentioned author of the article cited, n/a = not applicable.

Findings

The selected studies are categorized based on the multidimensional performance characteristics from the GSTM. All five categories of the GSTM were included in studies. Figure 2 gives an overview of the number of studies per performance characteristic. Thirteen studies focused on one performance characteristic. Ten studies described two performance characteristics in their study. These studies combined either anthropometrical and physiological characteristics, technical and tactical characteristics or physiological and psychological characteristics. No study measured three or more performance characteristics.

Figure 2.

Number of studies addressing performance characteristic(s). AP = Anthropometrical, PH = Physiological, TE = Technical, TA = Tactical, PS = Psychological.

All age categories (cadet (under 18 years, n = 5), junior (under 21 years, n = 3) and senior (over 21 years, n = 20)) were represented in the included studies. One study included solely female judoka and ten studies only males. The remaining studies included both sexes (n = 11) or did not specify the sex (n = 1). Performance levels that could be identified in studies ranged from semi-elite to world-class elite based on previously mentioned performance levels of Swann et al. (2015). Semi-elite judoka were included in 12 studies. Competitive, successful, and world-class elite judoka in eleven, thirteen, and eight studies, respectively.

The findings are discussed per performance characteristic of the GSTM. An overview of the included studies with focus on either anthropometrical and physiological, technical and tactical, or psychological characteristics can be found in Tables 4, 5 and 6, respectively.

Table 4.

Overview of included studies with main focus on anthropometric (AP) and physiological (PH) characteristics (n = 10).

Reference	Participants	Performance level of judoka	Aim	Relevant measurements	Main findings	Conclusion
Barbado et al. (2016)	Male judoka (n = 25) International level (n = 11; 24.5 ± 6.1 years) National level (n = 14; 24.0 ± 8.5 years)	Competitive elite Semi-elite	To assess the relationship between judo skill level and trunk muscle function	PH: Trunk stability by trunk responses to unexpected external perturbations: maximum trunk angular displacement (θmax), stiffness (K) and damping (β); and ability to control trunk posture and motion while sitting by Mean Radial Error (MRE); trunk strength & endurance by Peak Torque (PT) and Final fatigue ratio (FFR)	International judoka showed lower θmax in the anterior direction and higher PT during extension exertions than national level.	Competitive elite have higher isokinetic extension strength & better responses (lower trunk angular displacement) after sudden trunk loading in anterior direction than semi-elite.
Bonitch-Gongora et al. (2013)	Male and female judoka (n = 73) Elite (n = 47; 14.9 ± 0.7 years; medallist national championships U17) Non-elite (n = 26; 14.7 ± 0.6 years; non-medallist national championships U17)	Competitive elite Semi-elite	To determine the differences & similarities between elite & non-elite young judoka in terms of maximal isometric handgrip strength & their endurance to this strength	PH: Maximal isometric handgrip strength (MIHS) and endurance to maximal handgrip strength (E-MIHS) of the dominant hand	Female elite showed higher absolute & relative MIHS values than female non-elite judoka. Non-elite took longer to reach the MIHS than elites. Over eight repetitions (E-MIHS), the relative MIHS exerted by male and female elite is significantly higher than that for non-elite.	Competitive elite have higher hand grip strength than semi-elite.
Drid et al. (2015)	Male judoka (n = 10) U100 kg category Elite (n = 5; 25.6 ± 3.6 years) Sub-elite (n = 5; 25.8 ± 4.1 years)	World-class elite Competitive elite	To determine the anthropometric and fitness profiles of half-heavyweight judoka by success in competition	AP: Body mass, body height, skin fold thickness (biceps, triceps, subscapular, suprailiac), limb circumferences (forearms, upper arms, thighs, waist, and chest), body fat percentage PH: Handgrip & isokinetic shoulder and knee strength, dynamic strength tests, muscular endurance and power, aerobic & anaerobic profile, and specific judo performance (SJP)	Elite have larger fore- and upper arm circumferences than sub-elite. Elite recorded higher peak torque values for the external shoulder rotation and knee extensors (left leg). Elites scored better than sub-elites on dynamic strength tests, muscular endurance, aerobic & anaerobic profiles, and SJP.	World-class elite have a superior fitness profile compared with competitive elite.
Franchini et al. (2011)	Male senior judoka (n = 28) National team (n = 16) State level (n = 12)	Successful elite Semi-elite	To compare maximal isometric endurance time on judogi (judo uniform) pulling & number of repetitions during judogi pull-up in different competitive levels	PH: Judogi's isometric and dynamic strength endurance test	Elite outscored state level judoka in the number of repetitions during the dynamic endurance strength on judogi grip.	Successful elite judoka have higher Dynamic Judogi Strength Endurance than semi-elite.
