ArticlePublisher preview availableLiterature Review
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.

Abstract and Figures

Backward running (BR) is a form of locomotion that occurs in short bursts during many overground field and court sports. It has also traditionally been used in clinical settings as a method to rehabilitate lower body injuries. Comparisons between BR and forward running (FR) have led to the discovery that both may be generated by the same neural circuitry. Comparisons of the acute responses to FR reveal that BR is characterised by a smaller ratio of braking to propulsive forces, increased step frequency, decreased step length, increased muscle activity and reliance on isometric and concentric muscle actions. These biomechanical differences have been critical in informing recent scientific explorations which have discovered that BR can be used as a method for reducing injury and improving a variety of physical attributes deemed advantageous to sports performance. This includes improved lower body strength and power, decreased injury prevalence and improvements in change of direction performance following BR training. The current findings from research help improve our understanding of BR biomechanics and provide evidence which supports BR as a useful method to improve athlete performance. However, further acute and longitudinal research is needed to better understand the utility of BR in athletic performance programs.
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
REVIEW ARTICLE
A New Direction to Athletic Performance: Understanding
the Acute and Longitudinal Responses to Backward Running
Aaron Uthoff
1
Jon Oliver
1,2
John Cronin
1,3
Craig Harrison
1
Paul Winwood
1,4
Published online: 1 March 2018
ÓSpringer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018
Abstract Backward running (BR) is a form of locomotion
that occurs in short bursts during many overground field and
court sports. It has also traditionally been used in clinical
settings as a method to rehabilitate lower body injuries.
Comparisons between BR and forward running (FR) have
led to the discovery that both may be generated by the same
neural circuitry. Comparisons of the acute responses to FR
reveal that BR is characterised by a smaller ratio of braking to
propulsive forces, increased step frequency, decreased step
length, increased muscle activity and reliance on isometric
and concentric muscle actions. These biomechanical dif-
ferences have been critical in informing recent scientific
explorations which have discovered that BR can be used as a
method for reducing injury and improving a variety of
physical attributes deemed advantageous to sports perfor-
mance. This includes improved lower body strength and
power, decreased injury prevalence and improvements in
change of direction performance following BR training. The
current findings from research help improve our under-
standing of BR biomechanics and provide evidence which
supports BR as a useful method to improve athlete
performance. However, further acute and longitudinal
research is needed to better understand the utility of BR in
athletic performance programs.
Key Points
The acute effects of backward running display
unique cardiorespiratory and biomechanical
responses compared to forward running. While
running backward appears to be demanding on the
cardiorespiratory system and require high total
activation of lower limb muscles it has been shown
to display less mechanical strain on the knee joint
when compared to forward running.
Research suggests that implementing backward
running into longitudinal athletic training programs
is associated with decreased injury prevalence,
increased lower limb strength and improved change
of direction performance.
Though the acute and longitudinal benefits of
backward running are many, it is currently under-
represented in the scientific literature when
compared to other forms of locomotion.
1 Introduction
It is understood that forward running (FR) is a propulsive
form of locomotion characteristic of most overground
sports. Running in humans is a method of terrestrial loco-
motion that can refer to a variety of speeds ranging from
jogging to sprinting. Running is unique to other forms of
&Aaron Uthoff
uthoffaaron@gmail.com
1
Sports Performance Research Institute New Zealand
(SPRINZ), AUT Millennium, AUT University, Auckland,
New Zealand
2
Youth Physical Development Unit, School of Sport, Cardiff
Metropolitan University, Cyncoed Campus, Cyncoed Road,
Cardiff CF23 6XD, UK
3
School of Health and Medical Science, Edith Cowan
University, Perth, WA, Australia
4
Department of Sport and Recreation, School of Applied
Science, Toi Ohomai Institute of Technology, Tauranga, New
Zealand
123
Sports Med (2018) 48:1083–1096
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-018-0877-5
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
... To determine repeated sprint performance, a 20-m sprint FR test was performed, during which the subject covered the distance in the shortest time possible. Five attempts were given to the participants and the shortest time across attempts was considered 22,23 . From a static standing start, the participants sprinted all-out, 20-m, ve times. ...
