Abstract

Basketball is a sports game with prevailing motor behaviour of extremely high intensity, the results of which are highly dependent on play er’s motor potential and abilities that manifest themselves during the game. One of the most important of those – ability to adapt themselves to the constantly alternating physical load with no losses of movement and action accuracy and their consistency (Hay, 1994; Miller, Bartlett, 1996; Stonkus, 2003, Balciunas, 2005 and others). Objective of the research was to establish the effect of physical toad intensity on basketball shooting accuracy of junior girls basketball players. The first test basketball shooting accuracy indices of the surveyed girls basketball players of the experimental group, when the physical load intensity reached an average level (first testing) (37 percent, 14.7 ± 4.1 scoring throws) corresponded with the indices of average preparedness. During the second testing the basketball shooting indices of this test (46 percent, 18.3 ± 3.5) were in the zone of very good preparedness indices. The second test basketball shooting indices during the first testing, when the physical load applied was of the highest intensity (35 percent, 14.2 ± 3.7) corresponded with those of the average preparedness players, during the second testing (44 percents, 17.7 ± 3.5) they were better than those of the girls basketball players of average preparedness. The first test basketball shooting accuracy indices of the point guards of the experimental group during the second testing (under the high intensity physical load) (48 percent, 19.3 ± 3.5) were in the zone of excellent preparedness indices. The second test indices of the point guards during the second testing (under the physical load of the highest intensity) (47 percent, 18.8 ± 3.1) were better than those of the girls basketball players of average preparedness, still they differed insignificantly when comparing to the first test indices (p > 0.05). The first test indices of the wings during the second testing (under physical load of average intensity) (50 percent, 19.9 ± 3.0) differed statistically significantly from the second test indices during the second testing (48 percent, 19.3 ± 3.1) and reached the zone of good preparedness indices (p < 0.05). The first test indices of the centre forwards during the second testing (37 percent, 14.8 ± 1.9) differed insignificantly from the second test indices shown during the second testing (36 percent, 14.2 ± 1.9) and corresponded to the level of average preparedness of girls basketball players. Verf.-Referat