Kim et al. (2011)	Male judoka (n = 64) from various weight categories National team (NT, n = 10; 24.3 ± 3.4 years) University varsity team (VT; n = 26; 20.4 ± 0.7 years) Junior varsity team (JT; n = 28; 16.0 ± 0.9 years)	World-class elite Competitive elite Semi-elite	To examine the difference in association between the body composition of judoka and their anaerobic power by performance level	AP: Body composition measurements with values of fat free mass (FFM), muscle mass (MM), total body water (TBW), and fat mass (FM) PH: Peak and anaerobic power by Wingate 30-s Anaerobic Power Test	NT judoka values were significantly greater than those of JT for: FFM, MM, and TBW. NT judoka values were significantly greater than those of VT judoka for MM. VT judoka values were significantly higher than those of JT judoka for FM. NT and VT outscored JT in peak power. NT scored significantly better on mean power compared to VT and JT.	World-class elite have higher FFM, MM, TBW, peak and mean power than semi-elite. World-class elite have higher MM and mean power than competitive elite. Competitive elite have higher FM and peak power than semi-elite.
Monteiro et al. (2012)	Judoka (n = 63) from several national teams Top-Elite (n = 30; 23.5 ± 3.2 years; medals in World Cups/Grand Slam, World Championships or Olympic Games) Elite (n = 33; 22.6 ± 2.9 years; national team, no medals won)	Successful elite Competitive elite	To analyse the levels of explosive lower body strength through the SJ and CMJ to observe differences between Top-Elite judoka and Elite judoka.	PH: Jump without counter movement (SJ) to obtain: jump height, peak velocity (Vmax), peak relative power (Pmax), peak relative strength (Fmax) & production rate relative strength (TPF); Counter Movement Jump (CMJ) to obtain: jump height, Vmax, Pmax eccentric and concentric, Fmax eccentric and concentric, TPF Elasticity Index (%) = (CMJ-SJ) * 100/SJ	In SJ, top-elite and elite significantly differ in TPF.	Successful elite have a higher rate of force development than competitive elite.
Nikolova et al. (2018)	Male and female cadet judoka (n = 74; 15–17 years) from the national team Medallists international championships (n = 11) Non-medallists international championships (n = 63)	Competitive elite Semi-elite	To examine the morphological characteristics of male and female cadet judoka considering athletic achievements.	AP: Body mass, body height, arm span and leg length, body circumferences (arm relaxed, forearm, thigh, and calf), skinfold thickness measurements (chest, triceps, biceps, axillary, abdominal, subscapular, supraspinal, and front thigh), fat mass, fat-free mass, body mass index and fat-free mass index	Male medallists are significantly taller and have a greater arm span than male non-medallists. In female judoka significant differences between medallists and non-medallists were found only in the skinfold thickness of the chest, biceps and supraspinal. Lower values in relative and absolute body fat in both male and female medal-winners compared to their less successful peers were found.	Competitive elite have lower body fatness, are taller and have a wider arm span compared to semi-elite.
Stefanovsky et al. (2017)	Male judoka (n = 47) from several countries Elite (n = 10; 20.8 ± 2.8 years; 1^st - 5^th place at European & World ranking tournaments, & 1^st - 7^th place at European, World Championship & Olympic Games) Non-elite (n = 37; 18.7 ± 2.8 years; successful on national level)	Successful elite Semi-elite	To compare morphological variables of male judo athletes of different performance status.	AP: Body mass, body height, total body fat, skinfold thickness measurements (chest, abdomen, thigh, biceps brachii, triceps brachii, subscapular, suprailiac, lower back and calf) and circumference measurements (flexed arm, forearm, wrist, and calf)	Elite judo athletes were heavier than non-elite athletes and presented higher forearm circumference and wrist circumference.	Successful elite have higher forearm and wrist circumference than semi-elite judoka.
Sterkowicz-Przybycien et al. (2015)^a (part I)	Male and female judoka (n = 23) International level (n = 11, 24.5 ± 3.7 years) National level (n = 12; 21.8 ± 1.9 years)	Successful elite Semi-elite	To investigate specific judo performance in judoka of different competitive levels	PH: Specific judo performance with Special Judo Fitness Test (SJFT)	SJFT did not differ between international and national level judoka.	Successful elite and semi-elite do not differ in specific judo fitness.
Wazir et al. (2017)	Male U14 judoka (n = 22) Elite (n = 6; 13.0 ± 0.5 years; participants or medallist of tournaments organised by European Judo Union (EJU) or International Judo Federation (IJF)) Sub-elite (n = 10; 12.5 ± 1.1 years; medallist national & international tournaments (not from EJU or IJF))	Semi-elite Non-elite	To predict the performance of young male judo athletes with linear and non-linear predictive statistical models	AP: Weight, height, sitting height, fat percentage, BMI PH: flexibility (sit and reach), leg power (counter movement jump (CMJ)), speed (maximal 30 m sprint, split time 5 m), upper body strength (sit-ups), static strength (handgrip) endurance (beep test), gross motor coordination by 3 subtest of Körperkoördinations Test für Kinder (KTK: balance beam, jumping sideways and moving sideways)	Elite have a higher score on height, weight and BMI than sub-elite.	Semi-elite are taller and heavier than non-elite judoka. Semi-elite have a higher BMI than non-elite judoka.

