4.6 Article

Soccer-specific accuracy and validity of the local position measurement (LPM) system

Journal

JOURNAL OF SCIENCE AND MEDICINE IN SPORT
Volume 13, Issue 6, Pages 641-645

Publisher

SPORTS MEDICINE AUSTRALIA
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsams.2010.04.003

Keywords

Player tracking; Match analysis; Training analysis; Team sports; Performance analysis

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Limited data is available on accuracy and validity of video-based GPS and electronic tracking systems particularly with reference to curved courses and short high intensity running activities The main goal of this study was to assess soccer specific accuracy and validity of the radio-frequency based local position measurement (LPM) system (1000 Hz) for measuring distance and speed during walking and sprinting Three males walked and sprinted 4 soccer-specific courses 10 times each Distance and speed recorded by LPM were compared to actual distance and speed measured by measuring tape and timing gates In addition, accuracy was assessed The static accuracy (SD of the mean) is 1 cm for devices put on the pitch and 2-3 cm when worn by participants LPM underestimates actual distance (mean difference at most -1 6%) Coefficient of variation becomes larger at higher speed and Increased turning angle With regard to speed validity correlations are high (range 0 71-0 97) The LPM speed is significantly and systematically lower, although absolute and relative differences are small, between -0 1 km h(-1) (-1 3%) and -0 6 km h(-1) (-3 9%) The typical error of the estimate increases with increased speed but does not increase with increased turning angle Because the reported differences are small we conclude that the LPM system produces highly accurate position and speed data in static and dynamic conditions and is a valid tool for player tracking in soccer and ball team sports in general (C) 2010 Sports Medicine Australia Published by Elsevier Ltd All rights reserved

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available