The Relationship of Anthropometric Characteristics and Motor Abilities with Vortex Throwing Performance in Young Female Track-and-Field Athletes

Abstract

The vortex throw, similar to the javelin throw, requires exceptional mastery of technique and specific motor abilities to ensure success. This study examines the anthropometric and motoric status of young female track-and-field athletes and investigates their relationship with vortex throwing performance. This research included 63 young female athletes; the results of 14 motor tests, three anthropometric measures, and training experience were compared with vortex throwing distance and vortex release velocity. Pearson’s correlation analysis revealed that the most valuable strong correlation was between the release velocity and the throwing distance (r > 0.75), indicating that they almost equally contributed to throwing performance. The most valuable moderate correlations were those between the leg tapping test, the overhead medicine ball throw, and the chest medicine ball launch and the performance of both forms of throwing. Accounting for shared variance among predictors, multivariable models explained 43% of the variance in vortex release velocity and 58% in vortex throwing distance, with the standing long jump uniquely predicting release velocity and the overhead 1-kg medicine ball throw uniquely predicting throwing distance. Finally, the motor abilities recognized in athletes in this research are valuable indicators of quality throwing performance and could play a crucial role in throwing success, which supports previous evidence on similar topics. Collectively, these results support using release velocity alongside distance to evaluate youth vortex throwers and highlight simple field tests (leg tapping, medicine ball throws, and long jumps) as practical markers for training prescription and early talent identification.

1. Introduction

Vortex throwing is a track-and-field discipline that, in terms of its technical performance, is identical to the track-and-field discipline of javelin throwing. A vortex is a prop weighing 135 g, measuring 34 cm long, and made of spongy material. Due to its soft structure and low mass, the vortex is very safe for use indoors and outdoors and is thus used to teach javelin throwing to younger age groups [1,2]. Vortex throwing is also an official track-and-field discipline in competitions for younger age categories at the Croatian Athletics Federation. Due to the identical technical performance, the vortex throw is also considered as javelin throw for younger track-and-field athletes [1,2,3]. Several authors [1,3,4] suggest that a vortex is a reliable auxiliary or replacement prop for teaching young throwers and beginners, allowing them to master javelin throwing techniques more easily. The vortex is widely used in youth athletics as a safe, lightweight implement for teaching overarm throwing and introducing javelin-like technique in developing athletes [2]. Despite this practical role, evidence on determinants of performance in vortex throwing, particularly in children, is limited and often restricted to simple associations with throwing distance.

Javelin throwing is a demanding technical discipline, the results of which directly depend on kinematic parameters, mostly on release velocity, but also on release angle, release height, etc. [5,6,7]. The results of javelin throwing also depend on the anthropometric characteristics and motor abilities of the thrower, as well as on other factors, such as gender, age, training experience, and various environmental factors [8,9,10]. The level of motor abilities, such as speed, strength, and explosive power, is significantly related to results in javelin throwing, and the correlation is all the greater when more respondents have a better throwing technique [10,11,12,13]. For elite javelin throwers, anaerobic capacity, explosive power, speed of alternative movements, and flexibility are rated as the most important, while basic body strength, coordination, precision, transverse dimensionality of the skeleton, and body volume are rated as very important [14]. Studies have shown that the correlation between anthropometric characteristics and results in javelin throwing varies among different groups of subjects based on age, gender, and throwing experience [11,15,16]. Thus, for example, in some studies on younger age categories, a weaker correlation between individual longitudinal dimensions and body weight with results in javelin throwing has been found, but it is greater when the subjects are older and more experienced during training [16,17]. However, some studies have found that only certain transversal anthropometric dimensions are related to javelin throwing results, and the subjects were very heterogeneous in terms of body height and body weight [15].

Although techniques of vortex and javelin throw are similar, youth development and the lighter implement may shift which factors most strongly determine performance. This is consistent with established models of skill acquisition and youth athlete development. Technique in overarm throwing is progressively constructed across late childhood through practice and maturation, with coordination shaped by individual–task–environment constraints and more structured movement representations emerging only with increased training exposure [18,19]. Analyzing previous studies on vortex throwing, we can see that they are mainly oriented toward examining the correlation between anthropometric characteristics and motor abilities with the final result (distance) of throwing, which is considered the only measure of throwing performance [20]. However, this distance-only focus overlooks key kinematic determinants, particularly release velocity and the developmental specifics of youth athletes, limiting mechanistic insight and reducing the practical value of findings for training and talent identification. Thus, in female fifth-grade elementary students, it was determined that motor abilities such as explosive power, agility, and coordination have a much greater effect on vortex throwing success (vortex throwing distance) than morphological characteristics [21]. Due to the smaller mass of the vortex compared with the javelin, the influence of the weight and height of the young athlete’s bodies on performance, represented by the vortex throwing distance, is smaller.