Part II of this article can be found in Table 6.

Table 5.

Overview of included studies with main focus on technical (TE) and tactical characteristics (TA) (n = 11).

Reference	Participants	Performance level of judoka	Aim	Relevant measurements	Main findings	Conclusion
Agostinho et al. (2021)	Medal winners (n = 296) from the judo world championships Male and female (cadets, juniors or senior) judoka who won a gold, silver, or bronze medal at the judo world championships	Successful elite Competitive elite	To verify the differences in grip, actions before attacking, throwing technique, direction of attack, transition, and groundwork technique variations between medallists in the world judo championships	TE/TA: Scoring techniques, direction and side of attacks, grip, previous conditions before attacking, and transitions and groundwork anticipation	For grip variation a main effect of podium position was found. Gold medal winners presented higher variation of actions before attacking than bronze medal winners. There was a main effect of podium position on transition variation with higher values for gold medal winners compared to silver and bronze medallists.	Successful elite have higher variation in grip, action before attack and transitions compared to competitive elite.
Blach et al. (2021)	Olympic (n = 28) & world championship (n = 28) male medallists (26.3 ± 3.6 years) in seven weight divisions.	World-class elite	To determine the indicators of the technical and tactical skill level of judoka during competition at the elite level in two competitions of the highest rank	TE/TA: Efficiency of the attack, efficiency of the defence. total efficiency, effectiveness of the attack, effectiveness of the defence, activeness of the attack, activeness of the defence, total activeness	There is a positive relationship between the rank of a competitor and the values of the efficiency of the defence. There is a negative correlation between total efficiency and rank as well as for the effectiveness of defence and rank.	World-class elite have higher accumulation of attack and defence efficiency, and defence effectiveness than successful elite.
Courel et al. (2014)	Throw attempts (n = 1462; male = 722; female = 690) from 242 combats (male = 121; female = 121) of finals and semi-finals of 12 tournaments valid to the International Judo Federation (IJF) World Ranking List, including all weight categories	Competitive elite to successful elite	To analyse the type of grips used by high-level judo athletes and to verify its association with competitive outcome.	TA: Kumi-kata (grip) stance, grip-throw matching, attack effectiveness, combat result and combat minute	Winners performed a higher amount of attack attempts and achieved greater effectiveness rate. To attack on the same side of the kumi-kata is a predictor of combat winning throughout the entire fight. Combining same sided grip or only one athlete gripping with a same-side attack increased the likelihood of winning up to three and eight times. Results of grouped kumi-kata configurations (same sided grip and opposite grips) showed that the use of these followed by a same-side attack increased the chance of winning the combat.	Attacking on the same side of the kumi-kata increases the chance of scoring and winning the combat. Successful elite presented higher effectiveness and attacked more frequently than competitive elite.
Ishii et al. (2018)	Male (n = 10) judoka Elite (n = 3) judoka who were medallists in the 2010 World Judo Championships College (n = 7) judoka part of the university team	World-class elite Competitive elite	To investigate factors associated with skilled seoi-nage by comparing kinematics of the technique between elite and college judo athletes	TE: Seoi-nage throws were registered by a VICON-MX system (47 markers per athlete). Motion phase time, velocity of the centre of mass (COM) of the tori (athlete executing technique) and uke (athlete receiving opponent's attack), and overall angular velocity of the body part lines (arm, shoulder, hip and leg) were calculated	The relative COM velocity of all elite athletes was greater than college athletes. Elite athletes had a greater angular velocity of the arm-line than college athletes.	World-class elite had greater max anterior–posterior component of the relative COM velocity and a greater angular velocity of the arm-line during the turning phase compared with competitive elite.
Klys et al. (2020)	Senior female judo athletes (n = 87) from all weight categories Groups based on official ranking of the national judo association (Group 1: rank 1–5, Group 2: rank 6–23)	Competitive elite Semi-elite	To compare level of achievement to relevant technical-tactical variables based on the indices of the course of fight and time spent between grip contact and technique application in senior female judo athletes	TE/TA: In tachi-waza (standing phase) activity, efficiency and effectiveness of both attack and defence actions, points scored, and time spent between grip contact and technique application (1–3 s, 4–8 s and over 8 s) were analysed	Statistically significant differences between group 1 and 2 for all studied variables, except for activity in defence	Competitive elite had greater value of: activity in attack, efficiency & effectiveness of attack, effectiveness of defence, and number of attacks in time range of 1–3 s than semi-elite. Competitive elite had lower activity and efficiency in defence than semi-elite. Time spent between grip contact & throw application was shorter in competitive elite than in semi-elite.
Kons et al. (2022)	Matches of judoka (n = 393) who participated at the Tokyo Olympic Games 2020 (male (n = 201) and female (n = 192))	Successful to world-class elite	To identify the technical-tactical variation through the index of performance and types of techniques in high-level judo according competition outcome in the Tokyo Olympic Games 2020	TE/TA: scoring index, nage-waza variation (throwing techniques), katame-waza variation (groundwork techniques) and technique classification	Medallist had higher technical variability for nage-waza, technical variability of katame-waza, scoring index and nage-waza variation than non-medallists and repechage group. Repechage group had higher variability for nage-waza than non-medallists. No differences were found between groups in absolute and relative frequencies of techniques classification.	World-class elite have a higher technique variation (throw and ground techniques) than successful elite. No association was observed between technique classification and performance level.
Kons et al. (2018)	Matches of judoka (n = 390) who participated at the Rio Olympic Games 2016 (male (n = 237) and female (n = 153))	Successful to world-class elite	To identify which variable (score or penalties) determined the outcome of the competition outcome in the Rio Olympic Games 2016	TE/TA: Frequency of scores (ippon, waza-ri, yuko), shido (penalties) per match and efficiency	No significant differences in frequency of scores, penalties and efficiency were found among the gold, silver and bronze Olympic medallists in male or female judoka. The number of ippon was higher than waza-ari/yuko and shido in Olympic male and female judoka.	World-class and successful elite judoka can discriminate themselves by scoring an ippon.
Martins et al. (2019)	Matches (n = 799) of 386 male and female judoka who competed in the 2017 Senior Judo World Championships were analysed. Within these matches, there were 999 scoring situations (of which 756 were with throwing techniques that resulted in a score over 601 matches)	Successful to world-class elite	To compare the throwing techniques that resulted in a score between medal and non-medal winners during the 2017 Senior Judo World Championship	TE: The frequency of each technique was determined and percentages for nine classification groups was calculated in relation to all scoring techniques.	There was no significant relationship found between technique classification and tournament classification.	No association was observed between technique classification and performance level.
Miarka et al. (2016)	Combats (n = 174) from 17 male half-middleweight (-81 kg) judoka who qualified for the 2012 London Olympic Games	Successful to world-class elite	To examine the technical-tactical (T-T) systems of winning and losing male athletes during elite judo competition using discriminant analysis	TE/TA: Phases that were considered are: approach, gripping, attack, and groundwork. The frequency of each indicator and the combat phases were collected for each match and grouped according to the match outcome (Winning or Losing) for a given athlete	There is a high similarity among combat phase variables between Winning and Losing judoka. Findings show divergent T-T systems, specifically in Left Antero-posterior Approach, Left Back & Right Sleeve Gripping, and Right Sleeve Gripping, between winning and losing male half middleweight athletes during high-level judo competition.	World-class elite discriminate themselves from successful elite with actions in the Approach (Left Antero-posterior) and Gripping phases (Left Back/Right Sleeve and Right Sleeve).
Tirp et al. (2014)	Male judoka (n = 840) who participated in the Olympic Games (n = 204), national championships (n = 203) or national university championships (n = 433)	Successful elite Semi-elite Non-elite	To test for differences in laterality proportions in adult judoka between & within skill levels	TA: Laterality of combat stance which was defined as follows: A right-oriented combat stance was identified when the judoka had his right leg forward, grasping the opponent with his right hand around the neck and with his left hand on the right arm	The data from the Olympic Games showed a higher percentage of judoka with a left-oriented combat stance than the other tournaments.	In successful elite, there is a higher proportion of left-oriented judoka than in semi- & non-elite judoka.
Zaggelidis et al. (2012)	Judoka (n = 20; 6 males & 4 females per group) Advanced group (n = 10; 20.2 ± 4.3 years; more than 5 years of national competition experience + international experience (participation to National Team)) Novice group (n = 10; 21.5 ± 4.6 years; more than 5 years of national competition experience)	Competitive elite Non-elite	To analyse the vertical ground reaction forces of three different throwing hip techniques in novice and advanced judoka	TE: Maximal ground reaction forces (VGRFz) of three different hip throwing techniques (harai-goshi (HG), hane-goshi (HnG) and uchi-mata (UM))	The values of VGRFz were higher in all examined techniques in advanced judoka compared to novice ones, and in particular in HnG technique. Advanced participants applied peak VGRFs almost 110 to 140 ms following the onset of each throwing technique, whilst novice judoka had their peak values of VGRFs almost 200 ms after the same onset.	Competitive elite have higher vertical ground reaction forces during technique execution than non-elite judoka. Competitive elite apply peak values earlier during technique execution than non-elite judoka.

Table 6.

Overview of included studies with main focus on psychological characteristics (PS) (n = 3).

