INTRODUCTION: In freestyle snowboarding, particularly in the discipline halfpipe, athletes perform highly technical aerial movements with increasing rotation [1], requiring precise body control and landing techniques. Trampolines provide a safe environment for refining these techniques [2], with coaches offering feedback based on visual cues. While research has focused on the biomechanics of the landing phase during on-snow training [3], the cues coaches use to analyze tricks during off-snow training on trampolines remain largely unexplored. Until now, no studies have systematically investigated how coaches assess tricks or whether these assessments align with biomechanical measurements. Therefore, this study aims to analyze which visual cues coaches use to evaluate snowboard tricks performed on trampolines, explore whether these cues are biomechanically measurable, and how coach evaluations compare with athlete self assessments. METHODS: Four elite male snowboard halfpipe athletes (age: 23 ± 4 years; weight: 74 ± 8.8 kg; height: 178 ± 7.8 cm, experience Snowboard Halfpipe: 10 ± 9 y), national team members who compete or have competed at the international level (Welt cups), performed a total of 584 tricks on a freestyle trampoline using a bounce board, with the amount of rotation ranging from 360° to 900° in different direction. A national coach of snowboard halfpipe (age: 28 years; national license; coach experience 5 y) and the athletes themselves judge the quality and execution errors of the tricks based on a questionnaire. The body position was captured by a motion capture system (Xsens, Nederland, 18 IMU, 240 Hz). RESULTS/DISCUSSION: The coach focused primarily on 13 cues, with the front leg receiving the most attention, followed by gaze and upper body cues (s. Figure 1). The movement flow (t = -3.2; p < 0.001) and difficulty (t = 9.53; p < 0.001) showed statistically significant differences between coaches and athletes. Both coaches and athletes agreed on the feasibility of transferring tricks to on-snow conditions, suggesting that trampoline training effectively prepares athletes for the halfpipe. Coaches, relying on visual cues and experience, may provide more objective feedback compared to athletes, whose self-assessments can be biased. Biomechanical analysis could help standardize these cues and enhance coaching feedback. CONCLUSION: Coaches and athletes perceive movements subjectively in different ways. Integrating biomechanical analysis into coaching could further refine visual cues, enabling more evidence feedback and improving athletes' technique and safety when transitioning tricks from trampoline training to on-snow performance.
© Copyright 2025 10th International Congress on Science and Skiing, January 28 - February 1, 2025, Val di Fiemme, Italy. All rights reserved.