There is a lack of research dealing with the relationship between vortex release velocity and throwing results. According to the results of many studies on javelin throwing [6,22,23,24,25], release velocity is significantly related to the throwing distance/result. Considering this, vortex release velocity should demonstrate the same throwing performance as that of vortex throwing results. The only question is how strong vortex release velocities and throwing results are related to each other; among other things, this will be determined by this research. A clearer understanding of how anthropometry and specific motor abilities relate to both throwing distance (VR) and release velocity (VV) in youth would help coaches set priorities for training and talent identification.

There is a lack of previous research in this area on the relationship between individual motor abilities and anthropometric characteristics and vortex release velocity as a measure of throwing performance. Since these are young athletes without highly developed throwing techniques, vortex release velocity should be almost as valid a performance criterion as the throwing result itself. Specifically, given that two kinematic parameters are excluded from the vortex release velocity in relation to the vortex throwing distance (the vortex release angle, which exclusively depends on the throwing technique, and the release height, which depends on the throwing technique and the longitudinal dimensions of the skeleton), in some cases, the vortex release velocity could prove to be a better criterion of throwing performance.

Therefore, this study examines the anthropometric and motoric status of young female track-and-field athletes and compares their relationship with vortex throwing performance. Accordingly, this study examined the relationships between anthropometric characteristics and motor abilities with both vortex throwing distance and release velocity in young female athletes. By evaluating vortex throwing distance alongside release velocity, and situating findings within a youth-specific, vortex-based model, this work addresses a clear evidence gap and provides actionable markers (e.g., explosive power, rapid alternating movements) that can inform talent identification and training design in developmental throwing. We hypothesized that indices of explosive power and rapid alternating movements would show stronger associations with throwing parameters than body composition proxies.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants

Participants consisted of females of younger age categories and participants at the Zagreb track-and-field clubs HAAK “Mladost”, AK “Agram”, AK “Dinamo Zrinjevac”, and AK “Zagreb” (N = 63) enrolled in regular track-and-field school programs. We conducted a sensitivity power analysis for bivariate Pearson correlations (two-tailed, α = 0.05). With N = 63, the study has 80% power to detect correlations of approximately r = 0.34 and 90% power at r ≈ 0.39. Thus, effects in the small–to–moderate range (r ≈ 0.30–0.50) are within detectable limits, whereas smaller effects (r < 0.25) are likely underpowered. Power calculations were performed for the Pearson model, which matches the analysis used in this study. The approval was obtained from representatives of the parent clubs, as well as the written consent of the children’s parents; the latter were informed about the purpose, protocol, and risks of this research. Inclusion criteria were: female sex; age 8–11 years; current participation in a club track-and-field school program; ≥1 month of continuous training in the past 3 months; and the ability to complete all testing procedures. Exclusion criteria were: current injury or illness, or any condition limiting maximal effort during testing. Permission to conduct testing on children and minors was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Zagreb (no. 28/2022).

2.2. Variables and Measurement Procedures

The following variables were analyzed: VR—vortex throwing distance/result (m); VV—vortex release velocity (km/h); AGE—age (years); TREX—training experience (months); BW—body weight (kg); BH—body height (cm); BMI—body mass index; and 14 motor tests, namely: TAPH—hand tapping test (n/15 s), TAPL—leg tapping test n/15 s), 20MST—the 20 m sprint with a standing start (s), POL—the polygon backwards test (s), SST—side step test (s), S&R—sit and reach flexibility test (cm), SFT—shoulder standing flexibility test with stick (cm), VJT—standing vertical jump test (cm), LJT—standing long jump test (cm), MBOH—standing overhead medicine ball throw/1 kg (m), MBCH—standing chest medicine ball launch/1 kg (m), P-UP15—push-ups test (n/15 s), S-UP15—sit-ups test (n/15 s); SQ15—squats test (n/15 s). All motor tests were performed according to the instructions provided by relevant authors in this area of research [26,27,28,29]. Anthropometric measurements were performed in accordance with the standardized procedures of the International Biological Program (IBM) [30]. Anthropometric measurements were performed by experts from the Sports Diagnostic Centre of the Faculty of Kinesiology, Zagreb, in accordance with the standardized procedures of the International Biological Program. Body height (BH) was measured in participants with standing position and barefoot with the Rudolf Martin anthropometer by precision of 0.1 cm. Body weight (BW) was measured in participants with standing position, barefoot and wearing light sports clothes with the professional Seca 799 body mass scale by precision of 0.1 kg. Body mass index was (BMI) calculated by dividing weight in kilograms by the square of height in meters (kg/m²).