Reference	Participants	Performance level of judoka	Aim	Relevant measurements	Main findings	Conclusion
Morales et al. (2013)	Male and female judoka (n = 24) International level (n = 10; 24.1 ± 1.8 years) National level (n = 14; 22.4 ± 2.1 years)	Successful elite Semi-elite	To compare the levels of pre-competitive anxiety between international- and national-standard judo athletes in both official and unofficial competitions.	PS: Pre-competitive anxiety state with the Revised Competitive State Anxiety-2 (CSAI-2R) questionnaire	International level athletes have lower somatic and cognitive anxiety levels and higher level of confidence than national level athletes.	Successful elite judoka have lower precompetitive anxiety and higher level of confidence compared to semi-elite.
Sterkowicz-Przybycien et al. (2015)^a (part II)	Male and female judoka (n = 23) International level judoka (n = 11; 24.5 ± 3.7 years) National level judoka (n = 12; 21.8 ± 1.9 years)	Successful elite Semi-elite	To investigate attention processes in judoka of different competitive levels	PS: Estimation of attention and concentration with d2-test Attention Test (processing speed (TN), accuracy (percentage of error (E%) and concentration performance (CP))	International group had higher values of TN and CP than the national group. International group had lower values of E% than the national group.	Successful elite have higher values of processing speed and concentration performance than semi-elite. Successful elite judoka have lower values of accuracy of perception than semi-elite.
Suarez-Cadenas et al. (2016)	Judoka (n = 118; 94 males and 24 females) from several countries Elite (n = 43; 34 males and 9 females; 20.9 ± 4.3 years) who won at least 1 medal at international competitions (world or European championship) during the previous 4 years Sub-elite (n = 42; 32 males and 10 females; 20.9 ± 3.0 years) who won at least 1 medal in national competitions in the last 4 years	Successful elite Semi-elite	To gain knowledge about mental toughness (MT), perfectionistic strivings and perfectionistic concerns in judoka of different achievement level and age.	PS: Mental toughness via The Sports Mental Toughness Questionnaire (SMTQ); Perfectionistic strivings & perfectionistic concerns via Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (Sport-MPS 2) & Multidimensional Inventory of Perfectionism in Sports (MIPS)	Elite athletes scored significantly higher than sub-elite on personal standards subscale of the Sport-MPS 2, indicating higher perfectionistic strivings for elite athletes.	Successful elite have higher perfectionistic strivings than semi-elite judoka.

Part I of this article can be found in Table 4.

Anthropometrical

Five studies assessed anthropometrical characteristics of judoka with different performance level. Body mass, body height, limb circumferences, and skinfold thickness were measured by most studies. One study reported that cadet competitive elite are taller and have a wider arm span than cadet semi-elite judoka.³⁴ Subsequently, another study reported that cadet semi-elite judoka is taller, heavier and have a higher BMI than cadet non-elite judoka.³⁵ No difference in height is found between senior successful and semi-elite judoka.³⁶ Several studies measured limb circumferences. In judoka, larger fore- and upper arm circumferences are reported in world-class and successful elites compared with competitive and semi-elites.^36,37 No differences in limb circumferences between cadet competitive and semi-elites are reported, but cadet competitive elite reportedly have lower skinfold thickness, body fat percentage and fat mass than cadet semi-elite.³⁴ In addition, world-class elite had higher values of fat free mass and total body water than semi-elite. In the same study, world-class elite had higher values of muscle mass than competitive and semi-elite.³⁸ No differences in skinfold thickness and body fat percentage are reported in world-class and successful elites compared with competitive and semi-elites.^36,37

Physiological

The measurement of physiological characteristics was included in eight studies. Handgrip strength, lower body strength/power and anaerobic fitness were the most studied characteristics. Competitive elite shows higher hand grip strength than semi-elites.³⁹ No differences in handgrip strength between world-class elites and competitive elite judoka from the under 100 kg (U100) category are reported.³⁷ Moreover, handgrip strength seems not to distinguish semi-elites from non-elite.³⁵ Dynamic judogi pull-ups are a different way to assess grip. Successful elite judoka are able to reach more repetitions with dynamic judogi pull-ups than semi-elites.⁴⁰ Another characteristics that was measured, was trunk strength and stability. Competitive elites outscore semi-elites on trunk strength and stability.⁴¹ In addition, other components of strength, namely dynamic strength (bench press, squat, deadlift, pull ups) and isokinetic strength (external shoulder rotators and knee flexors), are able to make a distinction between world-class elite and competitive elite.³⁷ Lower body power of judoka was quantified in studies by different jump protocols (e.g., Counter Movement (CMJ) and Squat Jump). Successful elite have a higher rate of force development than competitive elites during jumping.⁴² This difference in jumping ability was not found between cadet semi-elite and non-elite judoka.³⁵ Anaerobic fitness of judoka was mentioned by two studies. World-class judoka has better anaerobic fitness compared with successful and semi-elite judoka, with successful elites outscoring semi-elites.^37,38 In addition, world-class elite judoka shows a higher level of judo specific and aerobic fitness compared with semi-elite.³⁷ No differences in judo specific fitness were found between successful and semi-elite judoka.⁴³

Technical

The technical characteristics of judoka were measured in nine studies. Two studies assessed this characteristic with focus on a specific technique. A kinematic comparison of the seoi-nage technique (shoulder throw) between world-class and competitive elites was made. They found that world-class elites tend to have a greater velocity, especially in forward drive and the turning face, in which they throw their opponent.⁴⁴ The second study with focus on specific techniques found that competitive elite judoka has earlier onset of peak ground reaction forces during three different hip throws than judoka of lower performance level.⁴⁵ The kind of technique is executed does not distinguish world-class from successful elite.^46–48 World-class elite variated more in their tachi-waza (standing) and ne-waza (ground work) actions than successful elites during competitions.⁴⁷ In turn, successful elite variated more in their techniques than competitive elite judoka.⁴⁸

Tactical

Tactical characteristics were measured in eight studies. Kumi-kata (gripping) is mentioned in several studies. In terms of grip variation, successful elite shows more variation than competitive elite judoka.⁴⁸ Competitive elite spend less time between gripping and executing their technique than semi-elite.⁴⁹ Attacking on the same side of the kumi-kata increases the chance of scoring and winning the combat in successful and competitive elite.⁵⁰ Also, world-class elite discriminate themselves from successful elite on the grip they aim for, such as the left back and right sleeve or right sleeve only.⁵¹ The approach phase before gripping is also described. A shorter approach phase is beneficial for winning the fight.⁵¹ It turns out that in successful elite, there is a higher proportion of left-oriented judoka than in semi- and non-elite judoka.⁵² Furthermore, winning successful elite show a more left-oriented approach in gripping during high-level competition than those who lose.⁵¹ The majority of the remainder of the tactical studies included motion analysis during competitions, showing that attack and defence effectiveness and efficiency are able to make a distinction in performance level of judoka.^49,50,53 World-class and successful elites show a higher number of total attacks than competitive and semi-elites.^50,53 Additionally, a greater transition variation from tachi-waza (standing) to ne-waza (ground work) phase means a better performance in successful and competitive elites.⁴⁸ World-class and successful elite can discriminate themselves from judoka of lower performance level by scoring an ippon (full point).^47,54 No differences in scoring index were observed between competitive and semi-elites.⁴⁹

Psychological

The psychological characteristics that could distinguish between different performance levels of judoka were measured in three studies. Successful elite show higher perfectionistic strivings than semi-elite.⁵⁵ In addition, successful elite judoka have higher levels of confidence and lower pre-competition anxiety than semi-elites.⁵⁶ Successful elite have higher values of processing speed and concentration than semi-elite, and lower values of accuracy of perception than semi-elite.⁴³ No differences in mental toughness were found between successful elite and semi-elite judoka.⁵⁵

Figure 3 (male judoka) and Figure 4 (female judoka) show an overview of performance characteristics that are measured by the studies included in this review. For every category, it is made clear what performance characteristics can make a distinction between performance levels and what direction is beneficial for judo performance. The performance characteristics for which it has not been proven that there is a difference between performance levels are also mentioned in the figures.

