Distance, Speed and High Intensity Characteristics of 0 to 24-Goal, Mixed and Women’s Polo

Round  1

Reviewer 1 Report

The dataset seems interesting and the short paper is well written.

These comments should be addressed before publishing:

-From the paper, I conclude that collected (raw) GPS coordinates are not included in the dataset. I think that this information is also of interest to verify if the offered sub-variables have been properly calculated. The same applies to accelerometry signals.

The procedure to calculate/define certain variables should be commented in more detail.

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for their kind words and their finding of our data descriptor interesting.

With respect to the reviewer's observation/recommendation regarding the availability and provision of accelerometer and GPS (longitude/latitude) data, we would suggest that the inclusion of this data (at present) may actually detract from the intended use of the current dataset, as each rider and horse will likely display a unique riding/gait signature that will adjust as a result of velocity and during Polo specific movements. Whilst these data are likely interesting, the ability to adequately describe and derive meaning from them is something we would wish to spend further time and pursue deeper investigation upon, in collaboration with other practitioners. More simply, in a typical Polo match a player may engage in unique horse-rider pairings, ranging in number between players from as few as 2 interactions to in excess of 12. As these pairings are not listed within the current dataset and accompanying raw data for the sake of maintaining anonymity, we have elected to exclude them, but acknowledge there is a need for further investigation in this area.

We have included the following sentence to this effect (Lines 85-90): 'Raw accelerometer and magnetometer data were excluded from the present dataset to minimize error due to individual rider and horse gait and playing profiles. Whilst such movement signatures are likely interesting, work independent of this investigation is required to fully understand these factors. We have previously shown that the data processed by the unit manufacturer’s software to produce reliable spatiotemporal data whether mounted in a specialist vest or mounted on the players’ belts [5], hence this processed data is preferred.'

We further acknowledge that the examination of longitude and latitude coordinates may also be tactically relevant and so represent an important area of subsequent investigation for sports scientists and coaches working with Polo players.

We have also added the following sentence to further describe the consistency of the procedure to minimise error (Line 93-94): 'We assigned each player the same GPS unit for repeat observations to minimize error due to differences in inter-unit reliability'. 

In response to the reviewer's second comment, as we have used the metrics as calculated by the manufacturer's software, we would suggest that the descriptions provided in Table 1 best represent the descriptions of these metrics. The methods for calculating these methods are proprietary to the manufacturer, and their definitions are sourced from the manufacturer's glossary (reference 7). These definitions are included in support information provided by the manufacturer to ensure consistent interpretation of the metrics generated by the units used in the present investigation. We feel it important to reiterate we have no conflicts of interest here, and have no ties, financial or otherwise to VX Sport.

Again, we thank the reviewer for taking the time to review this data descriptor, and feel their review has strengthened the manuscript and our understanding of the content presented within it, as well as highlighting an interesting area for future investigation.

Reviewer 2 Report

In manuscript data-547366, Best and Standing simply described a data set about observations on 19 different characteristics on distance, speed and high intensity of 0 to 24-goal, mixed and women's polo collected via GPS from New Zealand.

As this manuscript is a Data Descriptor, it is reviewed differently to a regular article. There is no introduction, research design and methods, results, or conclusions. However, the data appear to be reasonably described and are accessible. 

As a suggestion, the authors may want to explicitly describe the data quality. For instance, were appropriate quality control measures employed and described? Are there any possible sources of error and noise appropriately?

As another suggestion, the word "data" is expected to be a plural noun. The authors used the word "data" as it is both a singular noun (e.g., "Data is presented") and a plural noun (e.g., "Data are provided").

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for their kind words and acknowledgement that a data descriptor does not present a typical review format. We hope you found our data descriptor interesting.

We have ensured consistency with the use of data as a plural noun, as per the suggested amendment. 

We have also added the following sentence to further describe the consistency of the procedure to minimise error (Line 93-94): 'We assigned each player the same GPS unit for repeat observations to minimize error due to differences in inter-unit reliability'. American-English spelling is used here as per the journal template.

We acknowledge that sources of error likely exist within the data that contribute to this dataset, however we would suggest that these errors are more apparent in the raw GPS and accelerometer data prior to being processed by the manufacturer's software. We have included the following sentence to this effect (Lines 85-90): 'Raw accelerometer and magnetometer data were excluded from the present dataset to minimize error due to individual rider and horse gait and playing profiles. Whilst such movement signatures are likely interesting, work independent of this investigation is required to fully understand these factors. We have previously shown that the data processed by the unit manufacturer’s software to produce reliable spatiotemporal data whether mounted in a specialist vest or mounted on the players’ belts [5], hence this processed data is preferred.'

Again, we thank the reviewer for taking the time to review this data descriptor, and feel their review has strengthened the manuscript.