Leg power and hopping stiffness: relationship with sprint running performance.
Abstract:
CHELLY, S. M., and C. DENIS. Leg power and hopping stiffness: relationship with sprint running performance. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc., Vol. 33, No. 2, 2001, pp. 326-333.
Purpose: Although sprint performance undoubtedly involves muscle power, the stiffness of the leg also determines sprint performance while running at maximal velocity. Results that include both of these characteristics have not been directly obtained in previous studies on human runners. We have therefore studied the link between leg power, leg stiffness, and sprint performance.
Methods: The acceleration and maximal running velocity developed by 11 subjects (age 16 +/- 1) during a 40-m sprint were measured by radar. Their leg muscle volumes were estimated anthropometrically. Leg power was measured by an ergometric treadmill test and by a hopping test. Each subject executed a maximal sprint acceleration on the treadmill equipped with force and speed transducers, from which forward power was calculated. A hopping jump test was executed at 2 Hz on a force platform. Leg stiffness was calculated using the flight and contact times of the hopping test.
Results: The treadmill forward leg power was correlated with both the initial acceleration (r = 0.80, P < 0.01) and the maximal running velocity (r = 0.73, P < 0.05) during track sprinting. The leg stiffness calculated from hopping was significantly correlated with the maximal velocity but not with acceleration.
Conclusion: Although muscle power is needed for acceleration and maintaining a maximal velocity in sprint performance, high leg stiffness may be needed for high running speed. The ability to produce a stiff rebound during the maximal running velocity could be explored by measuring the stiffness of a rebound during a vertical jump.
Stepping Backward Can Improve Sprint Performance Over Short Distances.
Original Research
Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 22(3):918-922, May 2008.
Frost, David M 1; Cronin, John B 1,2; Levin, Gregory 1
Abstract:
The use of a backward (false) step to initiate forward movement has been regarded as an inferior starting technique and detrimental to sprinting performance over short distances as it requires additional time to be completed, but little evidence exists to support or refute this claim. Therefore, we recruited 27 men to examine the temporal differences among three standing starts that employed either a step forward (F) or a step backward (B) to initiate movement. An audio cue was used to mark the commencement of each start and to activate the subsequent timing gates. Three trials of each starting style were performed, and movement (0 m), 2.5 m, and 5 m times were recorded. Despite similar performances to the first timing gate (0.80 and 0.81s for F and B, respectively), utilizing a step forward to initiate movement resulted in significantly slower sprint times to both 2.5 and 5 m (6.4% and 5.3%, respectively). Furthermore, when the movement times were removed and performances were compared between gates 1 and 2, and 2 and 3, all significant differences were seen before reaching a distance of only 2.5 m. The results from this investigation question the advocacy of removing the false step to improve an athlete's sprint performance over short distances. In fact, if the distance to be traveled is as little as 0.5 m in the forward direction, adopting a starting technique in which a step backward is employed may result in superior performance.
Starting from standing; why step backwards?
Journal of Biomechanics, Volume 34, Issue 2, Pages 211-215
G.Kraan
At push-off, the mass centre of gravity of the body must be positioned in front of the foot to prevent a somersault. When starting a sprint from out the standing position the use of a step backwards is necessary for maximal acceleration. The aim of the present study was to quantify the positive contribution to push off from a backward step of the leg, which seems to be counterproductive. Ten subjects were instructed to sprint start in three different ways: (a) starting from the standing position just in front of the force platform on the subject's own initiative, (b) starting from the standing position on the force platform with no step backward allowed, and (c) starting out of the starting position with one leg in front of the force platform and the push-off leg on the force platform. A step backwards was observed in 95% of the starts from the standing position. The push-off force was highest in starting type (a), which had the shortest time to build up the push-off force. The results indicate a positive contribution to the force and power from a step backwards. We advocate developing a training program with special attention to the phenomenon step backwards.
Influence of high-resistance and high-velocity training on sprint performance.
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 27(
:1203-1209, August 1995.
DELECLUSE, CHRISTOPHE; COPPENOLLE, HERMAN VAN; WILLEMS, EUSTACHE; LEEMPUTTE, MARK VAN; DIELS, RUDI; GORIS, MARINA
Abstract:
The purpose of this study is to analyze the effect of high-resistance (HR) and high-velocity (HV) training on the different phases of 100-m sprint performance. Two training groups (HR and HV) were compared with two control groups (RUN and PAS). The HR (N = 22) and HV group (N = 21) trained 3 d.wk-1 for 9 wk: two strength training sessions (HR or HV) and one running session. There was a run control group (RUN, N = 12) that also participated in the running sessions (1 d.wk-1) and a passive control group (PAS, N = 11). Running speed over a 100-m sprint was recorded every 2 m. By means of a principal component analysis on all speed variables, three phases were distinguished: initial acceleration (0-10 m), building-up running speed to a maximum (10-36 m), and maintaining maximum speed in the second part of the run (36-100 m). HV training resulted in improved initial acceleration (P < 0.05 compared with RUN, PAS, and HR), a higher maximum speed (P < 0.05 compared with PAS), and a decreased speed endurance (P < 0.05 compared to RUN and PAS). The HV group improved significantly in total 100 m time (P < 0.05 compared with the RUN and PAS groups). The HR program resulted in an improved initial acceleration phase (P < 0.05 compared with PAS).