Figure 3.

Overview of performance characteristics that are measured by the studies included in this review sorted by performance level.²⁷ ↑: Male judoka of this performance level show a higher value of the mentioned performance characteristic compared to male judoka of lower performance level(s). ↓: Male judoka of this performance level show a lower value of the mentioned performance characteristic compared to male judoka of lower performance level(s).

Figure 4.

Overview of performance characteristics that are measured by the studies included in this review sorted by performance level.²⁷ ↑: Female judoka of this performance level show a higher value of the mentioned performance characteristic compared to female judoka of lower performance level(s). ↓: Female judoka of this performance level show a lower value of the mentioned performance characteristic compared to female judoka of lower performance level(s).

Discussion

This systematic review aimed to identify which multidimensional performance characteristics can discriminate between different performance levels of judoka and find the gaps in literature. The GSTM was used to structure the findings.²¹ Anthropometrical, physiological, technical, tactical, and psychological characteristics were identified that could distinguish judoka of different performance levels. The results were in line with the first hypothesis. Elite judoka outscore lower performance level judoka on multiple performance characteristics. Contrary to the second hypothesis, most studies that distinguish between different performance levels focused on technical-tactical characteristics. However, a variety of anthropometrical and physiological characteristics are described in studies as well (see Figure 2, Figure 3, and Figure 4). The mean quality of included studies was excellent (81.7%). Sixteen and seven studies were of excellent and good quality, respectively. Differences in quality among studies were observed with regard to ethical issues, method of analysis, clinical importance, practical implications, and limitations.

Numerous studies on judo (n = 10) have assessed anthropometrical (n = 5) and physiological (n = 8) characteristics. It is not surprising that a variety of these performance characteristics can discriminate judoka of different performance levels. Judo matches can last from a few seconds up to 20 min or more and throwing an opponent requires whole body movement.^9,10 Hence, having a broad set of physiological characteristics is an important manner to be prepared for the varying demands of judo combat situations. The amount of physiological characteristics that discriminate between performance levels are in line with earlier reviews based on studies conducted in the period 1972 to 2015.^17,57 These reviews also described the wide set of performance characteristics that are needed to be successful in judo. Thus, even though there have been rule changes in judo over the last decades, the importance of physiological characteristics remains with strong level of evidence.

Moreover, findings indicate a strong level of evidence for the importance of anthropometrical and physiological characteristics linked to kumi-kata (grip fighting). Judoka of higher performance level shows greater arm span and higher hand grip strength compared to lower level judoka.^34,39 In theory these allow a judoka to grip their opponent while keeping them at a distance. Additionally, larger fore- and upper arm circumferences are reported in higher performance level judoka.^36,37 This implies that muscles in the arms are frequently used to maintain grip, and therefore, are highly developed. Given that performance characteristics like these have often been measured, researchers in judo see the importance of grip fighting. It should be noted that, in contrast to hand grip strength, an anthropometrical characteristic like arm span cannot be trained. Therefore, it facilitates rather than determines the grip fight. Findings imply that hand grip strength is a relevant indicator of judo performance at the highest level that can be developed. Other measured performance characteristics that distinguish high from lower level performing judoka, are lower body fat and higher muscle mass.^34,38 As judoka needs to fit into a weight category, they want to maintain useful body tissue (e.g., muscle tissue) and get rid of body fat. Although the level of evidence is weak, the findings imply that judoka who have the best ratio of useful body tissue and body fat are likely to perform better.

Anthropometrical and physiological characteristics that cannot discriminate between performance levels were also identified (e.g., leg length, speed, flexibility). Therefore, it is not recommended to use them to distinguish judoka of high-performance level. It might be the case that some performance characteristics can discriminate up to a certain level. However, judoka with lower performance levels than semi-elite were out of the scope of this review.

In addition, technical (n = 9) and tactical (n = 8) characteristics have been studied among judoka. These studies only incorporated four out of 68 different throwing techniques separately.^44,45,58 Higher performance level judoka are faster in technique execution of the four assessed techniques than judoka of lower performance level. The fact that other throwing techniques have not been studied, could be explained by the finding that the kind of throw that is executed does not matter for judo performance at the highest level.⁴⁶ Therefore, it would not make sense to study technique differences between performance levels as judoka are not defined by the technique they execute. However, variation of techniques was found to be key to surprise an opponent and throw them.^47,48 This implies that there is strong evidence suggesting that judoka needs to focus on variation in throwing techniques with techniques they can quickly execute, and that suit them well. Besides, to surprise their opponent, it seems wise to train a wide range of techniques. This will result in the ability of a judoka to throw their opponent out of different combat situations. Since technical and tactical performance characteristics of judoka are interconnected and executed in a particular combat situation against an opponent, most studies focusing on tactical characteristics rely on motion analysis during competitions. Interestingly, the importance of grip fighting is again highlighted here with a strong level of evidence. It turns out that grip fighting and active judo distinguish higher from lower level judoka.^48–51 Thus, the importance of grip fighting now comes clear from multiple performance characteristics (anthropometrical, physiological, and tactical). Grip fighting and choice of techniques in judo competitions require anticipation on an opponent and fast decision making. Hence for a judoka, it is important to be able to execute different techniques, but performing the right action in a specific combat situation is just as important to be successful.

Where other performance characteristics have been examined extensively, limited studies focus on psychological characteristics (n = 3) that are able to discriminate between different performance levels of judoka. There is insufficient evidence to state that lower levels of pre-competitive anxiety and accuracy of perception, and higher levels of confidence, concentration, processing speed and perfectionistic strivings are able to distinguish judoka of different performance levels.^43,55,56 The limited studies involving psychological characteristics that can distinguish between judoka of different performance levels are in line with earlier reviews.^19,59 Namely, from those reviews it could be concluded that most studies on psychological characteristics of judoka have either focused on the influence of weight reduction on psychological characteristics, included judoka of low performance level or did not discriminate between performance levels. Hence, there is little insight into the sport psychological profile of elite judoka while it is perhaps very important to have certain psychological qualities to handle the complexity and unpredictability of the sport.⁶⁰ In addition, if there is no understanding of the psychological profile of judoka, it also cannot be developed and trained in a targeted manner. Ideally, insight into the psychological profile of elite judoka gives talented young judoka the opportunity to practice and get familiarized with psychological techniques related to important characteristics. Judoka who develop into elite athletes is able to select the sport psychological techniques that fit their needs in future situations.⁶¹ In other sports (e.g., endurance sports), studies found that psychological performance characteristics are essential for success in addition to the physiological characteristics.¹⁶ Thus, it is not unreasonable to think that this is also the case in judo. Therefore, research on psychological characteristics of judoka is advised. Nevertheless, it is recommended that professionals involved in judo integrate the development of psychological characteristics in their talent program.

