Validity of spatiotemporal and ground reaction force estimates during resisted sprinting with a motorized loading device.

We aimed to examine the validity of estimating spatiotemporal and ground reaction force (GRF) parameters during resisted sprinting using a robotic loading device (1080 Sprint). Twelve male athletes (age: 20.9 ± 2.2 years; height: 174.6 ± 4.2 cm; weight: 69.4 ± 6.1 kg; means ± SDs) performed maximal resisted sprinting with three different loads using the device. The step frequency and length and step-averaged velocity, anteroposterior GRF (Fap ), and the ratio of Fap to resultant GRF (RF) were estimated using the velocity and towing force data measured using the device. Simultaneously, the corresponding values were measured using a 50-m force plate system. The proportional and fixed biases of the estimated values against those measured using the force plate system were determined using ordinary least product (OLP) regression analysis. Proportional and fixed biases were observed for most variables. However, the proportional bias was small or negligible except for the step frequency. Conversely, the fixed bias was small for step-averaged velocity (0.11 m/s) and step length (0.04 m), whereas it was large for step frequency (0.54 step/s), Fap (16N), and RF (2.22%). For all variables except step frequency, the prediction intervals in the OLP regression dramatically decreased when the corresponding values were smoothed using a two-step moving average. These results indicate that by using the velocity and force data recorded in the loading device, most of the spatiotemporal and GRF variables during resisted sprinting can be estimated with some correction of the fixed bias and data smoothing using the two-step moving average.

Influence of horizontal resistance loads on spatiotemporal and ground reaction force variables during maximal sprint acceleration.

This study aimed to elucidate the influence of horizontal resistance loads on the spatiotemporal and ground reaction force (GRF) variables during maximal sprint acceleration. Nine male sprinters (20.2 ± 1.2 years; 175.3 ± 4.5 cm, 69.7 ± 6.1 kg) performed sprint-running with six loading conditions of one unresisted and five resisted loads of 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 kg using a resistance training device with intelligent drag technology. During the trials, the GRFs for all steps were determined using a 50-m force plate system. The spatiotemporal and GRF variables at running velocity of every 0.5 m/s were obtained and compared across the loading conditions. The maximal running velocity under 0, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 kg loading conditions were 9.84 ± 0.41, 8.55 ± 0.41, 8.09 ± 0.33, 7.62 ± 0.34, 7.11 ± 0.31, and 6.71 ± 0.29 m/s, respectively. ANOVA revealed significant main effects of load on the measured variables (η2 = 0.236-0.715, p < 0.05), except for stance-averaged anteroposterior GRF and braking impulse. However, the observed differences between the loading conditions were small, with approximately 4% (1.3-7.5%) for the GRF variables and approximately 9% (1.2-22.3%) for the spatiotemporal variables. The present study indicates that horizontal resistance load in sprint acceleration has little impact on the spatiotemporal and GRF variables at a given running velocity. In contrast to a general recommendation, one should adopt a heavy load in resisted sprint aiming to improve performance in the earlier stage of maximal sprint acceleration.

Differences between junior and senior male sprinters in physiological variables associated with sprint performance.

BACKGROUND: The physiological variables associated with sprint performance have been extensively studied. However, little information is available on how the corresponding physiological variables differ between junior and senior sprinters. This study aimed to examine this subject. METHODS: In addition to the maximal running velocity achieved while sprinting over 60-m, body composition, muscle thicknesses of the trunk and lower limbs, performance scores of four jumping tasks (countermovement, rebound, standing long, and standing five-step jumps), and 10-s maximal anaerobic pedaling power were determined in 17 junior and 22 senior male sprinters. RESULTS: In the junior and senior sprinters, most of the measured variables were significantly correlated with the maximal running velocity. Analysis of covariance showed that only the maximal pedaling power relative to the body mass was significantly different between the two groups in the regression equation slope of the relationship with maximal running velocity (0.20 for junior and 0.64 for senior sprinters). Additionally, multiple regression analysis revealed that while the standing five-step jump distance (40%) and the size of the psoas major muscle (23%) were selected as explanatory factors for maximal running velocity in the junior sprinters, maximal pedaling power relative to the body mass (63%) was selected in the senior sprinters. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the following physiological factors associated with sprint running performance differ between the junior and senior sprinters: the ability of repetitive jumping in the horizontal forward direction and muscularity of hip flexors in the junior sprinters versus the anaerobic capacity in senior sprinters. Therefore, coaches and athletes need to take into consideration that the physiological variables to be focused on are different for each generation.