... The effect of BR training on agility can be explained by the fact that BR provides more proprioceptive elements for body control and awareness (balance)4,14 .For the 20-m sprint test, the present study found a very low correlation (r = -0.06) with the V peak_BR .Although no previous studies have correlated these variables, Uthoff et al.22 demonstrated that eight weeks of sprint BR training with intensities classi ed as slow, moderate, and fast (20-45, 50-75, and ≥ 95% of maximal effort, respectively), and velocities self-selected by the participants, resulted in improvements in 10-m and 20-m sprint performances in forty-three male adolescents (aged 13-15 years). These results from Uthoff et al.22 likely occurred due to the speci city of training on performance.Another important result was the low correlation between CMJ and V peak_BR . ...
... with the V peak_BR .Although no previous studies have correlated these variables, Uthoff et al.22 demonstrated that eight weeks of sprint BR training with intensities classi ed as slow, moderate, and fast (20-45, 50-75, and ≥ 95% of maximal effort, respectively), and velocities self-selected by the participants, resulted in improvements in 10-m and 20-m sprint performances in forty-three male adolescents (aged 13-15 years). These results from Uthoff et al.22 likely occurred due to the speci city of training on performance.Another important result was the low correlation between CMJ and V peak_BR . This nding does not corroborate previous studies, that showed that BR training generates a better ability to produce muscle power and, consequently, greater height in the vertical jump4,22 . ...
Preprint
Full-text available
The aim of this study was to verify the correlations between peak backward running velocity (V peak_BR ) and peak forward running velocity (V peak_FR) , 5-km running performance, the agility T-test, 20-m sprint, and countermovement jump (CMJ) in physically active men. Fifty-four physically active men (age: 27.7 ± 4.8 years) performed the following tests: V peak_FR , V peak_BR, 5-km running performance, agility T-test, and 20-m sprint on the athletics track, and the CMJ test in the laboratory. Tests were performed at the same time of day with 48-hour intervals. Data normality was verified using the Shapiro-Wilk test and the Student's t test for dependent samples was used to compare variables. The correlation between the V peak_BR and the other variables was performed using the Pearson correlation test (r), according to the following classification: 0.0 to 0.1 very low; 0.1 to 0.3 low; 0.3 to 0.5 moderate; 0.5 to 0.7 high; 0.7 to 0.9 very high; and 0.9 to 1.0 almost perfect. The significance level adopted was P < 0.05. There was a high correlation between the V peak_BR and V peak_FR (7.7 ± 0.1 km·h − 1 ; 13.0 ± 0.2 km·h − 1 , respectively; r = 0.58); the V peak_BR showed a moderate and negative correlation with 5-km running performance time (t-5km) (27.4 ± 0.5 min; r = -0.46). The V peak_BR presented low or very low correlations with the other variables. We concluded that there is a correlation between V peak_BR and performance variables in physically active men, however this correlation is more expressive with the variables V peak_FR and 5-km running performance.
... Different training strategies and prescription methods have been investigated with the aim of optimizing performance of runners (UTHOFF et al., 2018;MACHADO et al., 2013). Recently, backward running (BR) has been used as a strategy to reduce the risk of injuries and improve forward running (FR) performance (UTHOFF et al., 2018;CAVAGNA et al., 2012). ...
... Different training strategies and prescription methods have been investigated with the aim of optimizing performance of runners (UTHOFF et al., 2018;MACHADO et al., 2013). Recently, backward running (BR) has been used as a strategy to reduce the risk of injuries and improve forward running (FR) performance (UTHOFF et al., 2018;CAVAGNA et al., 2012). For instance, due to its biomechanical characteristics, compressive forces on the patellofemoral joint in BR is lower compared to FR (FLYNN, SOUTAS-LITTLE, 1995), causing less joint impact at the same running velocities (UTHOFF et al., 2018;MEHDIZADEH et al., 2015) For this reason, BR is used as part of rehabilitation process of recently knee injured athletes as a way to maintain cardiovascular fitness (UTHOFF et al., 2018;FLYNN, SOUTAS-LITTLE, 1994). ...
... Recently, backward running (BR) has been used as a strategy to reduce the risk of injuries and improve forward running (FR) performance (UTHOFF et al., 2018;CAVAGNA et al., 2012). For instance, due to its biomechanical characteristics, compressive forces on the patellofemoral joint in BR is lower compared to FR (FLYNN, SOUTAS-LITTLE, 1995), causing less joint impact at the same running velocities (UTHOFF et al., 2018;MEHDIZADEH et al., 2015) For this reason, BR is used as part of rehabilitation process of recently knee injured athletes as a way to maintain cardiovascular fitness (UTHOFF et al., 2018;FLYNN, SOUTAS-LITTLE, 1994). Adesola and Azeez (2009) reported higher metabolic cost and cardiopulmonary responses during BR at the same intensity and duration when compared to FR. ...