As can be seen in Figure 3 and Figure 4, gaps in the literature were identified. For one, compared to the distribution of physiological and tactical characteristics over the performance levels, relatively large gaps in literature exists in psychological characteristics. Furthermore, only in successful elite all multidimensional performance characteristics were measured. It would be beneficial for professionals involved in judo to have an overview of the importance of all the performance characteristic per performance level. In addition, another gap in literature that was identified, is the underrepresentation of multidimensional performance characteristics of female judoka compared to male judoka. The results found for male judoka may not be generalisable to female judoka as previous research shows that male and female judoka differ in physiological characteristics (e.g., endurance capacity, strength) and technical-tactical characteristics (e.g., female judoka have more traditional gripping style and spend less time gripping than male judoka, differences in techniques that are most frequently utilized by male and female judoka).^57,62–65 Hence, the talent trajectory of male and female judoka possibly also differs and therefore a sex-specific approach may be advised. Taken this all together, future research should aim to fill these gaps in literature. Preferably, the performance development of judoka, from non-elite to world-class elite, can be monitored using evidence-based and sex-specific multidimensional performance characteristics.

A strong point of this review is that it is the first in judo that brings multiple performance characteristics together in a structured way. Secondly, it provides a clear overview of the ability of these characteristics to discriminate in various, concrete and general levels of performance.²⁷ In other words, this review makes clear that in judo multidimensional performance characteristics are useful for talent identification, selection, and development. Such overview makes it easier to link certain performance characteristics to others based on more than a gut feeling. For example, for the short time between grip contact and technique execution in combination with high throw velocity, anaerobic power is needed. This implies that if one aims for fast gripping, anaerobic power might be important to look at and train simultaneously. A third strength is that results are representative for judoka of high-performance level. All age categories and weight classes were described in studies included in this review. Therefore, the results can be widely used. Furthermore, half of the studies included both male and female judoka. Representability can also be concluded considering the variety of nationalities of judoka in included studies. However, even at the elite level differences in anthropometrical and physiological characteristics of judoka exist.⁶⁶ Thus, this review provides an overview of what characterizes elite judoka, but it should be kept in mind that there are always possible differences that could be related to environmental factors.

This review also comes with some limitations. As previously mentioned, weight cutting is an important aspect of judo as athletes are divided into weight classes to compete. It is not uncommon to cut weight before competitions from a young age.⁶⁷ However, in this review distinction between categories were not made although several studies compared performance characteristics of different weight categories.^20,57 Since final weight classes are not easy to determine early on, it is believed that talented judoka should focus on development of a broad set of performance characteristics. Determining final weight classes could be influenced by the age at peak height velocity (PHV). The PHV refers to the timing of maturity. It estimates chronological age at maximum rate of growth in height during the adolescent spurt.⁶⁸ The Long Term Athlete Development (LTAD) model, which consists of different training stages, suggests to use age at PHV as the reference for programming training protocols.⁶⁹ The variation in PHV among individuals is considerable and does seem to influence judo performance.^68,70 Therefore, it is not desirable to tailor talent programs to performance characteristics of a specific category and have a narrow focus. Instead, young judoka who have not fully matured yet, benefit from general performance characteristics as combat sports like judo are late specialization sports.⁶⁹ Later in their career, judoka may focus and specialize on the specific performance characteristics needed for a certain weight class. This is also in accordance with the Athletic Skills Model (ASM). This model describes that a child needs to become an athlete first, only then to specialize as an athlete.⁷¹ Applied to judo this means that an athlete first develops as an all-round judoka, before specializing on qualities for a certain weight category. Long-term adult success in multiple sports is also facilitated by this late specialization.⁷² Thus, this seems wise to consider if one aims for a sustainable sporting career in judo. Secondly, this review might be limited because studies without distinction in performance level were excluded. This can result in missed valuable information about performance characteristics within performance levels. However, considering the wide variety of performance characteristics and measurement instruments, it seemed best to create a clear general overview first based on studies which did include information on various performance levels. Lastly, only studies written in English were included which might have limited the findings. Judo is a very international sport, and it is therefore not unreasonable to think that relevant literature is written in another language.

A recommendation for future research is to set up longitudinal studies to gain insight into the development of performance characteristics of talented judoka over time. Unfortunately, only one longitudinal study that met the criteria for this review could be identified. Thus, there is much potential for this kind of research. The mean quality of included studies on judo was excellent, but differed between studies. Future research is advised to include clear practical implications and to maintain good quality for an optimal collaboration between science and practice. Furthermore, considering the dynamic and complex nature of judo, it is suggested to study more performance characteristics that may influence judo performance but are not explicitly mentioned in the GSTM (e.g., sight/perception). These might also be of importance and help complete the current profile of what characterizes elite judoka. In addition, from the findings it is clear that psychological characteristics of judoka have not yet received the attention they may deserve. There are possibilities to further discover the sports psychological profile of elite judoka.

Conclusion

The current systematic review is the first to bring multidimensional performance characteristics of judoka together and showed that a multidimensional set of performance characteristics is necessary for successful judo performance. Therefore, professionals involved in judo are advised to incorporate a multidimensional approach to identify, select and develop talented judoka. Findings of this review give insight into evidence-based performance characteristics that are important to look at in development trajectories or to incorporate in training programs of judoka. Strong evidence was found for the ability of multidimensional performance characteristics related to grip fighting to discriminate judoka of different performance levels. Moreover, a strong level of evidence was found for a broad set of physiological characteristics, the ability to throw opponents and variate in technique characterizes judoka of high-performance level. Furthermore, studies on psychological characteristics were under-represented. Hence, further research is needed in this area to capture the psychological characteristics that describe elite judoka. In addition, before performance characteristics can be used for talent identification and training programs, it is recommended to determine performance benchmarks for different age categories by further research. Lastly, to increase the understanding of development of multidimensional performance characteristics in judo, it is recommended to conduct longitudinal research. In this way, the development of multidimensional performance characteristics is known together with the importance of these characteristics at each point in the talent trajectory.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-spo-10.1177_17479541231223160 - Supplemental material for Throwing it out there: Grip on multidimensional performance characteristics of judoka – a systematic review

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-spo-10.1177_17479541231223160 for Throwing it out there: Grip on multidimensional performance characteristics of judoka – a systematic review by Suzan Schoof, Froukje Sliedrecht and Marije T. Elferink-Gemser in International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-2-spo-10.1177_17479541231223160 - Supplemental material for Throwing it out there: Grip on multidimensional performance characteristics of judoka – a systematic review

Supplemental material, sj-docx-2-spo-10.1177_17479541231223160 for Throwing it out there: Grip on multidimensional performance characteristics of judoka – a systematic review by Suzan Schoof, Froukje Sliedrecht and Marije T. Elferink-Gemser in International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Suzan Schoof

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Elferink-Gemser

Jordet

Coelho-E-Silva

, et al.

