Maximal Velocity Sprint Mechanics

Maximal Velocity Sprint Mechanics

By Michael Young
United States Military Academy & Human Performance Consulting

Veteran coaches may be familiar with most of the concepts presented here, but for a comprehensive and detailed description of top-speed sprint mechanics this article is well worth your time.

Sprinting is a complex task that places a high neuromuscular demand on the performer and requires high levels of coordinated movement and appropriate sequencing of muscle activations to perform at peak levels. This paper will examine maximal velocity sprint mechanics with particular focus on the primary factors affecting performance, the mechanics associated with those factors, and the causal relationships that occur as a result of optimal sprinting mechanics. Although it is understood that maximum velocity sprinting mechanics cannot be taken out of the context of either the acceleration that preceded it or the biomotor abilities of a given athlete, the following discussion will focus solely on maximal velocity mechanics for the sake of simplicity. Before going in to an in-depth discussion of sprinting mechanics we must first examine some fundamental concepts of sprinting performance. First, speed is a function of stride length and stride frequency. This means that faster speeds can be achieved when either one or both of the two variables are increased. While seemingly simple, the matter is actually considerably more complex. This is because the two variables are actually interdependent in a loosely inverse relationship. That is, for any given runner, as one variable increases the other often decreases. Thus, it is important to find an optimal balance between stride length and stride frequency and not try to artificially manipulate either of the variables as if they were completely independent. Stride Length and Frequency The fastest sprinters tend to have stride lengths and stride frequencies as great as 2.6m and 5 steps per second respectively (Mann, 2005). Interestingly, the source of these outstanding characteristics is actually a single attribute. Previous research by Weyand and colleagues (2000) indicates that force applied at ground contact is the most important determinant of running speed. This same research indicated that the speed at which an athlete moves his/her legs through the air is of little importance. The benefit of greater force application is two-fold. First, greater force application will increase stride length. This benefit is fairly obvious. If all else is equal, greater force applied to the ground will cause a greater displacement of the athlete’s body. More simply, a greater distance will be covered with each stride. The second benefit of increased force application is not so obvious and is often overlooked. This benefit is that of increased stride frequency. How, you ask, can increased stride frequency come about as a result of increased force application to the ground? This is where things can get difficult. Stride frequency is comprised of two components: ground contact time and flight time. Research on elite sprinters indicates that the best sprinters spend less time on the ground (Mann, 1986; 2005; Mann & Herman, 1985). This is because the forces they produce are so great that they enter a period of flight more rapidly than their less efficient counterparts. As a result, despite not moving their limbs significantly faster through the air (VVeyand et al., 2000), better sprinters tend to have greater stride frequency because they reduce the amount of time they spend on the ground. However, this presents a challenge to an athlete striving to move at increasingly greater speeds. That is, he must produce greater forces over increasingly shorter periods of time.

Force Development and Sprinting

In light of the previous points to increase running speed, an athlete must increase the force applied to the ground and do so over increasingly shorter periods of time. Just as important as the magnitude of force application however, is the direction of that force application. For instance, athletes should attempt to minimize horizontal braking forces and maximize vertical propulsive forces. Vertical propulsive forces are important because once momentum has been maximally developed during the acceleration period, the body will tend to keep moving forward at the same speed as long as the intemal and external forces acting on the body are balanced. When sufficient vertical forces are generated momentum and velocity are more easily maintained. With these fundamental con- cepts in mind, what can be done to maximize sprint performance? Some have suggested that training the biomotor abilities of the athlete should be the only concern for improving sprint speed. This, however, is short-sighted. For optimal development, the biomotor and technical aspects of force production must be addressed. To improve the specific biomotor abilities that will enhance speed, an athlete must increase his physical ability to withstand and produce large forces over short periods of time. This form of training must be high intensity with longer recoveries and an emphasis on quality over volume. However, it is important to remember that force application without regard to the direction of that force will lead to less than ideal results. This is where optimizing the mechanical factors that affect force production comes in to play. It is important that the athlete display appropriate sprinting mechanics to ensure that the forces generated by the neuromuscular system are expressed as greater sprint speed.

GOALS OF MAXIMAL VELOCITY SPRINTING

There are three primary goals of effective maximal velocity sprinting: preservation of stability, minimization of braking forces, and maximization of vertical propulsive forces. These goals will first be discussed individually and a detailed analysis of the techniques needed to achieve these goals will follow.

Preservation of Stability

The first objective of sprinting mechanics is stability preservation. Stability is crucial to any athletic movement because it ensures that the body is able to move with maximal efficiency. When stability is disrupted, dysfunctional movement patterns and loss of elasticity often result. As with many other aspects of sprint performance, posture is at the root of enhancing stability. Posture refers to the positioning and functional capacity of the core region of the body. Because movement of the limbs largely originate from the core of the body, running with the core stabilized and in proper alignment often ensures optimal movements of the limbs. When this occurs, stability is generally preserved. When the body lacks either proper internal stability or appropriate postural alignment, it often reacts in a reflexive manner to preserve stability. These reactions tend to be very detrimental to sprint performance. To enhance stability, the muscles surrounding the spine should be strong enough to provide a stable origin for movement of the limbs. It is important to note tliat this stabilization is dynamic in nature rather than static. This means that while the body does act to control movement, smail movements will still be present and are actually beneficial to performance. This is especially true of the pelvis. While the general attitude of the pelvis should have a posterior tilt, efficient sprinters exhibit pelvic rotation in all three planes {Novacheck, 1998; Young et al., 2004). This pelvic rotation can increase stride length by up to 5 cm, which over the course of an entire 100m, may equate to as much as 2.5 meters or a quarter of a second. Related to postural stabilization, the alignment of an athlete’s core is also very Important to stability. Ideally, a sprinter’s head, neck, and spine should be neutrally aligned and the athlete should display a slight posterior tilt of the pelvis. This posture ensures freedom of movement and facilitates relaxation, both of which enhance elastic energy return from the core and extremity musculature. An upright posture with a posteriorly rotated pelvis also promotes frontside mechanics and limits backside mechanics. Frontside mechanics refers to the actions of the legs that occur in front of the body. Similarly, backside mechanics refers to the actions of the legs that occur behind the body. Greater frontside mechanics and minimized backside mechanics are vitally important to sprinting efficiency.