Vortex throwing distance/result (VR) was measured in 0.01 m precision with a centimeter tape in the standardized competition field for javelin throw. Athletes used freely the run-up within the designated runway and throw the vortex before the radius throwing arc, from where the throw is measured to the first touch of the vortex in the field.

Vortex release velocity (VV) was measured in m/s with a Stalker Pro speed radar gun (Applied Concepts, Inc., Richardson, TX, USA) at the moment the vortex was released from the hand of the participant. The position of the measurer with the speed radar gun at the moment of release was three to five meters behind and one meter distal to the thrower, as instructed in the manual [31].

To perform the sit and reach test, participants sat on the floor with extended legs open to 90 degrees, and the measuring tape was placed from the pelvic floor between the legs in front of the participant. Slowly reaching forward as far as possible with one hand on top of the other, participants measured their hamstring and lower back flexibility. The maximal reach in centimeters was taken as a relevant value [26].

To measure shoulder standing flexibility test with stick participants held a ruler stick in front of the body with both hands wide apart and palms facing downwards. They lifted the stick over their head and behind their backs, maintaining the hand grip on the object. They repeated the test, moving hands closer together each time until the movement could not be completed. The minimal reach between their hands in centimeters was taken as a relevant value [27].

Standing long jump test, overhead medicine ball throw, and chest medicine ball launch were measured in 0.01 m precision with a centimeter tape.

To perform a long jump test, an athlete was standing behind a starting line with feet shoulder-width apart, then performed a two-footed jump as far forward as possible, landing on both feet. The jump involved a countermovement and arm swing for momentum. After the jump, the distance was measured from the starting line to the back of the athlete’s heels at the point of contact. The athlete was allowed three attempts, and the longest jump distance was recorded [26,27].

To perform a vertical jump test, an athlete stood shoulder-width apart, bent their knees, and used their arms for maximum vertical reach. The athlete performed three trials, and the highest result reported in centimeters was taken into further analysis [28,32].

To perform the overhead medicine ball throw and chest medicine ball launch, an athlete was standing behind a starting line with feet shoulder-width apart with the ball on the chest/above the head, then threw it as far forward as possible, trying not to cross the line. After the throw, the distance was measured from the starting line to the point of first ball contact on the ground. The athlete was allowed three attempts, and the longest throw distance was recorded [28].

To perform a hand tapping test, the table and chair height were adjusted so that the athlete was sitting comfortably in front of the discs drawn on the table. The two discs were placed with their centers 60 cm apart on the table. The rectangle was placed equidistant between the two discs. The non-preferred hand was placed on the rectangle. The athlete moved the preferred hand back and forth between the discs over the hand in the middle as quickly as possible. This action was repeated until 15 s had expired. The total number of taps on the start disc was recorded. An athlete repeated the test three times with a 3 to 5-min pause between the measures, and the best one was taken [27].

To perform a leg tapping test, the chair height was adjusted so that the athlete was sitting comfortably in front of the plate on the ground. The plate was divided into two parts with one fixed partition along the center of the plate, and 10 cm high. The athlete moved the preferred leg back and forth over the partition in the middle as quickly as possible. This action was repeated until 15 s had expired. The total number of taps on the start part of the plate was recorded. An athlete repeated the test three times with a 3 to 5-min pause between the measures, and the best one was taken [27].

To perform a push-up test, an athlete assumed a high plank position with hands slightly wider than shoulder-width apart and body straight from head to heels. Lowered their body by bending their elbows until their upper arms were parallel to the floor. Pushed back up until their arms were fully extended, maintaining a rigid body. They continued repeating the movement with controlled form, and the test ended when they could no longer maintain proper technique for two consecutive repetitions or until 15 s had expired [27].

