| # Strength Performance Analysis and Modeling | |
| ## Overview | |
| This project analyzes a large dataset of athlete strength metrics to understand patterns in deadlift performance and build predictive and classification models. | |
| The work includes: | |
| - Exploratory Data Analysis (EDA) | |
| - Feature engineering | |
| - Regression modeling | |
| - Classification modeling | |
| - Clustering | |
| - Model selection and export | |
| The final goal was to classify athletes into performance categories and evaluate which model performs best. | |
| --- | |
| ## Dataset | |
| The dataset includes: | |
| - Body weight | |
| - Height | |
| - Age | |
| - Strength metrics: deadlift, back squat, snatch | |
| After cleaning, outliers were removed and missing values handled. | |
| --- | |
| ## Exploratory Data Analysis (EDA) | |
| ### Average Deadlift by Body Weight | |
|  | |
| Heavier weight categories generally show higher deadlift performance. | |
| ### Average Deadlift by Height | |
|  | |
| Taller athletes tend to lift more, with increasing variance at higher height ranges. | |
| ### Average Deadlift by Age | |
|  | |
| Performance peaks around ages 25–34 and gradually decreases afterward. | |
| ### Body Ratio and Deadlift | |
|  | |
| Higher strength-to-body weight ratios correlate with higher deadlift results. | |
| ### Strength Metric Correlations | |
|  | |
| Deadlift and back squat show a strong positive correlation, while snatch is weakly correlated. | |
| --- | |
| ## Regression Modeling | |
| A baseline linear regression model was trained to predict deadlift performance. | |
| ### Actual vs Predicted Deadlift | |
|  | |
| The model follows the general trend but shows noise due to variability between athletes. | |
| --- | |
| ## Clustering | |
| K-Means clustering was applied to identify athlete groups based on performance metrics. | |
| ### Cluster Visualization (PCA) | |
|  | |
| Three clear performance clusters were identified, separating athletes by overall strength level. | |
| --- | |
| ## Classification Modeling | |
| Athletes were categorized into three balanced deadlift performance classes: | |
| - Low | |
| - Medium | |
| - High | |
| Models trained: | |
| - Logistic Regression | |
| - Random Forest | |
| - Gradient Boosting | |
| ### Confusion Matrices | |
| Logistic Regression: | |
|  | |
| Random Forest: | |
|  | |
| Gradient Boosting: | |
|  | |
| --- | |
| ## Model Evaluation | |
| All models achieved high accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score. | |
| However: | |
| - Random Forest made fewer critical misclassifications | |
| - It showed better separation between High and Low classes | |
| - It achieved the highest F1-score | |
| Therefore, the Random Forest model was selected as the final classification model. | |
| --- | |
| ## Final Model | |
| The winning model was: | |
| Random Forest Classifier | |
| It was trained fully and exported as: | |
| `classification_winner.pkl` | |
| --- | |
| ## How to Load the Model | |
| ```python | |
| import pickle | |
| with open("classification_winner.pkl", "rb") as f: | |
| model = pickle.load(f) | |
| prediction = model.predict(X_sample) | |
| ## Conclusion | |
| This project provided several key insights: | |
| - Weight, height, and body ratio strongly influence deadlift performance | |
| - Age shows a performance peak followed by decline | |
| - Deadlift and back squat are closely related | |
| - Classification models performed extremely well due to clear class separation | |
| - Random Forest proved to be the most reliable model | |
| This project demonstrates a full machine learning workflow, including: | |
| - Data exploration | |
| - Feature engineering | |
| - Model training | |
| - Evaluation | |
| - Model selection | |
| - Export and deployment | |
| The final Random Forest model offers strong predictive performance and can be used to classify athletes into performance categories based on their physical and strength metrics. |