4.4 Article

VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM UNITS (STATSPORTS VIPER) FOR MEASURING DISTANCE AND PEAK SPEED IN SPORTS

Journal

JOURNAL OF STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING RESEARCH
Volume 32, Issue 10, Pages 2831-2837

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002778

Keywords

training; circuit; team sports; velocity

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Previous evidence has proven that large variability exists in the accuracy of different brands of global positioning systems (GPS). Therefore, any GPS model should be validated independently, and the results of a specific brand cannot be extended to others. The aim of this study is to assess the validity and reliability of GPS units (STATSports Viper) for measuring distance and peak speed in sports. Twenty participants were enrolled (age 21 +/- 2 years [range 18 to 24 years], body mass 73 +/- 5 kg, and height 1.78 6 0.04 m). Global positioning system validity was evaluated by comparing the instantaneous values of speed (peak speed) determined by GPS (10 Hz, Viper Units; STATSports, Newry, Ireland) with those determined by a radar gun during a 20-m sprint. Data were analyzed using the Stalker (34.7 GHz, USA) ATS Version 5.0.3.0 software as gold standard. Distance recorded by GPS was also compared with a known circuit distance (400-m running, 128.5-m sports-specific circuit, and 20-m linear running). The distance bias in the 400-m trial, 128.5-m circuit, and 20-m trial was 1.99 +/- 1.81%, 2.7 +/- 1.2%, and 1.26 +/- 1.04%, respectively. Peak speed measured by the GPS was 26.3 +/- 2.4 km.h(-1), and criterion was 26.1 +/- 2.6 km.h(-1), with a bias of 1.80 +/- 1.93%. The major finding of this study was that GPS did not underestimate the criterion distance during a 400-m trial, 128.5-m circuit, and 20-m trial, as well as peak speed. Small errors (, 5%, good) were found for peak speed and distances. This study supported the validity and reliability of this GPS model.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available