Article
Full-text available
The study verified the effects of backward running training (BRT), forward running training (FRT), and combined backward/forward running training (BFRT), prescribed by Vpeak, on performance in 5-km running, countermovement jump, 20-m sprint, and the agility T-test, in thirty-three recreationally active young men. Thirty-three men (age 27.7 ± 4.8 years) were randomly assigned to one of three training groups (BRT; FRT; BFRT) and performed the following tests: 5-km running, vertical jump, 20-m sprint, agility performance, pre- and post-five weeks of running training. The normality of the data was verified by the Shapiro-Wilk test and the comparisons between groups and moments were performed by mixed ANOVA for repeated measures, followed by Bonferroni’s post hoc; the percentage of variation and the effect size (ES) were calculated. A significance level of P < 0.05 was adopted. All groups improved 5-km (P = 0.01) performance at post-training. The Vpeak (P < 0.01) and duration of the incremental test (P < 0.01) increased significantly in all groups after training. The Vpeak_BR increased significantly in the BRT and BFRT groups. CMJ jump height increased significantly for the FRT (P < 0.01) and BFRT (P < 0.05) groups. In the agility T-test there was a significant moment effect (P < 0.01) on the performance time. In conclusion, the inclusion of BRT sessions into FRT, prescribed based on Vpeak_BR and Vpeak_FR, leads to improvements in 5-km endurance running performance in recreationally active young men. Thus, it is suggested that BRT prescribed by Vpeak_BR could be more widely incorporated into FRT as a training method to obtain the same results in endurance performance as FRT alone.
... Other recent empirical evidence has even indicated that running backward may offer clear advantages in developing athletes' jumping ability, CoD speed, linear sprinting, and aerobic capacity that surpass those obtained from forward running training (40,43). In this regard, backward running has been proposed to provide a unique training stimulus that transfers to a range of athletic qualities because of its distinctive neuromuscular and physiological demands (17,42,44). For example, acute responses to backward running have been characterized by challenging coordination (24), unique step kinematics and kinetics (7,8,45), increased lower-limb stiffness (7,8), greater leg extensor or hip flexor muscle activation relying on concentric muscle actions (7,8,17), higher rates of force development (46), and greater energy expenditure (13,47) compared with forward running at relative or matched intensities. ...
... Similarly, Ordway et al. (31) examined the effects of 5 weeks of backward running on forward running economy in highly trained male runners, revealing significant improvements (Δ2.54%). There is evidence that backward running requires higher aerobic and anaerobic demands (42), making it an appropriate training approach to enhance AE AU6 . ...
Article
This study examined the effects of a six-week, one versus two sessions of volume-matched weekly repeated backward sprint training (RBST) on measures of physical fitness in youth male soccer players. Thirty male youth soccer players from a regional soccer team were randomly assigned to a two-day group (n=15; age=16.40±0.64 years; Maturity-offset=2.19±0.65 years) or a one-day group (n=15; age=16.27±0.51 years; Maturity-offset=1.91±0.40 years). Measures of jumping ability, linear sprint speed, change-of-direction (CoD) speed, aerobic endurance (AE), and repeated-sprint-ability (RSA) were measured before and after six weeks of training. The training interventions involved one to two sets, each comprising 7 repetitions over a 20 m distance of RBST in the two-day group, and two to four sets, also with 7 repetitions each over the same distance, in the one-day group. Statistical analyses were conducted using the ANCOVA model with baseline measurements entered as covariates. Results indicated that RBST over two days generated greater benefits compared to a single day for improving CoD speed (∆4.91% vs 0.04%; effect size [d]=0.78 vs 0.00, respectively), linear sprint speed (10-m: ∆4.74% vs 0.36%; d=0.96 vs 0.00, respectively; 20m: ∆3.34% vs 0.82%; d=1.00 vs 0.49, respectively), and RSA performances (RSAbest: ∆2.61% vs 0.29%; d=0.71 vs 0.16, respectively; RSAmean: ∆2.86% vs 0.89%; d=0.59 vs 0.16, respectively; RSAtotal: ∆2.86% vs 0.89%; d=0.62 vs 0.41, respectively). However, similar improvements in the two RBST formats were observed on jumping (two-day group: ∆6.9%; d=0.75; one-day group: ∆10.6%, d=1.26) and AE performance (two-day group: ∆17.24%, d=1.04; one-day group: ∆27.25%, d=2.25). In summary, the findings suggest that, when volume is matched, spreading the RBST regimen over two days may result in greater improvements compared to a single-day approach for enhancing CoD speed, linear sprint speed, and RSA performance.