Minimizing Braking Forces

The second objective of efficient sprinting is minimizing braking forces that the athlete encounters at ground contact. Braking forces refer to those forces which act in the opposite direction of the desired movement. Braking forces experienced in sprinting tend to result in horizontal deceleration. And while these forces are somewhat inevitable and in small magnitudes, actually add to the overall stability of the athlete, all attempts should be made to minimize the magnitude of braking forces experienced by an athlete. The primary cause of excessive braking forces is making ground contact too far in front of the athlete’s center of mass (an athlete’s center of mass is roughly located in the vicinity of the hips). Ideally, an athlete should minimize the horizontal distance between the center of mass and the point of ground contact. If we relate the cyclic motion of the foot in the sagittal plane to that of a pedal on a bicycle, ground contact should be made as close to the bottom dead center position as possible. Two scenarios are often the root of excessive braking forces. In many cases, the cause is a willful attempt to artificially increase step length by “reaching out” with each step. This inevitably makes ground contact occur further away from the bottom dead center position. Also since stride length is primarily a function of force applied at ground contact, stretching out with each step in an attempt to increase stride length may ultimately have the opposite effect due to the horizontal braking forces that such an attempt would introduce. A second scenario associated with excessive braking forces is instability. When the body experiences instability, it often attempts to regain stability by premature grounding of the swing leg. This often occurs as a result an overemphasis on “kicking the butt.”

Premature grounding of the swing leg typically means that the foot will still be moving forward with respect to the body when ground contact is made. This is referred to as excessive positive foot speed and it is potentially disruptive to efficient sprinting because it can increase braking forces at ground contact. Ideally, the foot should be moving backward with respect to the body when touchdown occurs (Mann, 2005). This is often referred to as negative foot speed at ground contact and this movement pattern is highly correlated with increased sprinting speed. It is important to note, however, that it is not advisable to actively “paw back” at the ground in an attempt to increase negative foot speed as this is an unnatural movement pattern that is disruptive to sprinting mechanics and may increase the likelihood of hamstring injuries. Any increases in negative foot speed should be a byproduct of increased frontside mechanics coupled with sufficient flight time. When these factors occur together, they increase the range of motion over which the swing leg has to accelerate down toward the ground and in so doing, increase the likelihood of negative foot speed at ground contact.

Increased Vertical Propulsive Forces

The final objective of effective sprinting is enhancing vertical propulsive forces. Although this point has been discussed previously, it will be examined in greater depth here. Increasing vertical propulsive forces produces a host of benefits. It increases vertical displacement of the athlete which will in turn result in a more effective ground contact position and increased likelihood of negative foot speed on the subsequent ground contact. Finally, increased vertical propulsive force application will enhance leg stiffness which will allow the athlete to better counteract the effects of gravity. When a sprinter is generating sufficient vertical forces, his center of mass will travel in a sinusoidal trajectory in the sagittal plane. The apex of the curve occurs at the midpoint of the flight phase. The low point of the curve occurs just slightly after ground contact is made. The amplitude of the curve is often indicative of the efficiency of the sprinter. Better sprinters tend to have more upward vertical displacement during flight and less downward vertical displacement following ground contact. Lesser sprinters often have difficulty producing sufficient vertical forces and as a result, their hips tend to drop considerably after ground contact. This inevitably lengthens ground contact times and reduces the elastic response of the subsequent push-off. As a result of their more efficient force application, better sprinters are distinguished by significantly shorter ground contact times than their less efficient peers. The second benefit of increased vertical force application is a more effective ground contact position on the subsequent touchdown. Because better athletes tend to have slightly larger vertical displacements during flight they have the time needed to get the swing-leg foot close to bottom dead center. When flight time is insufficient, ground contact may be made when the foot is still relatively far in front of a bottom dead center position. This will increase braking forces. When flight time is sufficient, negative foot speed is more likely and ground contact positions closer to bottom dead center are often observed. The final benefit of increased vertical propulsive forces is increased leg stiffness. Leg stiffness refers to the ability of the legs to act as a spring during contact. Leg stiffness is critically important to maximal velocity sprinting and the maintenance of the momentum developed during the acceleration period of a sprint (Bret et al., 2002; Chelly &c Denis, 2001).

As an athlete accelerates from a resting position to top end speed the athlete develops momentum along the way. This momentum describes the quantity of motion of the athlete and ensures that in the absence of unbalanced forces the athlete will continue to move at the same speed. There are only two significant external forces which the athlete needs to overcome to maintain maximal velocity: air resistance and gravity. Air resistance mainly hinders movement in the horizontal direction. Gravity, on the other hand, is an external force that acts in the vertical direction. Interestingly, although sprint performance is assessed by horizontal speed it is gravity that presents more of a limitation to sprint performance. The forces of gravity pull the athlete down toward the ground. When an athlete fails to produce sufficient vertical forces to overcome the downward forces of gravity, he/she will lack the leg stiffness that is so crucial to maximal velocity sprinting. When an athlete lacks adequate leg stiffness, ground contact times increase significantly and hip height often drops. This inevitably begins a downward spiral of events that lead to the athlete decelerating and losing horizontal momentum. When the athlete produces large vertical forces, ground contact times are shorter and the athlete is able to more rapidly propel himself back in to flight. This helps to preserve the velocity developed during the acceleration period of the run.