To perform a sit-up test, an athlete was sitting on the mat, knees bent, feet flat on the floor, and fingers interlaced behind their head. An assistant held their feet firmly on the floor. Athlete performed a full sit-up by lowering their trunk to the lying position with their shoulder blades touching the floor, and went up, curling their upper body to touch their elbows to their knees. The number of correct sit-ups performed in 15 s was taken as a relevant value [26,27].

To perform a squat test, an athlete was standing with feet shoulder-width apart, chest up, and back straight, then pushed their hips back to initiate the squat, lowering until their thighs are parallel to the floor while keeping their knees aligned with their toes and heels on the ground. The athlete returned to the starting position by getting up and then repeated the movement continuously. The number of correct squats performed in 15 s was taken as a relevant value [26]. TAPH, TAPL, P-UP15, S-UP15, and SQ15 were measured with a hand stopwatch.

The polygon backwards test was performed on the track, 10 m long, between two lines (start and finish). The athlete was on all fours with the foot facing the moving and toward the starting line. The athlete had to walk backwards on all fours from the start to finish, and faced two obstacles. The first one was a box 40 cm high, 50 cm wide, and 120 cm long, inserted 3 m from the start, and the second was the frame 50 cm high, 20 cm wide, and 120 cm long, inserted 6 m from the starting line. The athlete was as fast as could pass over the first and through the second obstacle, and then kept going to the finish. At the start and finish lines were placed a professional Microgate WITTY standard kit Timing Device. The laser beam of the device started and stopped the time at the start and finish lines when an athlete passed through them, and the relevant value was recorded in seconds. An athlete repeated the test three times with a 3 to 5-min pause between the measures, and the best one was taken [26].

The 20 m sprint with a standing start was performed on the track, 20 m long, between two lines (start and finish). The athlete stood after the starting line and had to sprint as fast as they could to the finish line [26,27]. At the start and finish lines were placed a professional Microgate WITTY standard kit Timing Device. The laser beam of the device started and stopped the time at the start and finish lines when an athlete passed through them, and the relevant value was recorded in seconds.

The side-step test was performed on the track between two lines 4 m apart. The athlete stood behind the first line and had to move side-stepping across or touch the second line with the outside leg and back to the first line, and repeated that three times in a row [26]. The laser beam registered the time from the first to the last move across the first line as a relevant value in seconds. At the start and finish lines were placed a professional Microgate WITTY (Bolzano, Italy) standard kit Timing Device.

The measurement procedures were conducted during three terms of the regular training sessions for track-and-field schools. That period was chosen as a natural part of the participants’ daily training routine, which they are accustomed to mentally and physically. All subjects were adequately warmed up and familiarized with the measurement protocol before each measurement appointment. The warming up consisted of jogging, light mobility, and flexibility exercises chosen to ensure the musculoskeletal and energetic preparation specifically for the following tests. Each of the four schools has participated in a different week within one month. Each school has done three terms within one week during the same period of the day, with similar conditions of weather (no rain, wind, or strong sun) and temperature (20 °C to 26 °C). The terms have been 60 to 120 min long and included 14 to 18 participants. Between the two measurement dates, the subjects had a minimum of 48 h of rest, i.e., a period without high-intensity activities. In the first term, vortex distance, vortex release velocity, and anthropometric measurements (body height and body weight) were taken. In the second term, standing chest medicine ball launch, standing vertical jump test, standing overhead medicine ball throw, standing long jump test, push-up test, sit-up test, and squats test were done following the mentioned order. The order was chosen logically from the principle of one-repetition-maximum as a relevant value to the principle of maximum-repetition-in-time. In the third term, leg tapping test, hand tapping test, the 20 m sprint with a standing start, the polygon backwards test, side-step test, sit and reach flexibility test, shoulder standing flexibility test with a stick were done following the mentioned order. The following order in the second and third terms was ensured so that it would not predominantly use the same muscle part of the body in the two tests in a row. To refer to all the tests, there were three attempts, and the best one was taken as the final value. In each term, the participants followed the mentioned order of the tests and made attempts one by one, and after the last one, the first participant made the second attempt, and the third time, the same. One cycle of each test lasted 4 to 6 min, which also represented the pause between two attempts for each participant. Exceptions of the mentioned protocol were push-up test, sit-up test, and squat test, which were measured once as a relevant value.

