4.6 Article

Pacing Strategy from High-Frequency Field Data: More Evidence for Neural Regulation?

Journal

MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE
Volume 43, Issue 12, Pages 2405-2411

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3182245367

Keywords

ENDURANCE; FATIGUE; MEASUREMENT; RUNNING

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

ANGUS, S. D. and B. J. WATERHOUSE. Pacing Strategy from High-Frequency Field Data: More Evidence for Neural Regulation? Med. Sci. Sports Exerc., Vol. 43, No. 12, pp. 2405-2411, 2011. Introduction: We demonstrate a methodology that uncovers an athlete's true pacing strategy from high-frequency (<= 1 km) split field data, even if affected by high gradient variation on course. The method thus opens up the analysis of many previously opaque but popular undulating professional and amateur races to scientific scrutiny. Methods: The method is relatively simple to use in any standard statistical package, and execution only requires the addition of the altitude-distance trace of the event to a runner's split times (e. g., as automatically collected by a modern Global Positioning System-enabled wristwatch). In addition, as opposed to assuming a pacing function (e. g., J shaped, U shaped, all-out) and testing this function on the data, the method uses a preliminary discovery step to suggest the most appropriate pacing function(s) to test on the data (if any). Results: The method is demonstrated with two novel case studies: Gebrselassie's world-record Berlin marathon (September 2008) and a unique data set taken from several years of the Six Foot Track Ultramarathon (45 km, Sydney, Australia). Conclusions: In both cases, the method reveals highly variable pacing strategies on a microscale despite remarkable symmetry on a macroscale in one case adding weight to the recent complex system perspective of the neural regulator.

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