The marvels of elite sports: how to get there?

Br J Sport Med 2011; 45: 683–684.

Klingner

Elferink-Gemser

. Riding to the top – A systematic review on multidimensional performance indicators in surfing. Int J Sport Sci Coach 2021; 17: 655–682.

Konings

Elferink-Gemser

Stoter

, et al. Performance characteristics of long-track speed skaters: a literature review. Sport Med 2015; 45: 505–516.

Reilly

Williams

Nevill

, et al. A multidisciplinary approach to talent identification in soccer. J Sport Sci 2000; 18: 695–702.

Stoter

Koning

Visscher

, et al. Creating performance benchmarks for the future elites in speed skating. J Sport Sci 2019; 37: 1770–1777.

Degoutte

Jouanel

Filaire

. Energy demands during a judo match and recovery. Br J Sports Med 2003; 37: 249.

Bohannon

. The science of judo. Science (80-) 2012; 335: 1551–1552.

Franchini

Sterkowicz

Meira

, et al. Technical variation in a sample of high level judo players. Percept Mot Skills 2008; 106: 859–869.

Julio

Panissa

VLG

Esteves

, et al. Energy-System contributions to simulated judo matches. Int J Sport Physiol Perform 2017; 12: 676–683.

10.

Franchini

Artioli

Brito

. Judo combat: time-motion analysis and physiology. Int J Perform Anal Sport 2013; 13: 624–641.

11.

Guilheiro

Franchini

. Be seeded or not be seeded? A study with Olympic judo athletes. J Exerc Rehabil 2017; 13: 152.

12.

Franchini

Julio

. The judo world ranking list and the performances in the 2012 London olympics. Asian J Sport Med 2015; 6: 240–245.

13.

Julio

Takito

Mazzei

, et al. Tracking 10-year competitive winning performance of judo athletes across age groups. Percept Mot Skills 2011; 113: 139–149.

14.

Brito

Miarka

De Durana

ALD

, et al. Home advantage in judo: analysis by the combat phase, penalties and the type of attack. J Hum Kinet 2017; 57: 220.

15.

Dosseville

Laborde

Raab

. Contextual and personal motor experience effects in judo Referees’ decisions. Sport Psychol 2011; 25: 67–81.

16.

Elferink-Gemser

Te Wierike

SCM

Visscher

, et al. Multidisciplinary longitudinal studies: a perspective from the field of sports. In: Ericsson KA, Hoffman RR, Kozbelt A, et al. (eds) The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018, pp.271–290.

17.

Torres-Luque

Hernández-García

Escobar-Molina

, et al. Physical and physiological characteristics of judo athletes: an update. Sports 2016; 4: 20.

18.

Kuvačić

Krstulović

Caput

. Factors determining success in youth judokas. J Hum Kinet 2017; 56: 217.

19.

Rossi

Roklicer

Tubic

, et al. The role of psychological factors in judo: a systematic review. Int J Env Res Public Heal 2022; 19: 2093.

20.

Engwerda

Lidor

Elferink-Gemser

. Performance characteristics of top-level youth judokas in light-and heavy-weight categories. Int J Sport Sci Coach 2020; 15: 783–792.

21.

Elferink-Gemser

Visscher

. Who are the superstars of tomorrow? Talent development in Dutch soccer. In: Baker

Schorer

Cobley

(eds) Talent identification and development in sport. International perspectives. London: Routledge, 2011, pp.95–105.

22.

Newell

. Constraints on the development of coordination. In: Wade

Whiting

HTA

(eds) Motor development in children: aspects of coordination and control. Amsterdam: Martinus Nijhoff, 1986, pp.341–360.

23.

Vaeyens

Lenoir

Williams

, et al. Talent identification and development programmes in sport. Sport Med 2008; 38: 703–714.

24.

Vaeyens

Güllich

Warr

, et al. Talent identification and promotion programmes of Olympic athletes. J Sports Sci 2009; 27: 1367–1380.

25.

Page

McKenzie

Bossuyt

, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021; 372: n71.

26.

Calmet

Pierantozzi

Sterkowicz

, et al. Judo rules: searching for a wind of changes. Int J Perform Anal Sport 2017; 17: 863–871.

27.

Swann

Moran

Piggott

. Defining elite athletes: issues in the study of expert performance in sport psychology. Psychol Sport Exerc 2015; 16: 3–14.

28.

Aras

Güler

Gülü

, et al. Comparison of balance skills of visually impaired and non-impaired judo athletes and goalball/futsal players. Phys Educ Students 2018; 22: 292–297.

29.

Law

Stewart

Pollock

, et al. Critical Review Form – Quantitative Studies.

30.

Te Wierike

SCM

Van Der Sluis

Van Den Akker-Scheek

, et al. Psychosocial factors influencing the recovery of athletes with anterior cruciate ligament injury: a systematic review. Scand J Med Sci Sport 2013; 23: 527–540.

31.

Faber

Bustin

PMJ

Oosterveld

FGJ

, et al. Assessing personal talent determinants in young racquet sport players: a systematic review. J Sports Sci 2016; 34: 395–410.

32.

van der Fels

IMJ

te Wierike

SCM

Hartman

, et al. The relationship between motor skills and cognitive skills in 4-16 year old typically developing children: a systematic review. J Sci Med Sport 2015; 18: 697–703.

33.

Kolman

Kramer

Elferink-Gemser

, et al. Technical and tactical skills related to performance levels in tennis: a systematic review. J Sports Sci 2019; 37: 108–121.

34.

Nikolova

Dimitrova

. Morphological characteristics of judo cadets with respect to sex-related differences and athletic achievements. Biomed Hum Kinet 2018; 10: 169–177.

35.

Wazir

MRWN

Torfs

Mostaert

, et al. Predicting judo champions and medallists using statistical modelling. Arch Budo 2017; 13: 168.

36.

Stefanovsky

Kracek

Ciz

, et al. Differences in morphological parameters of judo athletes of different age groups and performance level. Acta Gymnica 2017; 47: 187–192.

37.

Drid

Casals

Mekic

, et al. Fitness and anthropometric profiles of international vs. national judo medalists in half-heavyweight category. J Strength Cond Res 2015; 29: 2115–2121.

