The purpose of this study was to examine the upper and lower limb of skeletal muscle mass (SMM) and maximum anaerobic power (MAP) in female throwers. First, compared SMM and MAP between the four throwing events. Second, examined the relationship between MAP with SMM, and the relationship between MAP with throwing performance. Twenty-six female collegiate throwers participated in this study. SMM was measured using the body impedance analysis method. MAP was estimated from several loads and cranking or pedaling speeds (force-velocity relationship) using a bicycle ergometer. The results were as follows. The mean and standard deviation of body height, body weight, lean body mass, SMM of upper and lower limbs (both sides) were 162.3±3.7cm, 70.1±9.4kg, 50.7±4.4kg, 5.3±0.6kg, and 15.0±1.4kg, respectively. Shot put group was showed significantly higher values than those of other groups. MAP (and MAP/body weight) of the upper and lower limbs were 451±81W (6.4±0.8W/kg) and 830±130W (11.8±1.7W/kg), respectively. No significant differences were observed among the four groups. SMM was related to each of MAP of the upper limbs (r=0.689: p=0.0001) and lower limbs (r=0.592: p=0.0015). World Athletics Scores for each throwing best performance were associated with MAP of the upper limbs (r=0.465: p=0.017), lower limbs (r=0.606: p=0.001), and total power (r=0.586: p=0.002). These results suggest that the evaluation of SMM and MAP of the upper and lower limbs are useful for the control test of throwers.

In recent years, the knee extensor forces of athletes have usually been evaluated by measuring isokinetic output torque. The purpose of this study was to confirm the usefulness of normalizing the torque (force) -velocity curve and calculating the maximal power of knee extensor under isokinetic contraction.
Seventy two (46 elite, 26 non-elite) Japanese male sprinters were chosen as the subjects in this study. The peak torque of the dominant side of knee extensor was measured by using the isokinetic dynamometer (Cybex II⁺) in three different angular velocities of 60, 180, 300 deg/sec. Moreover, the isometric torque (0 deg/sec) was measured in 39 athletes, 120 and 240 deg/sec of contraction were performed in 12 out of 39 athletes.
The exponent equation (F = F_o× e^av- kv : Fenn 1935) was applied to normalize the torquevelocity curve without including the coefficient of viscosity (k) . The maximal power and its optimal velocity was presumed from this torque-velocity curve. The average of measured torque at 0 deg/sec contraction (F₀) was lower than that of 60 deg/sec, thereforeF₀was presumed as the same as the maximal power. Those parameters were not significantly different when calculated from 3 velocities (60, 180, 300 deg/sec) and 5 velocities (plus 120, 240 deg/sec) in 12 athletes. For this reason, each parameter was calculated from 3 velocities.
The maximal torque (F₀/BW) was the same between elite and non-elite group (4.0 Nm/kg) . Nevertheless, the coefficient of torque loss (a), maximal power and its optimal velocity were significantly different (-0.1586 : -0.1908, 9.6 : 7.8 watt/kg, 373: 309 deg/sec, respectively. P<0.01 Student-t) . It was said that to normalize the torque-velocity curve or to presume the maximal knee extension power and its optimal velocity were useful to assess the muscle function or the performance of athletes under isokinetic contraction.