Kinematic demands of FIFA’s EPTS validation circuit compared to a sport-specific alternative

This study compared the kinematic demands of FIFA's Electronic Performance and Tracking Systems (EPTS) validation circuit with an alternative sport-specific circuit (SSC). The aim was to determine which circuit presents high-intensity demands known to challenge EPTS accuracy. Four amateur soccer players (age: 29.4 ± 5.9 years) performed both circuits using global positioning system (GPS). Speed, acceleration and change of direction (COD) was divided into zones and compared between the circuits. Results showed that the SSC resulted in greater distance, time and entrances in speed zones 3 and 4, as well as in moderate and high acceleration/deceleration zones. SSC also exhibited more time and entries in high-speed COD zones. FIFA's circuit demonstrated higher peak speed and more time in speed zone 5. Differences in COD between circuits reflect the intensity and type of exercises performed, with the SSC including more sprints and rapid direction changes. In conclusion, the SSC presents more kinematic demands in high-intensity situations critical for EPTS validation, whereas the FIFA circuit demonstrates less challenging movement patterns. FIFA could improve the validation protocol by updating the circuit to include more demanding sport-specific movements thus increasing the evaluated devices validity in high-intensity situations which are of very high interest for sports.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2025-12-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-31587-w
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

Kinematic demands of FIFA’s EPTS validation circuit compared to a sport-specific alternative

Guilherme de Sousa Pinheiro, Rafael Luiz Martins Monteiro, Martin Lames, Paulo Roberto Pereira Santiago et al.
Scientific Reports
Sports Performance and Training
article

Kinematic demands of FIFA’s EPTS validation circuit compared to a sport-specific alternative

Guilherme de Sousa Pinheiro, Rafael Luiz Martins Monteiro, Martin Lames, Paulo Roberto Pereira Santiago, Patrick Blauberger, Tiago Guedes Russomanno
article en

Abstract

This study compared the kinematic demands of FIFA's Electronic Performance and Tracking Systems (EPTS) validation circuit with an alternative sport-specific circuit (SSC). The aim was to determine which circuit presents high-intensity demands known to challenge EPTS accuracy. Four amateur soccer players (age: 29.4 ± 5.9 years) performed both circuits using global positioning system (GPS). Speed, acceleration and change of direction (COD) was divided into zones and compared between the circuits. Results showed that the SSC resulted in greater distance, time and entrances in speed zones 3 and 4, as well as in moderate and high acceleration/deceleration zones. SSC also exhibited more time and entries in high-speed COD zones. FIFA's circuit demonstrated higher peak speed and more time in speed zone 5. Differences in COD between circuits reflect the intensity and type of exercises performed, with the SSC including more sprints and rapid direction changes. In conclusion, the SSC presents more kinematic demands in high-intensity situations critical for EPTS validation, whereas the FIFA circuit demonstrates less challenging movement patterns. FIFA could improve the validation protocol by updating the circuit to include more demanding sport-specific movements thus increasing the evaluated devices validity in high-intensity situations which are of very high interest for sports.

Scientific ReportsVol. 15(1)
Universidade de Ribeirão Preto (BR), Universidade de Brasília (BR), Universidade de São Paulo (BR), Clinics Hospital of Ribeirão Preto (BR), Technical University of Munich (DE)
National Natural Science Foundation of China, Tongji University
Openalex Percentile: Top 51%
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.