↓ Skip to main content

Identifying the performance characteristics of a winning outcome in elite mixed martial arts competition

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
25 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
132 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Identifying the performance characteristics of a winning outcome in elite mixed martial arts competition
Published in
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, August 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.jsams.2016.08.001
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lachlan P. James, Sam Robertson, G. Gregory Haff, Emma M. Beckman, Vincent G. Kelly

Abstract

To determine those performance indicators that have the greatest influence on classifying outcome at the elite level of mixed martial arts (MMA). A secondary objective was to establish the efficacy of decision tree analysis in explaining the characteristics of victory when compared to alternate statistical methods. Cross-sectional observational. Eleven raw performance indicators from male Ultimate Fighting Championship bouts (n=234) from July 2014 to December 2014 were screened for analysis. Each raw performance indicator was also converted to a rate-dependent measure to be scaled to fight duration. Further, three additional performance indicators were calculated from the dataset and included in the analysis. Cohen's d effect sizes were employed to determine the magnitude of the differences between Wins and Losses, while decision tree (chi-square automatic interaction detector (CHAID)) and discriminant function analyses (DFA) were used to classify outcome (Win and Loss). Effect size comparisons revealed differences between Wins and Losses across a number of performance indicators. Decision tree (raw: 71.8%; rate-scaled: 76.3%) and DFA (raw: 71.4%; rate-scaled 71.2%) achieved similar classification accuracies. Grappling and accuracy performance indicators were the most influential in explaining outcome. The decision tree models also revealed multiple combinations of performance indicators leading to victory. The decision tree analyses suggest that grappling activity and technique accuracy are of particular importance in achieving victory in elite-level MMA competition. The DFA results supported the importance of these performance indicators. Decision tree induction represents an intuitive and slightly more accurate approach to explaining bout outcome in this sport when compared to DFA.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Singapore 1 <1%
Unknown 131 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 14%
Student > Bachelor 16 12%
Researcher 6 5%
Lecturer 5 4%
Other 25 19%
Unknown 38 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 51 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 8%
Psychology 5 4%
Engineering 3 2%
Social Sciences 3 2%
Other 16 12%
Unknown 44 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 March 2017.
All research outputs
#1,521,517
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
#422
of 2,874 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,218
of 376,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
#14
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,874 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 376,060 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.