... Backward walking is not merely a reversal movement of forward walking but has its own unique advantages as gait training (Wang et al. 2018). Since backward walking is more difficult and physically demanding than forward walking (Flynn et al. 1994;Terblanche et al. 2005), several studies have suggested that backward walking training may provide additional benefits for gait performance than forward walking training (Ordway et al. 2016;Uthoff et al. 2018;Wang et al. 2018). During backward walking, visual information does not provide the ground conditions of the walking direction, and the motor patterns are unfamiliar. ...
... We chose these areas as targets for stimulation because tDCS over M1 has been reported to improve balance and motor learning, while tDCS over DLPFC has been reported to improve dual-task walking (Baharlouei et al. 2020;Zhou et al. 2021;Maudrich et al. 2022). In addition, difficult training, such as backward walking, may be helpful in detecting the changes in motor performance in young adults who have reserve resources that make it difficult to show behavioral improvements (Uthoff et al. 2018). We evaluated and compared forward and backward walking performances before and after a combination of backward walking with tDCS. ...
Article
Full-text available
Backward walking training presents a great challenge to the physical and neural systems, which may result in an improvement in gait performance. Transcranial direct current electrical stimulation (tDCS), which can non-invasively enhance cortical activity, has been reported to strengthen corticomotor plasticity. We investigated whether excitatory tDCS over the primary motor cortex (M1) or the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) enhances the effects of backward walking training in healthy participants. Thirty-six healthy participants (16 men and 20 women, mean age 21.3 ± 1.4 years) participated in this study. The participants were randomly assigned to one of the three tDCS groups (M1, DLPFC, and sham). They performed 5 min of backward walking training during 15 min of tDCS. We evaluated dual-task forward and backward walking performance before and after training. Both tDCS groups increased walking speed in the backward condition, but the DLPFC group increased the dual-task backward walking speed more than the M1 group. The M1 group showed decreased gait variability in dual-task backward walking, whereas the DLPFC group showed increased gait variability. Backward walking training combined with M1 stimulation may increase the backward walking speed by reducing gait variability. Backward walking training combined with DLPFC stimulation may prioritize walking speed over gait stability. Our results indicate that backward walking training combined with tDCS may be extended to other rehabilitation methods to improve gait performance.
... According to Uthoff et al. (2018), also defines running as a forward movement at high speed, where both feet alternately leave the ground. In the context of sports, running is an activity that tests a person's speed, endurance and technical ability to cover a certain distance in the shortest possible time. ...
Article
Full-text available
This study investigates the relationship between running techniques, physical factors, and the sprinting abilities of fifth-grade elementary school students. Through direct observation and measurement of students’ running techniques, as well as assessments of their physical attributes such as speed, leg muscle strength, and flexibility. This research aims to identify key factors that contribute to sprinting performance. Statistical analysis reveals a significant positive correlation between proper running techniques characterized by a forward-leaning posture, synchronized arm-leg movements, and correct foot landing and enhanced sprinting ability. Furthermore, the analysis highlights the importance of physical factors, with findings showing that students possessing greater leg muscle strength and flexibility exhibit superior sprinting capabilities. The correlation analysis underscores the strong influence of both running techniques and physical attributes on sprinting performance, indicating that improvements in these areas can lead to enhanced athletic outcomes. These findings have practical implications for the development of targeted training programs in elementary schools, emphasizing the enhancement of running techniques and physical conditioning. By focusing on structured training that incorporates muscle strengthening, flexibility improvement, and technique refinement, educators can help students maximize their athletic potential and encourage lifelong healthy habits. This research contributes to a deeper understanding of the factors influencing sprinting abilities and offers a foundation for optimizing physical education practices for young athletes.