2.3. Statistical Analysis

The data were processed with the statistical program Statistica 14.0. The normality of the distribution of variables was determined using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and since all throwing and motoric variables showed normal distribution, we used parametric tests for further analysis. Descriptive statistics (arithmetic mean, minimal value, maximal value, and standard deviation) were calculated for all variables. Pearson’s correlation analysis was used to test the relationship between variables. The results were interpreted as follows: r = 0.00 to 0.19—no correlation or negligible; r = 0.20 to 0.39—weak correlation; r = 0.40 to 0.69—moderate correlation; r = 0.70 to 0.89—strong correlation; r = 0.90 to 1.00—very strong correlation [33,34]. Additionally, to see the relationship in a multivariate way, we conducted a multiple regression analysis with VV and VR being criteria and motoric tests being the predictors. However, to avoid multicollinearity, we calculated variance inflation factors and excluded predictors with VIF values of more than 5. All analyses were set to be significant at p < 0.05.

3. Results

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of the sample and selected anthropometric variables.

VARIABLES	M	Min	Max	SD
SAMPLE OF RESPONDENTS
Age (years)	9.76	8.83	10.92	0.60
Training experience (months)	16.46	1.00	48.00	12.82
ANTHROPOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS
Body weight (kg)	33.65	23.70	58.70	7.20
Body height (cm)	140.85	127.00	160.30	7.17
Body mass index (kg/m2)	16.83	13.27	25.84	2.46

Legend: M—mean value; Min—minimum; Max—maximum; SD—standard deviation.

shows the basic descriptive values of the respondents and their anthropometric measures. The cohort represents late-childhood athletes with training experience ranging from novices to those with several months of consistent practice. Anthropometric measures show moderate between-subject variability consistent with this developmental stage. All variables are reported with central tendency and dispersion.

Table 2. Descriptive statistics of throwing performance and selected motor abilities.

VARIABLES	M	Min	Max	SD
THROWING PERFORMANCE
Vortex release velocity (km/h)	49.53	33.40	68.40	8.64
Vortex throwing distance/result (m)	16.49	6.47	31.64	6.15
MOTOR ABILITIES
Hand tapping test (n/15 s)	22.75	18.00	38.00	3.51
Leg tapping test (n/15 s)	19.71	15.00	25.00	2.22
The 20 m sprint with a standing start (s)	4.09	3.22	4.97	0.34
The polygon backwards test (s)	18.93	12.47	31.00	4.39
Side-step test (s)	11.51	8.52	15.13	1.36
Sit and reach flexibility test (cm)	55.27	23.00	84.00	11.66
Shoulder standing flexibility test with stick (cm)	51.02	13.00	82.00	14.38
Standing vertical jump test (cm)	30.38	19.00	43.00	5.46
Standing long jump test (cm)	155.67	105.00	194.00	21.05
Standing overhead medicine ball throw/1 kg (m)	5.81	3.73	10.05	1.47
Standing chest medicine ball launch/1 kg (m)	5.71	3.13	8.19	1.08
Push-up test (n/15 s)	10.05	1.00	18.00	3.78
Sit-up test (n/15 s)	11.24	7.00	16.00	2.00
Squat test (n/15 s)	15.10	11.00	17.00	1.29

Legend: M—mean value; Min—minimum; Max—maximum; SD—standard deviation.

shows the basic descriptive values of the variables for the throwing performance and motor test results of the respondents. Vortex release velocity and vortex throwing distance/result display wide inter-individual spread, indicating meaningful performance heterogeneity. Time-based tests (e.g., sprint, agility) are presented so that lower values reflect better performance, while jump and medicine-ball measures reflect higher-is-better outputs. Results are presented with consistent descriptive statistics and clear variable labels to aid interpretation.

The results in Figure 1 revealed a significant (p < 0.05) strong positive correlation (r > 0.75) between release velocity and throwing result (distance).

Figure 2 presents the correlations between anthropometric characteristics, age, training experience, and vortex throwing performance (VV and VR). The closest relationship was found between release velocity and throwing distance (r = 0.78, ** p < 0.001). Training experience showed moderate positive associations with both VV and VR, while age was moderately correlated with throwing distance but not with release velocity. Body height and body weight displayed small-to-moderate positive correlations with throwing results, reflecting the natural advantage of older and larger children. In contrast, body mass index showed no meaningful relationship with performance.