APPLICATION OF CONCEPTS

Now that the fundamental concepts and goals of sprinting have been discussed, they will now be applied to actual sprinting mechanics. To ensure maximal expression of force as sprint speed, frontside and backside mechanics must be optimized to produce best results. In general, it is safe to say that better sprinters tend to exhibit greater frontside mechanics and minimized backside mechanics. Research on elite sprinters supports this observation (Mann, 1986; 2005; Mann & Hermann, 1985). Maximizing frontside mechanics produces a cascade of benefits, many of which have already been discussed. Increased frontside mechanics is associated with enhanced stability, minimized braking forces and increased propulsive vertical forces. So how do athletes maximize frontside mechanics and minimize backside mechanics? The answer is actually quite simple. As indicated previously, correct posture promotes frontside mechanics while limiting backside mechanics. As is often the case, the actions of the limbs are dictated by the stabilization and alignment of the core. More specifically, the positioning and functional capacity of the limbs is closely related to the positioning and functional capacity of the athlete’s core. When posture is correct, movement of the limbs is often correct. Because of this, posture is of utmost importance to sprint performance. For efficient sprinting to take place there are some postural prerequisites. The head, neck and spine should be aligned in a neutral position and the pelvis should exhibit a slight posterior tilt. When these traits are present in a sprinter at maximal velocity, the athlete will typically display an upright trunk, level head, and maximal hip height. Athletes should strive to exhibit this posture at all times during maximal velocity sprinting. The following section will examine an efficient sprint stride. To simplify discussion, the sprint stride will be broken down in to a stance phase and a flight phase. Stance begins with the instant of ground contact and ends at the moment of toe-off. Since the sprint stride should be symmetric and cyclic in nature, the guidelines suggested herein apply to both legs. Special attention will be given to the limbs but always keep in mind that the actions of the limbs are dependent on the proper positioning and stabilization of the core, especially the pelvis. If optimal posture is compromised, attempting to fix the positioning or movement patterns of the limbs will be fruitless. If you fix the cause of a problem, which in many cases will be related to posture, many of the dysfunctional or inappropriate movements of the limbs will automatically disappear.

Ground Contact

As previously indicated, ground contact should be made with the foot as close to bottom dead center as possible. This will help to minimize braking forces. At ground contact, both thighs should be in line with each other and the tibia (shin bone) of the support leg should be approximately perpendicular with the ground. When these positions are not observed, it is almost always due to hyper-lordosis or a “buttout” posture.

Stance Phase

As the athlete enters the stance phase, he must absorb the impact forces generated at ground contact. Oftentimes, when an athlete lacks adequate postural stability or leg stiffness, he may have difficulty absorbing the forces at ground contact. When an athlete’s hips drop or postural deviations occur during the initial moments of the stance phase, it is often due to the athlete’s failure to prepare for ground contact during the flight phase. Optimal preparation for ground contact will be discussed in the flight phase discussion. As the body travels over and in front of the support foot, the athlete is no longer absorbing the forces of ground contact and has started to apply vertical and horizontal propulsive forces to the ground. Aggressive forward and upward movement of the swing-leg thigh will help to increase the vertical and horizontal propulsive forces applied to the ground due to an action-reaction relationship. When posture is correct, the swing-leg foot should step over the support knee and the heel should remain tucked to the buttocks. As the swing-leg thigh moves in front of the body, the lower leg should begin to “unfold” and extend at the knee. When unfolding of the lower leg occurs prior to this point it is almost always due to excessive backside mechanics. Toe-Off Posture should remain upright at the moment of toe-off. For athletes lacking sufficient strength in their postural muscles this can often be a difficult task. The hip of the swing leg should be projected forward slightly and the knee should be high and in front of the body. The “high knee” position of the swing leg places the hamstring and gluteal muscles on stretch which increases their capacity for speed and force development when they accelerate the thigh down toward the ground for the subsequent groimd contact. Also, greater frontside mechanics increase the range of motion over which the swing leg can accelerate down toward the ground. In addition to increased frontside mechanics, better sprinters also exhibit minimized backside mechanics at toe-off. Because of their increased vertical force production, better sprinters tend to toe-off closer to bottom dead center than less efficient sprinters.