... Consequently, the collective literature indicates shuffling activity is essential to consider, but it appears movements such as backwards and sideways running have been categorized as specific movements alongside shuffling, or grouped collectively with forwards running as locomotion-based movements (i.e., walking, jogging, running, or sprinting). Given that movement direction impacts the external load encountered during locomotor tasks [98][99][100], and different training approaches are needed to improve backwards, sideways, and forwards running abilities, movements should likely be measured specific to the direction in which they are performed (i.e., backwards, sideways, and forwards) in research for greatest specificity in the reported data. Identification of basketball-specific movements becomes more inconsistent across the literature as some studies included picking/ screening (four out of 18, 22%) and positioning (three out of 18, 17%) as separate basketball-specific movement zones, while other studies grouped picking/screening and positioning movements within broader specific zones (five out of 18, 28%). ...
Article
Full-text available
Background Despite widespread use of intensity zones to quantify external load variables in basketball research, the consistency in identifying zones and accompanying intensity thresholds using predominant monitoring approaches in training and games remains unclear. Objectives The purpose of this work was to examine the external load intensity zones and thresholds adopted across basketball studies using video-based time-motion analysis (TMA), microsensors, and local positioning systems (LPS). Methods PubMed, MEDLINE, and SPORTDiscus databases were searched from inception until 31 January 2023 for studies using intensity zones to quantify external load during basketball training sessions or games. Studies were excluded if they examined players participating in recreational or wheelchair basketball, were reviews or meta-analyses, or utilized monitoring approaches other than video-based TMA, microsensors, or LPS. Results Following screening, 86 studies were included. Video-based TMA studies consistently classified jogging, running, sprinting, and jumping as intensity zones, but demonstrated considerable variation in classifying low-intensity (standing and walking) and basketball-specific activities. Microsensor studies mostly utilized a single, and rather consistent, threshold to identify only high-intensity activities (> 3.5 m·s⁻² for accelerations, decelerations, and changes-in-direction or > 40 cm for jumps), not separately quantifying lower intensity zones. Similarly, LPS studies predominantly quantified only high-intensity activities in a relatively consistent manner for speed (> 18.0 m·s⁻¹) and acceleration/deceleration zones (> 2.0 m·s⁻²); however, the thresholds adopted for various intensity zones differed greatly to those used in TMA and microsensor research. Conclusions Notable inconsistencies were mostly evident for low-intensity activities, basketball-specific activities, and between the different monitoring approaches. Accordingly, we recommend further research to inform the development of consensus guidelines outlining suitable approaches when setting external load intensity zones and accompanying thresholds in research and practice.
Article
Introduction: Knee Osteoarthritis (OA) is a significant cause of disability globally and is rapidly becoming a major health issue. The part of the knee most affected by OA is the patellofemoral joint. This type of arthritis poses challenges for both patients and healthcare providers in managing symptoms and improving the quality of life for those affected. However, there’s a lack of data on specific therapies for the patellofemoral joint. Aim: To investigate if a varied frequency treadmill exercises protocol involving retro-walking has a greater impact on musculoskeletal responses, leading to better improvements in individuals with symptomatic Patellofemoral Joint Osteoarthritis (PFOA). Materials and Methods: The present study was an experimental research design i.e., between -subjects experimental design in which 60 participants with patellofemoral arthritis were enrolled based on the inclusion criteria. The study was conducted in the Department of Orthopaedics, SGT Medical College Hospital and Research Institute in Gurugram, Haryana, India for a duration of one year (May 2022- May 2023). Participants were randomly randomised to three distinct exercise program groups with varying intensity levels for retro-walking on a treadmill for six weeks, and all three groups received conventional treatment six days/week for six weeks. All participants were evaluated at three-time intervals of baseline, at the end of the third week, and after intervention (end of the sixth week) for the evaluation of several musculoskeletal parameters affecting patellofemoral arthritis. Statistical analysis was carried out using the IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 26.0. Comparison for within group differences between various outcome measures at various intervals of time was done using repeated measures of Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and posthoc analysis for mean values with Least Significant Difference (LSD) whereas for between group analysis One-way ANOVA and post-hoc Analysis for mean values was done with p-value set at <0.05. Result: Significant statistical and clinical differences were observed in musculoskeletal responses, Q-angle (p-value=0.001) and popliteal angle (p-value=0.001) in the high frequency group (group C) performing the protocol five times a week for six weeks leading to a better quality of life followed by group B and group A, respectively. Conclusion: The main finding of the present study suggested that the dosage for retro-walking on treadmill among patients with patellofemoral arthritis requires at least walking for five times/week for six weeks to get more clinical improvement in Musculoskeletal Disorders (MSD).