Finally, Figure 3 shows the mutual correlations between all motor variables and throwing performance. Given the results of the correlation analysis in the table below, it is important to note that, from a total of 28, 20 significant correlations (p < 0.05) at different levels can be observed. The strongest positive relationships with throwing performance were found for the medicine ball throws (overhead and chest) and the leg tapping test. Moderate positive associations also appeared with the vertical and long jumps. On the other hand, tests where lower times indicate better ability (such as the 20 m sprint, polygon backwards, and side-step test) showed moderate negative correlations, meaning that faster athletes tended to throw further. Measures of flexibility (sit-and-reach, shoulder flexibility) and basic strength tests (push-ups, sit-ups, squats) were generally weakly related to throwing performance.

The multiple regression model including all motor tests was statistically significant (R = 0.66, R² = 0.43, adjusted R² = 0.30, p = 0.01), indicating that the battery explained 43% of the variance in VV (

Table 3. Multivariate associations between throwing velocity and motoric tests.

	Vortex Throwing Velocity
Variable	β	b	p
TAPH	0.16	0.40	0.25
TAPL	0.02	0.08	0.90
20MST	0.00	−0.09	0.98
POL	0.13	0.26	0.42
SST	0.16	1.05	0.33
SFT	−0.06	−0.04	0.64
VJT	0.05	0.08	0.73
LJT	0.39	0.16	0.02
MBOH	0.28	1.66	0.19
MBCH	0.14	1.15	0.46
P-UP15	0.06	0.14	0.62
SQ15	−0.04	−0.26	0.76
R	0.66
R2	0.43
Adjusted R2	0.30
p	0.01

Note: TAPH—hand tapping test, TAPL—leg tapping test, 20MST—the 20 m sprint with a standing start, POL—the polygon backwards test, SST—side step test, SFT—shoulder standing flexibility test with stick, VJT—standing vertical jump test, LJT—standing long jump test, MBOH—standing overhead medicine ball throw/1 kg, MBCH—standing chest medicine ball launch/1 kg, P-UP15—push-ups test, SQ15—squats test, β—standardized regression coefficient; b—nonstandardized regression coefficient, R—multiple regression; R²—coefficient of determination.

). After mutual adjustment, the standing long jump (LJT) emerged as the only independent predictor of VV (β = 0.39, b = 0.16, p = 0.02). All other tests (hand/leg tapping, sprint, agility, flexibility, vertical jump, medicine-ball throws, push-ups, squats) did not retain statistical significance when entered simultaneously (all p > 0.05). This pattern suggests that lower-body explosive power, as indexed by LJT, is the principal motor attribute linked to higher release velocity once overlapping contributions among tests are accounted for.

For the throwing distance, the full model was significant (R = 0.76, R² = 0.58, adjusted R² = 0.46, p = 0.001), so the motor-test battery explained 58% of the variance in VR (

Table 4. Multivariate associations between throwing distance and motoric tests.

	Votrex Throwing Distance
Variable	β	b	p
TAPH	0.22	0.39	0.08
TAPL	0.16	0.46	0.29
20MST	−0.09	−1.61	0.51
POL	0.11	0.15	0.51
SST	0.16	0.73	0.27
SFT	0.04	0.02	0.73
VJT	0.00	0.00	1.00
LJT	0.06	0.02	0.65
MBOH	0.39	1.64	0.04
MBCH	0.07	0.41	0.72
P-UP15	0.04	0.07	0.72
S-UP15	0.07	0.22	0.63
S&R	0.13	0.07	0.32
R	0.76
R2	0.58
Adjusted R2	0.46
p	0.001

Note: TAPH—hand tapping test, TAPL—leg tapping test, 20MST—the 20 m sprint with a standing start, POL—the polygon backwards test, SST—side step test, SFT—shoulder standing flexibility test with stick, VJT—standing vertical jump test, LJT—standing long jump test, MBOH—standing overhead medicine ball throw/1 kg, MBCH—standing chest medicine ball launch/1 kg, P-UP15—push-ups test; S-UP15—sit-ups test, S&R—sit and reach flexibility test, β—standardized regression coefficient; b—nonstandardized regression coefficient, R—multiple regression; R²—coefficient of determination.