Flight Phase

After the athlete breaks contact with the ground he enters the flight phase. Immediately following toe-off, the heel of the push-off leg should be recovered up toward the buttocks. Note, however, that this action is not due to the active contraction of the hamstring. Contrary to the commonly held notion that the athlete should actively “kick their butt,” research evidence suggests that the hamstring muscle is largely silent during this period of the stride cycle (Mann & Hagy, 1980; Thelen et al., 2005a, 2005b). In fact, the knee flexion observed following toe-off is largely a result of the aggressive hip flexion that occurs once the athlete has left the ground. As sprinters reach the apex of their flight, better athletes are distinguished by greater vertical amplitudes of the previously discussed sinusoidal wave. At this point the ipsilateral leg should have moved to a position completely in front of the body. This is commonly referred to as a “high knee” position. At the end of its forward movement, the thigh should be forcefully accelerated down and back towards the ground. As this occurs, the knee joint will naturally extend and the lower leg will “open up.” There is no need to actively initiate or amplify this movement and doing so could actually be disruptive to efficient sprinting. As previously indicated, it is very important for athletes to prepare for the stance phase while still in flight. The ground contact period in maximal velocity sprinting is so short (~O.ls) that it is impossible for an athlete to adequately produce the necessary forces during the stance phase without preparing the support leg prior to ground contact. There are several conditions which help to prepare the soon-to-be support leg for ground contact. The ankle joint may be the weakest Imk in the leg spring system. As such, it is very important that it is stabilized appropriately prior to ground contact. The ankle joint of the soon-to-be support leg should be in a neutral or slightly dorsifiexed position in the final moments of flight. This position provides several benefits. First, when compared to a plantarfiexed ankle joint, ground contact will be delayed by a fraction of a second. This gives the soon-to-be support leg foot a few moments longer to move closer to bottom dead center. This reduction could be as great as 2-3cm which is enough to significantly reduce braking forces. The second benefit of a neutral or slightly dorsifiexed foot posifion is related to the first. A neutral or slightly dorsifiexed foot places the fascial linkages of the posterior anatomy train on stretch. This increased stretch should theoretically produce a faster downward acceleration of the thigh and lower leg. This greater acceleration should produce greater negafive foot speed and help to reduce braking forces at ground contact. Finally, a neutral or slightly dorsifiexed posifion prior to ground contact places the gastroc-soleus muscle complex on stretch which increases its capacity for elastic force production upon ground contact. These benefits combine to ensure that the weakest link of the leg is in the best position possible to resist the effect of gravity at ground contact. Another effective means of preparing for ground contact is by emphasizing a vertical pushing motion for maximal velocity sprinting. Although in acfion the sprinting motion is a combination of pushing (at the knee joint) and pulling (at the hip joint), anecdotal evidence suggests that it is more beneficial to focus on the vertical pushing aspect of the motion. Emphasizing vertical pushes will ensure that the athlete actively accelerates the thigh down toward the ground during the flight phase and will increase leg stiffness once ground contact is made. This will in turn reduce ground contact fime and backside mechanics and increase stride frequency and length.

Arm Swing

The role of the arm swing remains a rather controversial topic among sprint coaches. Some believe the arm swing is crucial to performance and significantly contributes to horizontal propulsive forces. A deeper examination, however, reveals that the role of the arms may not be as sigruficant as previously thought and they may serve a different funcfion than previously believed. Research evidence suggests that the arms do not contribute directly to forward movement or horizontal propulsive forces (Hinrichs, 1987). The horizontal force capabilities of the arms are very limited due to the simultaneous forward-backward action of contralaterai arms. That is, although the forward swinging arm has the ability to generate horizontal propulsive forces, any benefit is cancelled out by the opposite action of the contralaterai arm moving backwards. The arm swing does, however, serve two important roles. The first of these is to counterbalance the rotary momentum of the legs (Hinrichs et al., 1987; Mann & Hermann, 1985). If it were not for the action of the arms, an athlete would not be able to control the rotation of the trunk caused by the unilateral action of the legs. The second role that the arm swing serves is to enhance vertical propulsive forces. Research evidence indicates that the arms may contribute up to 10% of the total vertical propulsive forces an athlete is capable of applying to the ground (Hinrichs, 1987). This is because unlike the spatial phase difference of the arm swing in the forward backward direction, both arms are synchronized in their upward and downward movement. As a result, there is no cancellation of their effect in the vertical direction, and the synchronized upward movement of both arms is able to contribute to the verfical propulsive forces an athlete can apply to the ground. In light of these considerafions, an optima! arm swing is one which is symmetrical and roughly matches the timing and magnitude of movement of the legs. Efficient sprinters exhibit an arm swing that originates from the shoulder and has a fiexion and extension action at the shoulder and elbow that is commensurate to the flexion and extension occurring at the ipsilateral shoulder and hip.

CLOSING POINTS

Sprint performance is maximized when the largest possible forces are applied in appropriate directions over very short periods of time. From a technical standpoint, an athlete should strive to preserve postural stability, minimize braking forces and increase vertical propulsive forces. Generally speak ing, all three of these issues can be addressed by running with opfimal posture, increasing frontside mechanics, and minimizing backside mechanics. In addition to these technical points, biomotor training with an emphasis on developing strength, power, and elasticity in the gluteal, quadriceps and hamstring musculature, as weil as strength and stability in the muscles of the core, will help to enhance an athlete’s maximal velocity.

RELATIONS OF THE VARIABLES OF POWER AND MORPHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS TO THE KINEMATIC INDICATORS OF MAXIMAL SPEED RUNNING

Vesna Babić, Dražen Harasin and Dražan Dizdar
University of Zagreb, Faculty of Kinesiology, Zagreb, Croatia

Abstract:

The aim of the present research was to investigate the relations of 7 variables of power and 12 variables of morphological characteristics with the kinematic indicators (stride frequency, stride length, foot-ground contact duration, flight duration) of maximal running speed. The research was conducted on a sample of 133 physical education male students, 19 to 24 years (age 21.7 ± 1.08; body height 180.8 ± 6.98; body weight 76.6 ± 7.62), freshmen at the Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Zagreb. By means of the component model of factor analysis under the GK criterion and non-orthogonal rotation under the promax criterion the following factors were obtained: three morphological factors (skeleton dimensionality, in which the longitudinal component prevailed, body voluminosity and subcutaneous fatty tissue) and two factors of power (power of a jumping type and ballistic power). Canonical analysis of the morphological factors and power factors with kinematic parameters resulted in two pairs of canonical factors with statistically significant canonical correlations (Rc1=0.76; p<0.01, and Rc2=0.57; p<0.01). On the basis of the first pair structure of canonical factors it was concluded that the Faculty of Kinesiology students who had pronounced dimensionality of skeleton, a smaller amount of subcutaneous fatty tissue and better developed relative power, performed longer strides in maximal speed running. The structure of the second canonical factor pair indicated that the students with the greater skeleton dimensionality had a smaller frequency of strides and their foot-ground contact lasted longer. It was also determined that stride length and stride frequency were negatively correlated in maximal speed running which was the result of positive correlation between skeleton dimensionality and stride length, on the one hand, and of negative correlation between skeleton dimensionality and stride frequency on the other. The findings may contribute to a better understanding of the factors responsible for sprint performance in the population of athletes who are not top-level sprinters, i.e. they may be useful to PE teachers, coaches who work with novices in athletics and physical conditioning coaches who work in sports other than athletics, to get a more thorough insight into the sprinting efficiency mechanisms.