Article
The study verified the effects of backward running training (BRT), forward running training (FRT), and combined backward/forward running training (BFRT), prescribed by Vpeak, on performance in 5-km running, countermovement jump, 20-m sprint, and the agility T-test, in thirty-three recreationally active young men. Thirty-three men (age 27.7 ± 4.8 years) were randomly assigned to one of three training groups (BRT; FRT; BFRT) and performed the following tests: 5-km running, vertical jump, 20-m sprint, agility performance, pre- and post-five weeks of running training. The normality of the data was verified by the Shapiro-Wilk test and the comparisons between groups and moments were performed by mixed ANOVA for repeated measures, followed by Bonferroni’s post hoc; the percentage of variation and the effect size (ES) were calculated. A significance level of P < 0.05 was adopted. All groups improved 5-km (P = 0.01) performance at post-training. The Vpeak (P < 0.01) and duration of the incremental test (P < 0.01) increased significantly in all groups after training. The Vpeak_BR increased significantly in the BRT and BFRT groups. CMJ jump height increased significantly for the FRT (P < 0.01) and BFRT (P < 0.05) groups. In the agility T-test there was a significant moment effect (P < 0.01) on the performance time. In conclusion, the inclusion of BRT sessions into FRT, prescribed based on Vpeak_BR and Vpeak_FR, leads to improvements in 5-km endurance running performance in recreationally active young men. Thus, it is suggested that BRT prescribed by Vpeak_BR could be more widely incorporated into FRT as a training method to obtain the same results in endurance performance as FRT alone.
Article
Full-text available
IntroductionThis study examined the effects of an 8-week backward running (BR) vs. forward running (FR) training programmes on measures of physical fitness in young female handball players.Methods Twenty-nine players participated in this study. Participants were randomly assigned to a FR training group, BR training group, and a control group.Results and discussionWithin-group analysis indicated significant, small-to-large improvements in all performance tests (effect size [g] = 0.36 to 1.80), except 5-m forward sprint-time in the BR group and 5- and 10-m forward sprint-time in the FR group. However, the CG significantly decreased forward sprint performance over 10-m and 20-m (g = 0.28 to 0.50) with no changes in the other fitness parameters. No significant differences in the amount of change scores between the BR and FR groups were noted. Both training interventions have led to similar improvements in measures of muscle power, change of direction (CoD) speed, sprint speed either forward or backward, and repeated sprint ability (RSA) in young female handball players, though BR training may have a small advantage over FR training for 10-m forward sprint time and CoD speed, while FR training may provide small improvements over BR training for RSAbest. Practitioners are advised to consider either FR or BR training to improve various measures of physical fitness in young female handball players.
Article
Full-text available
During running at a constant speed, the optimal stride frequency (SF) can be derived from the u-shaped relationship between SF and heart rate (HR). Changing SF towards the optimum of this relationship is beneficial for energy expenditure and may positively change biomechanics of running. In the current study, the effects of speed on the optimal SF and the nature of the u-shaped relation were empirically tested using Generalized Estimating Equations. To this end, HR was recorded from twelve healthy (4 males, 8 females) inexperienced runners, who completed runs at three speeds. The three speeds were 90%, 100% and 110% of self-selected speed. A self-selected SF (SFself) was determined for each of the speeds prior to the speed series. The speed series started with a free-chosen SF condition, followed by five imposed SF conditions (SFself, 70, 80, 90, 100 strides·min⁻¹) assigned in random order. The conditions lasted 3 minutes with 2.5 minutes of walking in between. SFself increased significantly (p<0.05) with speed with averages of 77, 79, 80 strides·min⁻¹ at 2.4, 2.6, 2.9 m·s⁻¹, respectively). As expected, the relation between SF and HR could be described by a parabolic curve for all speeds. Speed did not significantly affect the curvature, nor did it affect optimal SF. We conclude that over the speed range tested, inexperienced runners may not need to adapt their SF to running speed. However, since SFself were lower than the SFopt of 83 strides·min⁻¹, the runners could reduce HR by increasing their SFself.