). After mutual adjustment, only the overhead medicine ball throw (MBOH) remained an independent predictor of distance (β = 0.39, p = 0.04). Hand tapping (TAPH) showed a positive trend (β = 0.22, p = 0.08), while all other tests were not retained as independent predictors (all p > 0.05). The pattern suggests that once shared variance is accounted for, upper-body explosive throwing ability uniquely relates to throwing distance, with the rest of the measures contributing overlapping information.

4. Discussion

This study explored how growth, training background, and different motor skills are linked to vortex throwing performance in young female athletes. As expected, release velocity and throwing distance were very closely connected, which means both can be used as reliable indicators of performance at this age. Beyond that, girls who were taller, heavier, or who had spent more time in training generally achieved better results, while body mass index did not appear to play a role. The motor tests provided a clearer picture: the best throwers were also those who performed well in tasks demanding explosive strength and quick alternating movements, such as medicine ball throws, long jumps and the leg tapping test. In contrast, tests of flexibility or basic muscular endurance showed only weak or negligible relationships with throwing performance. However, multivariable analyses showed that lower-body explosive power uniquely predicted VV, whereas upper-body/trunk throwing power uniquely predicted VR, consistent with proximal-to-distal sequencing and the primacy of release parameters.

Taken together, these findings point to the idea that while growth and training experience provide a foundation, it is the development of specific motor abilities—especially explosive power and speed—that most strongly supports success in vortex throwing.

Firstly, the results of the correlation analysis confirmed a significant strong positive correlation between the vortex release velocity and the vortex throwing distance result. The results of this research are in accordance with the many studies [5,6,23,24,25,35], proving the relationship between release velocity and throwing distance. The strong statistically significant correlation between the vortex release velocity and the throwing result (r > 0.75) aligns with most of the correlations obtained between the same variables in javelin throwing; for example, Pavlović [23] obtained r = 0.84, Hussain and Bari [35] obtained r = 0.87, and Saratlija et al. [24] obtained r = 0.90. Considering this research, we can conclude that release velocity can be almost as valid a criterion of vortex or javelin throwing performance as the result itself.

Furthermore, the correlation analysis confirmed a significant correlation of certain anthropometric characteristics and motor abilities with the throwing performance variables (VV and VR). Certain results show statistically significant weak (r = 0.20 to 0.39) and moderate (r = 0.40 to 0.69) positive correlations between age and training experience, body weight, and body height and the throwing result, as well as the variables training experience, body height and release velocity. Conversely, different authors have found that javelin throwers are very heterogeneous when it comes to their anthropometric characteristics [9,15,16,17]. However, this research deals with children who are still in the phase of growth and biological maturation, and body height and body weight showed a significant positive correlation with throwing performance. In this age group, greater height likely aids performance by raising release height and lengthening levers, while higher body weight mostly reflects stature-related growth accompanied by gains in absolute strength and neuromuscular output, both supportive of higher release velocity. The lack of a BMI effect suggests that how mass is distributed (stature and muscle) matters more than mass per se. Some of the size–performance link may also reflect collinearity with age and training exposure. Considering this kind of correlation, it can be assumed that older children and children who are more experienced in training have better-developed motor abilities, which are necessary for better throwing performance. These findings align with the previously mentioned conclusions, indicating that body weight, age, and training experience are positively correlated with results in javelin throwing [16,17].

However, the MBOH, MBCH, and TAPL tests are significantly moderately correlated with both throwing performance tests. Even though this research was conducted on children, these findings indicate that explosive power and the speed of alternative movements in throwing are more important than other abilities, which is also confirmed by Milanović and Harasin [14]. They rated the explosive power and speed of alternative movements as the most important motor abilities for success in javelin throwing. Other research points to similar results. For example, Maszczyk et al. [12] determined that in young javelin throwers aged 14 to 15, the specific strength of the arms and trunk and the specific strength of the shoulder girdle and trunk are the most important predictors for throwing a javelin from a full run. Furthermore, Stanković et al. [13] used the same speed tests (TAPH and TAPL) on first-year students at the Faculty of Kinesiology and found that there is a statistically significant correlation between individual motor abilities and results in javelin throwing; specifically, hand tapping and leg tapping showed the greatest influence on the result.