Key words: canonical analysis, morphological characteristics, power, kinematics, stride length, stride frequency, sprinting, PE students

Introduction

Quite a lot of previous research has focused on the investigation of biomechanical factors responsible for performance in sprint or maximal speed running (for a review see Mero, Komi, & Gregor, 1992; Čoh, Dolenec, & Jošt, 2003; Korhonen, Mero, & Suominen, 2003; Babić, 2005; Wang, 2006; Pain & Hibbs, 2007). It was found, among other fi ndings, that the maximum speed of running is determined by the following kinematic parameters: stride frequency, stride length, ground-foot contact duration, non-contact phase duration (or airborne phase duration) (Bellotti, 1991; Brüggemann & Glad, 1988; Müller & Hommel, 1997; Harland & Steele, 1997; Ferro, Riviera, Pagola, Ferreruela, Martin, & Rocandio, 2001). Maximum sprinting speed is actually a result of the optimal relationship between stride frequency and stride length. Several authors indicated stride frequency as being more important for maximum speed of running performance than stride length (Ballreich, 1976; Luhtanen & Komi, 1978; Mero, Luhtanen, Viitasalo, & Komi, 1981). On the other hand, both parameters - stride length and stride frequency, are influenced by numerous factors, such as muscular structure (Costill, Daniels, Evans, Fink, Krahenbuhl, & Saltin, 1976; Mero, Luhtanen, Viitasalo, & Komi, 1981; Mero, Kuitunen, Harland, Kyröläinen, & Komi, 2006), running technique (Mero, Luhtanen, & Komi, 1986), speed strength and elasticity of muscular-tendon locomotor complex (Mero et al., 1981). Based on the analysis of stride frequency and stride length parameters and on their comparison it is feasible to conclude that changes in stride length and stride frequency, found in the best, fastest world sprinters, enable great acceleration and speed maintenance over the course of a running event. As far as stride length is concerned, it is possible to differentiate between two parameters. The first one is the distance between two foot-ground contacts, and the second is the distance the runner’s centre of gravity travels within one stride (effective stride length). Movement velocity of the runner’s centre of gravity varies within a sprinting stride. So, in the phase of the rear leg support (take-off), the velocity of the gravity centre increases, whereas it decreases in the phase of the front leg support. In top quality sprinters the horizontal velocity of the gravity centre decreases up to 2 to 3%, whereas in less quality sprinters it decreases even up to 5 to 6%. Stride length depends on the take-off velocity, take-off angle and the height of the centre of gravity at the moment of take-off, whereas stride frequency depends on the time needed for a stride performance and it is limited by stride length. In several previous research studies (e.g. Donati, 1995; Gambetta, 1997) it was determined that runners achieve their maximal running speed by means of an individual-specifi c ratio between stride length and stride frequency. World-class male sprinters manage to run over a 100m-course at a speed of 12 m/s, whereas female sprinters achieve a speed of 11 m/s. The number of strides performed by the 100 m male sprint fi nalists in Seoul ranged from 43.6 to 46.6, whereas their stride frequency ranged from 4.76 to 4.39 strides per second. The number of strides performed by the 100 m female sprint fi nalists in Seoul ranged from 42.6 to 50.8, whereas their stride frequency ranged from 3.88 do 4.69 strides per second. It is obvious that when enhancing the speed of running, one must enhance either the stride length, or the stride frequency, or both. However, one must have in mind that Hunter, Marshall and McNair (2004) determined a relatively high negative correlation between stride length and stride frequency (r=–0.70, P<0.01), meaning that in the athletes who performed a larger number of strides they noticed the tendency of a smaller stride length, and vice versa. The issue treated in the present research is an investigation of the phenomenon of sprinting conducted on a sample of variably trained physical education teacher students who were not top-level athletes-sprinters. The research was conducted on the sample of the Faculty of Kinesiology students who had been positively selected for their study, meaning generally for sport, but had not been oriented towards athletics nor had been trained specifi cally for it. Sport achievements in this case were neither an integral indicator of the effects of learning athletics technique of sprinting, nor the indicators of athletics training effects simply because previous training stimuli were not sufficient to induce considerable effects. Situations of this kind are the same as those with which physical education teachers, coaches who work with novices in athletics and physical conditioning coaches, who work in sports other than athletics, have to face in their actual practice. Therefore, the main issue of the research was to determine the relationships among the kinematic parameters (stride length, stride frequency, airborne duration, and ground-foot contact duration) in subjects who ran with maximal speed (sprinted) and the relations of these kinematic parameters to morphological characteristics and the variables of power in order to disclose the mechanisms that determine the sprinting performance of athletes who were not top-level sprinters.

Methods

Sample of subjects

The population were the students of the Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Zagreb, Croatia, who were positively selected for their study as regarding their motor and physiological abilities (capacities) and motor knowledge (skills). The research was conducted on the convenience sample embracing 133 male freshmen, aged 19 to 24 years (age 21.7±1.08 yrs; body height 180.8±6.98 cm; body weight 76.6±7.62 kg), who regularly attended their first-year classes at the Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Zagreb. The obtained results can be generalized to a population of similar anthropological features.

