Abstract:

The changes of regulations affect the development of all sports. In volleyball one of the key changes in the 1998 regulations was that players were allowed to pass the float serve with upper head pass technique. The outcome of this change was the use of this as main technique by numerous players mostly in float serve. At the last congress of the FIVB proposed repealing regulation, ' as in volleyball on sand, but was not accepted. Reception serve is part of the syndrome 1 Volleyball and important to the success of attack, but also for the game success, while the speed of the attack in Volleyball Men is a predictor for the final result of the game.The purpose of this research is to highlight the differences in the effectiveness of the attack syndrome1 Volleyball depending on the type of pass to the float serve or jump from the ground. The data comes from recording the technical skill of the pass after float serve (N >15.500) of 176 games performance teams (88 races for 2 groups) of the season 2012‐13 A1 National Men category . The technical skills are assessed (dropping to 5‐level ordinal scale) the type of pass used (with U.h or L.h) , the zone in which the passer is located (in nominal scale six levels) , the zone of which the attack took place (in nominal range 5 levels) ,and the efficiency of theattack (on regular 3‐level scale) . The interatomic control of reliability was tested with the log Cohen K coefficient and weighted Coehn K.For the statistical processing of data applied logistic regression by the method of maximum probabilities. Results showed that all the passes with L.h technique were more than the total passes with UH technique and efficacy of attack after the L.h is better, than the effectiveness of the attack after the UH pass technique.