In relation to the other motor tests applied in this research, significant moderate correlations (r = 0.40 to 0.69) can be observed between the hand tapping test, 20 m sprint with a standing start (20MST), and the sit-ups test and throwing distance and between the standing vertical jump test and standing long jump test and release velocity. The tests that usually indicate the speed of alternative movements (TAPH, 20MST, and S-UP15) have a stronger correlation with the results/distance, but the tests that typically indicate explosive power (VJT and LJT) exhibit a stronger correlation with release velocity. In any case, these tests could be good indicators of throwing performance. These results agree with those of Ivanović [11], who found a significant correlation between individual tests of explosive power (20 m sprint from a flying start, standing triple jump, and standing long jump) and results in javelin throwing among first-grade high school students. Conversely, Žuvela et al. [10] studied first-year kinesiology faculty students with no previous javelin throwing experience, determining a significant correlation between motor tests of speed and explosive power (30 m sprint from a high start; standing long jump) and javelin throw results, but only in those with a better throwing technique. These results once again confirm that throwing skill is as important as motor abilities for success in the athletic discipline of javelin throwing.

In the tests showing statistically significant weak (r = 0.20 to 0.39) correlations with both indicators of throwing performance (SST and S&R with VR and VV) and with one of the measured indicators (TAPH, 20MST, VJT, LJT, and S-UP15 with VR or VV), it is obvious the attributes play a recognized role in throwing performance but are not dominant and do not have a significant influence on the success of throwers. In the observed tests showing no statistically significant correlations with any of the indicators of throwing performance (POL, SFT, P-UP15, and SQ15 with VR or VV), it is probable that they do not include enough attributes to influence throwing performance. Finally, the motoric variables that were significantly correlated with one of the indicators of throwing performance (VR or VV) at any level have a significant correlation with another one (VR or VV). This shows once again that VR and VV are almost equal indicators of throwing performance for young track and field athletes.

To place these findings in context, the multivariable models show that different parts of the kinetic chain matter at different stages of the throw: lower-body explosive power (standing long jump) stood out for throwing velocity, whereas upper-body/trunk throwing power (overhead medicine-ball throw) uniquely related to throwing distance once overlapping tests were considered. This aligns with classic descriptions of the proximal-to-distal sequencing in overarm throws and with work highlighting the primacy of release parameters for outcome, especially release velocity [36]. It also fits broader evidence that explosive strength qualities are central to success in the throwing events, with task-specific expression (lower body for speed generation; upper body for force transmission and implement release) [37]. Practically, coaches working with youth can emphasize jump/plyometric progressions to build the impulse that feeds VV, and progressive medicine-ball work to convert that impulse into distance—always alongside technical practice to refine angle, height, and timing at release.

Limitations and Strengths

Our sample was narrow, girls aged 8–11 from four clubs in one city, so the findings may not generalize to boys, older athletes, or other settings. The cross-sectional design does not allow causal conclusions. We also did not measure biological maturation (e.g., age at peak height velocity, Tanner stage), so age, size, and training may still confound some associations. Field testing (tape measure for distance, handheld radar for velocity) and testing across sessions may have added measurement noise. Future work should include larger, multi-centre and longitudinal samples, direct maturation indices and training-load records, and multivariable analyses with key kinematic variables (release angle/height). This study has several strengths. We examined a homogeneous cohort of young female athletes, reducing sex-related variability and aligning the sample with real-world coaching contexts. We assessed both throwing distance and release velocity, a rarely combined approach in youth vortex research, using objective tools (tape measure; handheld radar), alongside a broad, field-relevant motor test battery and standard anthropometrics.

5. Conclusions

Combining the overall results of this research, it can be concluded that vortex release velocity and throwing results/distance are almost equally good criteria for determining throwing performance. Furthermore, javelin throwers represent a very heterogeneous group when it comes to anthropometric characteristics, and these attributes should not be the main criteria for the selection of successful throwers. This phenomenon is even more pronounced when it comes to children because, during their biological development and maturation, they should not be selected exclusively according to their anthropometric characteristics. Some children may achieve better throwing results if they are biologically more mature, chronologically older, or have more training experience, and this should also be considered when it comes to selection. Furthermore, individual motor abilities in children can play a very important role in achieving success in throwing and should also be considered in the selection and creation of the training process. Finally, certain motor tests—such as the leg tapping test, standing overhead medicine ball throw, and standing chest medicine ball launch—are very good indicators of throwing performance. Moreover, they can be of great use in forming better and more precise modal characteristics for throwing athletes in younger age categories. Additionally, the motor abilities recognized in athletes in this research can be valuable indicators of quality throwing performance and could play a crucial role in throwing success.