Sample of variables

In this research three groups of variables were measured:
a) power,
b) morphological characteristics,and
c) kinematic characteristics of sprint.

a) The power of the subjects was assessed by means of fi ve tests assessing power of a jumping type and two tests assessing power of a ballistic (throwing) type. All the applied tests were of good metric characteristics and had been successfully utilized in previous research (e.g. Markovic, Dizdar, Jukic, & Cardinale, 2004; Artega, Dorado, Chavarren, & Calbert, 2000). The following tests were utilized to assess power of a jumping type:

• standing long jump (SLJ)
• standing triple jump (STJ). A subject stands on the start line and performs a triple jump so as to perform the first take-off by two legs and the consecutive take-offs first by the take-off leg and then by the lead leg. The landing is on both legs.
• drop-broad jump (DBJ). A subject stands on his take-off leg on the edge of a box (height: 50 cm). He pushes himself off with his take off leg and lands on the same leg; after landing, he quickly performs another take-off with the same leg and finishes by landing on both feet on the mat. The landing from the box and the consecutive take-off must be performed in the zone of 70 cm which is 150 cm away from the box. The distance between the projection of the box edge on the floor and the landing foot mark on the mat is measured.
• squat jump (SJ). The capacitive contact mat Ergojump, Psion XP, MA.GI.CA., Rome, Italy was used.
• countermovement jump (CMJ). The capacitive contact mat Ergojump, Psion XP, MA.GI.CA., Rome, Italy was used.

In all the jumping tests the final score, expressed in centimetres, is an arithmetic mean of the results achieved in three performances. For the ballistic power assessment the following tests were used:

• medicine ball throwing backwards from supine position (MBTSL). A subject is on his back with his head in the vicinity of the start line. With his arms extended he throws a 3 kg medicine ball as far as possible in the measuring scale direction.
• medicine ball sitting put from the chest (BSPC).

A subject sits on the chair leaning with his shoulder-blades and head against the wall; his feet are on the floor slightly apart. From his chest he puts a 3 kg medicine ball as far as possible in the direction of the measuring scale simultaneously keeping his contact with the wall.
The distance between the chair’s front legs and the ball’s landing spot is measured. In all throwing tests the final score, expressed in centimetres, is an arithmetic mean of the results
achieved in three performances.

b) Morphological characteristics were measured using International Biological Program (IBP) protocols (Mišigoj-Duraković et al., 1995). With respect to the hypothetical model of the morphological dimensions, the following morphological variables were measured, describing primarily the following:

• longitudinal dimensionality of skeleton: body height (BH), leg length (LL), foot length (FL);
• transversal dimensionality of skeleton: knee diameter (KD), ankle diameter (AD) and elbow diameter (ED);
• voluminosity and body mass: body weight (BW), upper arm circumference (UAC), forearm circumference (FC), thigh circumference (TC), calf circumference (CC);
• subcutaneous fatty tissue: back skinfold (BS), abdominal skinfold (AS), thigh skinfold (TS) and lower leg skinfold (LLS). Trained measurers performed the measurements of all the morphological and power variables in the Sports Diagnostic Centre of the Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Zagreb.

c) Kinematic measurements of maximal speed running were conducted by means of a contact 20- m-long mat (ERGO TESTER – Bosco; Italy), with a measuring electronic system and respective computer software. After a 20 m run-up, a subject was supposed to run over the mat with maximal speed. The test was performed two times, with a pause of 15-20 minutes between the two trials. The following variables were registered (Čoh et al., 2001):

• foot-ground contact average duration (TLCAD),
• average airborne or flight phase duration (TLFAD),
• average stride frequency (TLASF) and
• average stride length (TLASL).

Kinematic parameters were measured by a team of trained measurers with the Institute for Sport of the Faculty of Sport, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia.

Data analysis

For all variables the basic descriptive parameters were computed: arithmetic mean (Mean), minimal result (Min), maximal result (Max), and standard deviation (SD). Normality of distribution of the variables was tested by means of Kolmogorov-Smirnov test at the error level of 0.05. Latent structure of morphological characteristics and of power indicators was determined with the component model of factor analysis under the Guttman-Kaiser (GK) criterion and with a non-orthogonal rotation of the initial coordinate system under the promax criterion. Relations of power and morphological variables to kinematic parameters (stride frequency, stride length, foot-ground contact duration and airborne phase duration) of maximal running speed were determined using canonical analysis.

Results

The descriptive parameters obtained are presented in Table 1.

In order to reduce the group of manifest morphological variables to a smaller number of latent dimensions, the method of principal components was utilized. By the application of GK criterion three principal components were obtained which explained about 72% of the common variance of the manifest variables (Table 2). Using non-orthogonal rotation under the promaxcriterion the initial coordinate system was transformed to obtain a simple factor structure. Table 3 displays the relationships among the manifest variables and the rotated factors. The relationships among the manifest variables of morphological characteristics and the rotated factors (Table 3) indicate that the variables of longitudinal dimensionality have the largest parallel and orthogonal projections on the fi rst factor: body height (BH), leg length (LL) and foot length (FL), whereas the variables of transverse body dimensionality knee diameter (KD), ankle diameter (AD) and elbow diameter (ED) have moderate projections. Also, the latent structure of power variables was determined. Using the method of principal components under the GK criterion two signifi cant latent dimensions were extracted which explained 68.62% of the total variance of the manifest variables (Table 4). By means of the non-orthogonal rotation under the promax criterion the fi nal solution was obtained (Table 5). High parallel and orthogonal projections on the fi rst factor were obtained for the following variables: counter movement jump (CMJ), squat jump (SJ), representing vertical jumping ability, and standing long jump (SLJ), standing triple jump (STJ) and drop-broad jump (DBJ), representing horizontal jumping ability. Due to the characteristics of the mentioned tests it was feasible to conclude that we were dealing with the factor of power of a jumping type, whereas the second factor was best determined by the following variables: medicine ball throwing backwards from supine position (MBTS) and medicine ball sitting put from the chest (STC). Therefore, the second factor was named power of a ballistic type.