Article
Full-text available
The purpose of this study was to examine the kinematic and kinetic differences of the sprint start and first two steps between faster and slower high-level sprinters. Twelve male sprinters were dichotomized according to personal best 60- and 100-m times. Each participant performed five starts under constant conditions. An eight-camera system was used for 3-D kinematic analysis. Dynamic forces at the start were determined with starting blocks mounted on bipedal force plates. Measures of front and rear block total force, front and rear block maximal force, time to front and rear block peak force, total force impulse, total horizontal and vertical impulse, front and rear block force impulse, time of block clearance, block leaving velocity and block leaving acceleration were collected. Between-group comparisons were made using independent samples t tests (p < 0.05) and by calculating effect sizes (Cohen’s d). Spearman’s correlation coefficients were used to examine the relationships between sprint start kinematics, kinetic measures and sprint performance. Significant between-group differences were observed in rear block total force (p = 0.0059), rear block maximal vertical force (p = 0.0037) and total force impulse (p = 0.0493). Only front block total force significantly correlated with 100 m sprint performance in both the slower and faster groups (r = 0.94 and 0.54, respectively; p = 0.05). Our findings suggest that faster sprinters show enhanced sprint start motor performance with greater force development than slower sprinters.
Article
Full-text available
Despite an intuitive relationship between technique and both running economy (RE) and performance, and the diverse techniques used by runners to achieve forward locomotion, the objective importance of overall technique and the key components therein remain to be elucidated. Purpose This study aimed to determine the relationship between individual and combined kinematic measures of technique with both RE and performance. Methods Ninety-seven endurance runners (47 females) of diverse competitive standards performed a discontinuous protocol of incremental treadmill running (4-min stages, 1-km·h⁻¹ increments). Measurements included three-dimensional full-body kinematics, respiratory gases to determine energy cost, and velocity of lactate turn point. Five categories of kinematic measures (vertical oscillation, braking, posture, stride parameters, and lower limb angles) and locomotory energy cost (LEc) were averaged across 10–12 km·h⁻¹ (the highest common velocity < velocity of lactate turn point). Performance was measured as season's best (SB) time converted to a sex-specific z-score. Results Numerous kinematic variables were correlated with RE and performance (LEc, 19 variables; SB time, 11 variables). Regression analysis found three variables (pelvis vertical oscillation during ground contact normalized to height, minimum knee joint angle during ground contact, and minimum horizontal pelvis velocity) explained 39% of LEc variability. In addition, four variables (minimum horizontal pelvis velocity, shank touchdown angle, duty factor, and trunk forward lean) combined to explain 31% of the variability in performance (SB time). Conclusions This study provides novel and robust evidence that technique explains a substantial proportion of the variance in RE and performance. We recommend that runners and coaches are attentive to specific aspects of stride parameters and lower limb angles in part to optimize pelvis movement, and ultimately enhance performance.
Article
Full-text available
A sub-2-hour marathon requires an average velocity (5.86 m/s) that is 2.5% faster than the current world record of 02:02:57 (5.72 m/s) and could be accomplished with a 2.7% reduction in the metabolic cost of running. Although supporting body weight comprises the majority of the metabolic cost of running, targeting the costs of forward propulsion and leg swing are the most promising strategies for reducing the metabolic cost of running and thus improving marathon running performance. Here, we calculate how much time could be saved by taking advantage of unconventional drafting strategies, a consistent tailwind, a downhill course, and specific running shoe design features while staying within the current International Association of Athletic Federations regulations for record purposes. Specifically, running in shoes that are 100 g lighter along with second-half scenarios of four runners alternately leading and drafting, or a tailwind of 6.0 m/s, combined with a 42-m elevation drop could result in a time well below the 2-hour marathon barrier.
Article
Full-text available
No studies have analysed the acute effects of the FIFA 11+ and Harmoknee warm-up programmes on major physical performance measures. The aim of this study was to analyse the acute (post-exercise) effects of the FIFA 11+, Harmoknee and dynamic warm-up routines on several physical performance measures in amateur football players. A randomized, crossover and counterbalanced study design was used to address the purpose of this study. A total of sixteen amateur football players completed the following protocols in a randomized order on separate days: a) FIFA 11+; b) Harmoknee; and c) dynamic warm-up (DWU). In each experimental session, 19 physical performance measures (joint range of motion, hamstring to quadriceps [H/Q] strength ratios, dynamic postural control, 10 and 20 m sprint times, jump height and reactive strength index) were assessed. Measures were compared via a magnitude-based inference analysis. The results of this study showed no main effects between paired comparisons (FIFA 11+ vs. DWU, Harmoknee vs. DWU and Harmoknee vs. FIFA 11+) for joint range of motions, dynamic postural control, H/Q ratios, jumping height and reactive strength index measures. However, significant main effects (likely effects with a probability of >75–99%) were found for 10 (1.7%) and 20 (2.4%) m sprint times, demonstrating that both the FIFA 11+ and Harmoknee resulted in slower sprint times in comparison with the DWU. Therefore, neither the FIFA 11+ nor the Harmoknee routines appear to be preferable to dynamic warm-up routines currently performed by most football players prior to training sessions and matches.