38.

Kim

Cho

Jung

, et al. Influence of performance level on anaerobic power and body composition in elite male judoists. J Strength Cond Res 2011; 25: 1346–1354.

39.

Bonitch-Gongora

Almeida

Padial

, et al. Maximal isometric handgrip strength and endurance differences between elite and non-elite young judo athletes. Arch Budo 2013; 9: 239–248.

40.

Franchini

Miarka

Matheus

, et al. Endurance in judogi grip strength tests: comparison between elite and non-elite judo players. Arch Budo 2011; 7: 1–4.

41.

Barbado

Lopez-Valenciano

Juan-Recio

, et al. Trunk stability, trunk strength and sport performance level in judo. PLoS One 2016; 11: 1–12.

42.

Monteiro

Massuça

García-García

, et al. Differences of explosive strength in judokas medallists and not medallists. Paripex Indian J Res 2012; 3: 199–202.

43.

Sterkowicz-Przybycien

Blecharz

Sterkowicz

, et al. Attention and acute judo-specific effort in athletes preparing for Olympic competition. Arch Budo 2015; 11: 265–270.

44.

Ishii

Suzuki

, et al. Kinematic comparison of the seoi-nage judo technique between elite and college athletes. Sport Biomech 2018; 17: 238–250.

45.

Zaggelidis

Lazaridis

. Evaluation of vertical ground reaction forces in three different judo hip throwing techniques in novice and advanced Greek athletes. Med Dello Sport 2012; 65: 29–36.

46.

Martins

De Souza

De Campos

, et al. Techniques utilised at 2017 Judo World Championship and their classification: comparisons between sexes, weight categories, winners and non-winners. Ido Mov Cult J Martial Arts Anthro 2019; 19: 58–65.

47.

Kons

Agostinho

Santos

DFC

, et al. Match-related performance during the Olympic games 2020: a technical variability analysis of high-level judo athletes. Int J Perform Anal Sport 2022; 22: 516–525.

48.

Agostinho

Franchini

. Observational analysis of the variability of actions in judo: the key for success? Rev Artes Marciales Asiáticas 2021; 15: 69–77.

49.

Kłys

Sterkowicz-Przybycień

Adam

, et al. Performance analysis considering the technical-tactical variables in female judo athletes at different sport skill levels: optimization of predictors. J Phys Educ Sport 2020; 20: 1775–1782.

50.

Courel

Franchini

Femia

, et al. Effects of kumi-kata grip laterality and throwing side on attack effectiveness and combat result in elite judo athletes. Int J Perform Anal Sport 2014; 14: 138–147.

51.

Miarka

Fukuda

Del Vecchio

, et al. Discriminant analysis of technical-tactical actions in high-level judo athletes. Int J Perform Anal Sport 2016; 16: 30–39.

52.

Tirp

Baker

Weigelt

, et al. Combat stance in judo-Laterality differences between and within competition levels. Int J Perform Anal Sport 2014; 14: 217–224.

53.

Błach

Rydzik

Błach

, et al. Characteristics of technical and tactical preparation of elite judokas during the world championships and Olympic games. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021; 18: 5841.

54.

Kons

Da Silva Júnior

Fischer

, et al. Olympic and Paralympic Games Rio 2016: a technical-tactical analysis of judo matches. Kinesiology 2018; 50: 204–210.

55.

Suarez-Cadenas

Sretkovic

Perales

, et al. Mental toughness and perfectionism in judo: differences by achievement and age. The relation between constructs. Arch Budo 2016; 12: 267–274.

56.

Morales

Garcia

García-Massó

, et al. The use of heart rate variability in assessing precompetitive stress in high-standard judo athletes. Int J Sport Med 2013; 34: 144–151.

57.

Franchini

Del Vecchio

Matsushigue

, et al. Physiological profiles of elite judo athletes. Sport Med 2011; 41: 147–166.

58.

International Judo Federation (IJF). Names-of-Judo-techniques.pdf. Documents / IJF.org, https://www.ijf.org/ijf/documents/19 (2022, accessed 10 May 2022).

59.

Ziv

Lidor

. Psychological preparation of competitive judokas – A review. J Sport Sci Med 2013; 12: 380.

60.

Kumar

Shirotriya

. Sports psychology’ a crucial ingredient for athletes success: conceptual view. Br J Sport Med 2010; 44: i55–i56.

61.

Lidor

Ziv

. Psychological preparation in early phases of talent development in sport. In: Hanton

Mellalieu

(eds) Professional practice in sport psychology - A review. London, UK: Routledge, 2011, pp.195–218.

62.

Sterkowicz-Przybycień

Fukuda

. Sex differences and the effects of modified combat regulations on endurance capacity in judo athletes: a meta-analytic approach. J Hum Kinet 2016; 51: 113–120.

63.

Sacripanti

. Judo match analysis, a powerful coaching tool, basic and advanced tools.

64.

Sbriccoli

Bazzucchi

Di Mario

, et al. Assessment of maximal cardiorespiratory performance and muscle power in the Italian Olympic judoka. J Strength Cond Res 2007; 21: 738–744.

65.

Agostinho

Junior

JAO

Stankovic

, et al. Comparison of special judo fitness test and dynamic and isometric judo chin-up tests’ performance and classificatory tables’ development for cadet and junior athletes. J Exerc Rehabil 2018; 14: 252.

66.

Quintero

Orssatto

LBD

Pulgarin

, et al. Physical performance, body composition and somatotype in Colombian judo athletes. Ido Mov Cult J Martial Arts Anthro 2019; 19: 56–63.

67.

Giannini Artioli

Gualano

Franchini

, et al. Prevalence, magnitude, and methods of rapid weight loss among judo competitors. Med Sci Sport Exerc 2010; 42: 436–442.

68.

Malina

Rogol

Cumming

, et al. Biological maturation of youth athletes: assessment and implications. Br J Sport Med 2015; 49: 852–859.

69.

Balyi

Hamilton

Long-term athlete development: trainability in childhood and adolescence—windows of opportunity, optimal trainability. Victoria, BC: National Coaching Institute British Columbia and Advanced Training and Performance Ltd, 2004.

70.

Detanico

Kons

Fukuda

, et al. Physical performance in young judo athletes: influence of somatic maturation, growth, and training experience. Res Q Exerc Sport 2020; 91: 425–432.

71.

Savelsbergh

GJP

Wormhoudt

. Creating adaptive athletes: the athletic skills model for enhancing physical literacy as a foundation for expertise. Mov Sport Sci - Sci Mot 2018; 102: 31–38.

72.

Barth

Güllich

Macnamara

, et al. Predictors of junior versus senior elite performance are opposite: a systematic review and meta-analysis of participation patterns. Sport Med 2022; 52: 1399–1416.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.01 MB