Ten-second maximal pedaling power as a representative measure for assessing sprint performance.

BACKGROUND: There is no evidences concerning the relative contribution of physiological parameters to maximal sprinting velocity and acceleration ability. The aim of this study is to elucidate the associations between physiological variables and sprint performance. METHODS: Twenty-six male sprinters performed a 60-m sprint twice. Maximal sprint velocity (Vmax) and running distance after 4 s from the start (D4) were measured as indices of sprint performance during the sprint using a laser distance measurement device. Body composition, jump performance in the countermovement jump, the rebound jump, the standing long jump and the standing 5-step jump, and 10-s maximal anaerobic pedaling power were measured as physiological variables. RESULTS: All measured variables were significantly related to Vmax (r=0.49-0.71, P<0.05) and D4 (r=0.39-0.72, P<0.05), expect for anthropometric variables. Multiple regression analysis indicated that the 10-s maximal anaerobic pedaling power relative to body mass was the only variable that significantly explained Vmax and D4. CONCLUSIONS: The 10-s maximal anaerobic pedaling power relative to body mass can be a representative measure for assessing the sprint performance of male sprinters.

Associations Between Individual Lower-Limb Muscle Volumes and 100-m Sprint Time in Male Sprinters.

PURPOSE: To elucidate the relationship between the muscularity of individual lower-limb muscles and 100-m-race time (t100) in young-adult male sprinters. METHODS: Thirty-one young-adult male sprinters took part in this study (age 19.9 ± 1.4 y, height 173.5 ± 4.6 cm, body mass 67.0 ± 4.9 kg, t100 10.23-11.71 s). Cross-sectional images from the origin to insertion of 12 lower-limb muscles were obtained with via magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The absolute volume of each muscle, the ratio of total volume of measured muscles to body mass, the ratio of individual muscle volume to body mass, and the ratio between 2 individual muscle volumes were calculated as indices of muscularity using the images. A stepwise multiple-regression analysis was performed to examine the association between the indices and t100. RESULTS: A stepwise multiple-regression analysis produced an equation (adjusted R2 = .234) with the gluteus maximus-to-quadriceps femoris muscle-volume ratio (ß = -0.509, P = .003) as the explanatory variable. CONCLUSIONS: Individual differences in 100-m-race performance cannot be explained by the muscularity of specific muscles, and 23% of the variability in the performance can be explained by the relative difference between the muscularity of gluteus maximus and quadriceps femoris; faster runners have a greater gluteus maximus relative to quadriceps femoris.

Lack of association between genotype score and sprint/power performance in the Japanese population.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to examine the association between a total genotype score (TGS) based on previously published genetic polymorphism candidates and differences in sprint/power performance. DESIGN: Case-control association study. METHODS: We analysed 21 polymorphisms, which have previously been associated with sprint/power performance and related phenotypes, in 211 Japanese sprint/power track and field athletes (77 regional, 72 national, and 62 international athletes) and 649 Japanese controls using the TaqMan SNP genotyping assay. We calculated the TGS (maximum value of 100 for the theoretically optimal polygenic score) for the 21 polymorphisms. RESULTS: All groups exhibited similar TGSs (control: 55.9±7.2, regional: 55.1±7.1, national: 56.1±7.4, and international: 56.0±7.8, p=0.827 by one-way analysis of variance). Nine of the 21 polymorphisms had the same direction of effect (odds ratio >1.0) as in previous studies, while 12 had the opposite direction of effect (odds ratio <1.0). Three polymorphisms (rs699 in AGT, rs41274853 in CNTFR, and rs7832552 in TRHR), which had the same direction of effect as in previous studies, were associated with international sprint/power athlete status (p<0.05). However, after multiple testing corrections, the statistical significance of these polymorphisms was not retained. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that TGSs based on the 21 previously published sprint/power performance-associated polymorphisms did not influence the sprint/power athlete status of Japanese track and field athletes. However, our results maintain the possibility that three of these polymorphisms might be associated with sprint/power performance.