Article
Full-text available
Background Several strategies have been used to improve running economy (RE). Defined as the oxygen uptake required at a given submaximal running velocity, it has been considered a key aerobic parameter related to endurance running performance. In this context, concurrent strength and endurance training has been considered an effective method, although conclusions on the optimal concurrent training cannot yet be drawn. Objective To evaluate the effect of concurrent training on RE in endurance running athletes and identify the effects of subject characteristics and concurrent training variables on the magnitude of RE improvement. Methods We conducted a computerized search of the PubMed and Web of Science databases, and references of original studies were searched for further relevant studies. The analysis comprised 20 effects in 16 relevant studies published up to August 2015. The outcomes were calculated as the difference in percentage change between control and experimental groups (% change) and data were presented as mean ± 95 % confidence limit. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model and, in addition, simple and multiple meta-regression analyses were used to identify effects of age, training status, number of sessions per week, training duration, type of strength training, and neuromuscular performance on % change in RE. ResultsThe concurrent training program had a small beneficial effect on RE (% change = −3.93 ± 1.19 %; p < 0.001). In addition, explosive (% change = −4.83 ± 1.53; p < 0.001) and heavy weight (% change = −3.65 ± 2.74; p = 0.009) training programs produced similar improvements in RE, while isometric training (% change = −2.20 ± 4.37; p = 0.324) in selected studies did not induce a significant effect. The multiple linear meta-regression analysis showed that all the differences between % changes could be explained by including the above-mentioned characteristics of subjects and weight training program elements. This model showed that the magnitude of the % change in RE was larger for longer training duration (β = −0.83 ± 0.72, p = 0.02). Conclusion Explosive training and heavy weight training are effective concurrent training methods aiming to improve RE within a few weeks. However, long-term training programs seem to be necessary when the largest possible improvement in RE is desired.
Article
The goals of this study were to examine the following hypotheses: (a) there is a difference between the theoretically calculated (McMahon and Cheng, 1990. Journal of Biomechanics 23, 65-78) and the kinematically measured length changes of the spring-mass model and (b) the leg spring stiffness, the ankle spring stiffness and the knee spring stiffness are influenced by running speed. Thirteen athletes took part in this study. Force was measured using a "Kistler" force plate (1000 Hz). Kinematic data were recorded using two high-speed (120 Hz) video cameras. Each athlete completed trials running at five different velocities (approx. 2.5, 3.5, 4.5, 5.5 and 6.5 m/s). Running velocity influences the leg spring stiffness, the effective vertical spring stiffness and the spring stiffness at the knee joint. The spring stiffness at the ankle joint showed no statistical difference (p < 0.05) for the five velocities. The theoretically calculated length change of the spring-mass model significantly (p < 0.05) overestimated the actual length change. For running velocities up to 6.5 m/s the leg spring stiffness is influenced mostly by changes in stiffness at the knee joint.
Chapter
This book section starts with an introduction towards the historical development of modern marathon running with respect to number of participants, gender and age distribution and the world record marathon times. This encompasses the development of the mean running velocities, details about the applied stride characteristics (e.g. stride rate, stride length), the applied strike patterns (e.g. forefoot strike vs. heel strike), the prevalence and causes of running related injuries. The second part gives an overview about general biomechanical principles which are relevant in running. In particular, specific definitions (phase definition of the running cycle, strike patterns), force components and the mathematical basics with respect to running energetics, joint loading, leg stiffness etc. are presented. The final part gives an overview about the state of the art knowledge about performance and injury related aspects with respect to marathon running from a biomechanical perspective. Special attention is paid to anthropometrics, running technique related aspects, fatigue effects and footwear.
Article
Some competitive and recreational athletes are running backward, believing that the activity will improve their ability to run forward. Crazy? Maybe not. Some researchers are finding that backward running may be an effective adjunct to forward running for both conditioning and rehabilitation.