(1) Background: Learning and training in variable conditions favors adapting to unstable or changing environments. The aim of the study was to test the effect of variable practice on the accuracy of the forehand net approach shot in tennis.; (2) Methods: Thirty (n=30) first-class national players (12.9 ± 1.1 years old) participated, divided into three groups: i) induced variability training (n=10) (varying court surfaces and balls), ii) specific training (n=10) and iii) usual training -control group- (n=10). All groups trained for a month: 12 sessions of 20 minutes -3 per week-. The accuracy of the shots were analyzed through a 2D capture and digitization process of the ball bounce on the court; (3) Results: The variability group presented better accuracy values after the period without practice than the stable training group (p = 0.041; ES= 0.51).; (4) Conclusions: the application of variability in the game conditions during tennis training seems to have a favorable effect on the retention of accuracy in the forehand down the line approach to the net.

This article focuses on the variation of how the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals uses the language of trauma in gender-based asylum claims. Gender-based asylum claims include female genital mu-tilation (FGM), domestic violence, forced marriage, coercive population control (CPC) in the form of forced abortions and forced sterilizations, and rape. The Circuit Courts have reviewed appeals from petitioners with asylum claims since 1946, yet the language of trauma did not appear in the Court’s decisions until 1983. From 1983-2023 only 385, 3.85% or less, of the over 10,000 asylum cases before the Circuit Courts used the language of trauma in its legal interpretation of persecution. I have identified 101 gender-based asylum cases that were reviewed by one of the eleven U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that apply the language of trauma in its legal interpretation of persecution for this analysis. This study found that U.S. Circuit Courts use the language of trauma in four ways: precedent cases, psychological trauma, physical trauma, and policies and reports when reviewing gender-based asylum claims.

Recently there has been growing interest in the application of game theory (GT) to solve many diverse problems in the field of construction, including i.a.: tender preparation, selection of a contractor for construction works, negotiating terms and conditions of cooperation of the parties to the contract, analysis and modeling of investment risk. In the authors opinion, the use of GT by general contractor (GC) of construction works to indicate the best strategy leading to winning court proceedings in a situation of conflict with investor (IN), so far has not been the subject of research. Taking into account the above, the aim of the presented paper is to indicate the optimal strategy from the GC point of view in the conflict situation with IN. The article presents a list of the most common causes of conflicts between parties of the construction works' contract, defines the background of the problem and the cause of the dispute, and on its basis, the authors generate the theoretical model of the game. Based on the analyzed game model, expected payoffs for players were calculated and the probability border value at which GC should apply the indicated strategy determined. The results of the study show that in the case when the probability of issuing a judgment favorable for GC is at least equal to 69.23%, it is justified to use an aggressive strategy. The analysis also confirms that from the financial perspective, litigation in most cases of conflicts in the area of construction should be the last choice.