Maximal Accelerated Linear Sprints From Standing And Moving Starts

Straight-line sprinting and the ability to accelerate is deemed essential for success in team sports. In Rugby League around 58% and in football around 60% of straight-line sprints are preceded by forward locomotion. In team sports most straight-line sprint diagnostics are performed from a standing start, over distances of 20 to 40 m. PURPOSE: To analyse the effects of three pre-start running velocities vs. standing start on acceleration profiles in maximum straight-line sprinting. METHODS: 20 males (80.8 ± 10.4 kg, 180.8 ± 5.3 cm, 24 ± 2.7 yrs) performed four times three maximally accelerated 35 m-sprints in randomized order, starting from standing start (V0), and with starting velocities of 1.47 ± 0.09 m/s (V1), 2.56 ± 0.10 m/s (V2) and 4.09 ± 0.13 m/s (V3), respectively. Running velocity was measured continuously by radar with 46.875 Hz. Sprint velocities were analysed as function of time. Differences in acceleration were analysed using a mono exponential fit of sprint velocity over time. RESULTS: At V0 the time constant of the increase in sprint velocity (1.28 ± 0.08 s) was significantly lower (p < 0.05) than at V1 (1.38 ± 0.17 s), V2 (1.41 ± 0.14 s) and V3 (1.44 ± 0.15 s), respectively. No differences were found between V1, V2 and V3 (p > 0.05). Higher pre-running velocities lead to higher (p < 0.05) running distances after 1, 2, 3 and 4 s compared to sprints with lower pre-running velocity and sprints from standing start (Tab. 1). CONCLUSIONS: Each increase in starting velocity lead to practically relevant gains in running distance as considered for football, though acceleration was impaired in comparison to the standing start. The latter effect was independent of pre-starting velocity and reflects an unutilized acceleration reserve. Table 1 - : Distance (m) at 1-4 s at V0-V3. Time (s) Distance (m) V0 Distance (m) V1 Distance (m) V2 Distance (m) V3 1 2.51 ± 0.12 3.40 ± 0.18 4.17 ± 0.13 5.26 ± 0.14 all p < 0.05 2 8.11 ± 0.34 9.26 ± 0.48 10.39 ± 0.39 12.01 ± 0.35 all p < 0.05 3 15.10 ± 0.58 16.28 ± 0.79 17.62 ± 0.70 19.50 ± 0.62 all p < 0.05 4 22.74 ± 0.83 23.87 ± 1.10 25.35 ± 1.04 27.36 ± 0.91 all p < 0.05 all p < 0.05 all p < 0.05 all p < 0.05 all p < 0.05

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Published
2024-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0001057460.85782.28
Primary Topic
Sports Dynamics and Biomechanics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Maximal Accelerated Linear Sprints From Standing And Moving Starts

Ralph Beneke, Lucas Röleke
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Sports Dynamics and Biomechanics
article

Maximal Accelerated Linear Sprints From Standing And Moving Starts

Ralph Beneke, Lucas Röleke
article en

Abstract

Straight-line sprinting and the ability to accelerate is deemed essential for success in team sports. In Rugby League around 58% and in football around 60% of straight-line sprints are preceded by forward locomotion. In team sports most straight-line sprint diagnostics are performed from a standing start, over distances of 20 to 40 m. PURPOSE: To analyse the effects of three pre-start running velocities vs. standing start on acceleration profiles in maximum straight-line sprinting. METHODS: 20 males (80.8 ± 10.4 kg, 180.8 ± 5.3 cm, 24 ± 2.7 yrs) performed four times three maximally accelerated 35 m-sprints in randomized order, starting from standing start (V0), and with starting velocities of 1.47 ± 0.09 m/s (V1), 2.56 ± 0.10 m/s (V2) and 4.09 ± 0.13 m/s (V3), respectively. Running velocity was measured continuously by radar with 46.875 Hz. Sprint velocities were analysed as function of time. Differences in acceleration were analysed using a mono exponential fit of sprint velocity over time. RESULTS: At V0 the time constant of the increase in sprint velocity (1.28 ± 0.08 s) was significantly lower (p < 0.05) than at V1 (1.38 ± 0.17 s), V2 (1.41 ± 0.14 s) and V3 (1.44 ± 0.15 s), respectively. No differences were found between V1, V2 and V3 (p > 0.05). Higher pre-running velocities lead to higher (p < 0.05) running distances after 1, 2, 3 and 4 s compared to sprints with lower pre-running velocity and sprints from standing start (Tab. 1). CONCLUSIONS: Each increase in starting velocity lead to practically relevant gains in running distance as considered for football, though acceleration was impaired in comparison to the standing start. The latter effect was independent of pre-starting velocity and reflects an unutilized acceleration reserve. Table 1 - : Distance (m) at 1-4 s at V0-V3. Time (s) Distance (m) V0 Distance (m) V1 Distance (m) V2 Distance (m) V3 1 2.51 ± 0.12 3.40 ± 0.18 4.17 ± 0.13 5.26 ± 0.14 all p < 0.05 2 8.11 ± 0.34 9.26 ± 0.48 10.39 ± 0.39 12.01 ± 0.35 all p < 0.05 3 15.10 ± 0.58 16.28 ± 0.79 17.62 ± 0.70 19.50 ± 0.62 all p < 0.05 4 22.74 ± 0.83 23.87 ± 1.10 25.35 ± 1.04 27.36 ± 0.91 all p < 0.05 all p < 0.05 all p < 0.05 all p < 0.05 all p < 0.05

Medicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseVol. 56(10S)
Philipps University of Marburg (DE)
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 86%
Sports Dynamics and Biomechanics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.