A comparison between common measurement systems for quantifying spatiotemporal variables during the early sprint acceleration phase

There has been increasing interest in new measurement systems that provide instantaneous spatiotemporal data whilst being less expensive and more accessible to practitioners. The aim of this study was to examine the agreement between the OptoJump Next system (OJ), videography and force platform methods for measuring spatiotemporal variables during the acceleration phase of sprinting. Ninety-nine university students completed two maximal 20 metre sprints in which spatiotemporal parameters (contact time [CT], flight time [FT], step length [SL] and step rate) were simultaneously obtained using the OJ system (1000 Hz), videography (200 Hz), and force platforms (1000 Hz). The OJ and video systems showed high agreement for the measurement of step length (bias: 0.003–0.007 m, random error [RE]: 0.057–0.071 m). For temporal parameters, OJ tended to overestimate CT compared to the force platforms (bias: 0.012–0.014 s, RE: 0.009–0.021 s) and also underestimated FT (bias: 0.012–0.013 s, RE: 0.011–0.012 s). Despite the lower sampling rate, videography showed a closer agreement with the force platform for both CT (bias: 0.005–0.010 s, RE: 0.009–0.021 s) and FT (bias: 0.005–0.007 s, RE: 0.008–0.010 s). Although OptoJump next provides instantaneous spatiotemporal parameters, coaches may wish to adjust for the systematic overestimation of CT (0.013 s) and underestimation of FT (0.012 s) in order to obtain sprint spatiotemporal data that aligns to force platforms.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching
Published
2025-04-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/17479541251333937
Primary Topic
Sports Performance and Training
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A comparison between common measurement systems for quantifying spatiotemporal variables during the early sprint acceleration phase

Parag Parelkar, Alexander J. Dinsdale, Josh Walker, Gareth Nicholson et al.
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching
Sports Performance and Training
article

A comparison between common measurement systems for quantifying spatiotemporal variables during the early sprint acceleration phase

Parag Parelkar, Alexander J. Dinsdale, Josh Walker, Gareth Nicholson, Athanassios Bissas
article en

Abstract

There has been increasing interest in new measurement systems that provide instantaneous spatiotemporal data whilst being less expensive and more accessible to practitioners. The aim of this study was to examine the agreement between the OptoJump Next system (OJ), videography and force platform methods for measuring spatiotemporal variables during the acceleration phase of sprinting. Ninety-nine university students completed two maximal 20 metre sprints in which spatiotemporal parameters (contact time [CT], flight time [FT], step length [SL] and step rate) were simultaneously obtained using the OJ system (1000 Hz), videography (200 Hz), and force platforms (1000 Hz). The OJ and video systems showed high agreement for the measurement of step length (bias: 0.003–0.007 m, random error [RE]: 0.057–0.071 m). For temporal parameters, OJ tended to overestimate CT compared to the force platforms (bias: 0.012–0.014 s, RE: 0.009–0.021 s) and also underestimated FT (bias: 0.012–0.013 s, RE: 0.011–0.012 s). Despite the lower sampling rate, videography showed a closer agreement with the force platform for both CT (bias: 0.005–0.010 s, RE: 0.009–0.021 s) and FT (bias: 0.005–0.007 s, RE: 0.008–0.010 s). Although OptoJump next provides instantaneous spatiotemporal parameters, coaches may wish to adjust for the systematic overestimation of CT (0.013 s) and underestimation of FT (0.012 s) in order to obtain sprint spatiotemporal data that aligns to force platforms.

International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching
University of Gloucestershire (GB), Leeds Beckett University (GB)
Leeds Beckett University
Openalex Percentile: Top 89%
Sports Performance and Training
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.