Table 6 displays correlations among the power and morphological factors. Nearly zero correlations were obtained for the following factors:

• skeleton dimensionality (F_DS) and subcutaneous fatty tissue (F_SFT),
• skeleton dimensionality (F_DS) and power of a jumping type (F_POW_J)
• subcutaneous fatty tissue (F_SFT) and power of a ballistic type (F_POW_B), and
• body voluminosity (F_BV) and power of a jumping type (F_POW_J), whereas the correlations among the other factors were moderately high.

Table 7 displays correlations among the kinematic parameters. It is obvious that stride frequency (TLASF) has negative and relatively high correlations with the rest of the kinematic parameters (average stride length - TLASL, average foot-ground contact duration – TLCAD, and average fl ight duration - TLFAD).

In order to reveal and thoroughly explain the mechanisms regulating sprint performance, it was necessary to determine the crucial relationships between power and morphological factors and kinematic parameters (stride frequency, stride length, foot-ground contact duration) of maximal speed running. Canonical analysis was used.

According to the canonical analysis results, out of the four possible pairs of linear composites (canonical factors), two were singled out by the statistical signifi cance of their canonical correlation. Both canonical correlations are relatively high (0.76 and 0.57).

The fi rst canonical factor among kinematic parameters is determined mostly by stride length (TLASL), whereas the fi rst canonical factor among morphological factors and power factors (Table 9) is determined by the positive correlation between the factors of power (F_POW_J, F_POW_B) and skeleton dimensionality (F_DS), on the one hand, and by the negative correlation between the factors of subcutaneous fatty tissue (F_SFT) on the other. The analysis of the second pair of canonical factors among morphological factors and power factors revealed a very high positive correlation of the factors skeleton dimensionality (F_DS), whereas the structure of the second canonical factor among kinematic parameters was bipolar (Table 9). It was best determined by stride frequency (TLASF) on the negative pole and by foot-ground contact duration (TLCAD) on the positive pole.

Discussion and conclusion

The analysis of descriptive parameters (Table 1) confirmed the assumption of the results’ distribution normality in most variables, with the accepted error of 0.05. The exceptions were the following morphological variables: elbow diameter (ED), abdominal skinfold (AS), lower leg skinfold (LLS), forearm circumference (FC) and calf circumference (CC). It is well known that morphological characteristics have their own, specifi c growth rate and that in a population there are individuals with pronounced body diameters, voluminosity and skinfolds. In previous studies similar results were obtained for these variables (Kurelić, Momirović, Stojanović, Šturm, Radojević, & Viskić-Štalec, 1975; Stojanović, Solarić, Momirović, & Vukosavljević, 1975; Šnajder, 1982). The average body height of the observed subjects was 180.77 ± 6.98 cm, and their average body mass was 76.57 ± 7.62 kg (Table 1). These morphological characteristics did not differentiate between them and top-level athletes (Gajer, Thepaut-Mathieu, & Lehenaff, 1999). However, the authors assumed that certain differences in the measures of body voluminosity and subcutaneous fatty tissue would have occurred between the observed sample and top level athletes only if the rest of the morphological parameters applied in the research had been available for the sample of top-level athletes. According to Brüggeman, Koszevski and Müller (1997), the world-class top-level sprinters have an average stride length of 2.30 m, and a frequency of 4.78 strides/second in the phase of maximal speed of running. In the same article it was published that the world’s fastest sprinters (e.g. Ben Johnson, Carl Lewis and Leroy Burell) achieved an average stride length of 2.45 m and an average frequency of 4.75 stride/second in the phase of maximal speed of their fastest runs at the World Championships and the Olympic Games. On the other hand, the Faculty of Kinesiology students have an average stride length of 2.01 m and an average frequency of 4.22 stride/second, that is, the observed subjects achieved far smaller stride length and frequency than the world-class sprinters. Sprint performance may also be analysed through the kinematic parameters of foot-ground contact duration and fl ight duration. Values of these parameters in top-level Slovenian sprinters in the phase of maximal speed running are on average 89.76 ms and 126.25 ms for contact duration and fl ight duration, respectively (Čoh, Milanović, & Kampmiller, 2001). In the analysed sample of students these values were on average 117.82 ms and 120.08 ms for contact duration and fl ight duration, respectively. Despite the fact that not all Slovenian sprinters are world-class athletes, their foot-ground contact phase duration is considerably shorter (about 28%) than the contact duration of the analysed students. The initial coordinate system was transformed using a non-orthogonal rotation under the promax criterion to obtain a simple factor structure. Table 3 shows the relationships among the manifest variables and the rotated factors. The largest parallel and orthogonal projections on the fi rst factor were obtained for the variables of longitudinal body dimensionality: body height (BH), leg length (LL) and foot length (FL), and moderate projections were obtained for the variables of transverse body dimensionality: knee diameter (KD), ankle diameter (AD) and elbow diameter (ED). It is obvious that bone growth in length (longitudinal dimensionality) and in width (transverse dimensionality) are to a great extent determined by the same mechanism. With regard to such a structure of the fi rst factor it is feasible to regard it as a general factor of skeleton dimensionality in which the longitudinal dimensionality prevails. The obtained results confirmed the authors’ initial assumption that there were four morphological dimensions, which assumption was based on certain previous research (Marković, 2004). However, these results are no exception at all. Namely, in numerous previous research studies the three-factor latent structure was obtained (Kurelić et al., 1975; Stojanović et al., 1975). The second factor is mostly determined by the following variables: forearm circumference (FC), upper arm circumference (UAC), thigh circumference (TC) and calf circumference (CC). Therefore, this factor can be regarded as the factor of circular dimensionality or body voluminosity. Besides, it is also obvious that the variables of transverse dimensionality: knee diameter (KD), ankle diameter (AD) and elbow diameter (ED), have moderate projections on this factor as well. The variables of transverse skeleton dimensionality shared equally its variance on the fi rst and the third factor. The finding was expected since bone growth in length (longitudinal component) is to a great extent followed by the body growth in width (transverse component), which also became obvious in the positive correlation with the circular body dimensionality. The third factor is mostly determined by high projections of the skinfold variables: back skinfold (BS), abdominal skinfold (AS), thigh skinfold (TS) and lower leg skinfold (LLS). Taking into account that the other variables had not defined this factor significantly, it may be regarded as the factor of subcutaneous fatty tissue, which was also found in previous research studies on the latent structure of morphological variables. The variable body weight (BW) shared equally its variance between the first and the second factor, whereas its share in the third factor was somewhat smaller. The finding is expected since body weight is determined by all the three obtained factors. Two latent dimensions of power were obtained (Tables 4 and 5). Three basic determinants differentiated between the two factors:

• body mass – the first factor displays relative power, whereas the second displays absolute power
• motor activity - the first factor represents power of a jumping type, and the second power of a ballistic type
• muscular group - the first factor represents power of the lower extremities and the second power of the upper extremities.

From Table 6, representing the correlations among power and morphological factors, it is obvious that nearly zero correlations were obtained for the following factors:

• skeleton dimensionality (F_DS) and subcutaneous fatty tissue (F_SFT),
• skeleton dimensionality (F_DS) and power of a jumping type (F_POW_J)
• subcutaneous fatty tissue (F_SFT) and power of a ballistic type (F_POW_B), and
• body voluminosity (F_BV) and power of a jumping type (F_POW_J), whereas the correlations between the other factors are of a moderate value. Similar relations were obtained among the morphological factors in previous research (Marković, 2004). Moderate positive relations are understandable between power of a jumping type (F_POW_J) and power of a ballistic type (F_POW_B), because, despite the listed determinants that differentiate between them (body mass, motor activity, muscle groups engaged), in both factors the greatest possible force should be produced in the shortest time possible.

The results in Table 7 make the following conclusion feasible: the observed Faculty of Kinesiology students who achieved higher stride frequency (TLASF) had on average smaller stride length (TLASL), shorter fl ight duration (TLFAD) and footground contact duration (TLCAD). On the other hand, those students who achieved longer stride length had on average longer flight duration and foot-ground contact duration and lower stride frequency. It should be accentuated here that the obtained negative correlation (r=–0.73) between stride frequency and stride length is very similar to the correlation (r=–0.70) obtained in the research by Hunter, Marshall and McNair (2004). The obtained results of canonical analysis (Tables 8 and 9) indicate that the Faculty of Kinesiology students who are taller, have less subcutaneous fatty tissue and are more powerful (have better developed power, especially of a jumping type), perform longer strides when running with maximal speed. The fi nding is in accordance with previous research results (Gajer, Thepaut-Mathieu, & Lehenaff, 1999). It is generally known that taller athletes perform a fewer number of strides (lower frequency) while running and that their foot-ground contact lasts longer – these facts have been corroborated by the present research as well. So, in the population of the observed students the negative corrrelation was determined between stride frequency and stride length in maximal speed running due to the positive correlation between skeleton dimensionality and stride length, on the one hand, and the negative correlation between skeleton dimensionality and stride frequency on the other (Figure 1).

To conclude, the research was conducted with the aim to determine the relations of morphological characteristics and the variables of power to kinematic parameters (stride frequency, stride length, foot-ground contact duration, fl ight duration) of maximal speed running. Component model of factor analysis under the GK criterion and non-orthogonal rotation under the promax criterion were used for data analysis. Three morphological factors (skeleton dimensionality, in which the longitudinal component prevailed, body voluminosity and subcutaneous fatty tissue) and two factors of power (power of a jumping type and ballistic power) were obtained. Relations among the obtained morphological and power factors to the kinematic parameters were determined by means of canonical analysis. Out of the four possible pairs of canonical factors, two were singled out by their statistically significant correlations. On the basis of the structure of the first pair of canonical factors it was concluded that the Faculty of Kinesiology students who had pronounced dimensionality of skeleton, a smaller amount of subcutaneous fatty tissue and better developed relative power (of a jumping type) performed longer strides in maximal speed running.

The structure of the second canonical factor pair indicated that the students with the larger skeleton dimensionality performed less frequent strides and their foot-ground contact lasted longer. Therefore, it is feasible to conclude that in maximal speed running stride frequency and stride length are negatively correlated due to the positive correlation between skeleton dimensionality and stride length on the one hand, and the negative correlation between skeleton dimensionality and stride frequency, on the other. It was also concluded that stride length was positively influenced by power, whereas it was negatively influenced by subcutaneous fatty tissue. As far as the authors know, this research is the first one that demonstrated integrally the mechanism of mutual relationships between subcutaneous fatty tissue, skeleton dimensionality, explosive power and kinematic parameters, that is, stride length and stride frequency in maximal speed running or sprinting (Figure 1). Therefore, the obtained results contribute to a better understanding of the factors responsible for sprint or maximal speed running performance in a population of subjects who are not top-level athletes-sprinters. Consequently, it may help physical education teachers, coaches of novices in athletics and physical conditioning coaches to get a more thorough insight into the sprinting efficiency mechanisms.

This is ancient history, Remember Pluto.

All the studies are now focussing on why Bolt is so much quicker than the rest, can’t wait for part 3.

Seva–

What’s up with posting these numerous threads for no reason? I don’t understand.

What’s up with posting these numerous threads for no reason?

:confused:

If you do not like it do not read it! Simple.

Probably got a chip on his shoulder, I sometimes dribble. I once wondered why he is so revved up.

Are there many studies out there that discuss sprint performance and bodyfat?