Pace Controlled by a Steady-State Physiological Variable Is Associated with Better Performance in a 3000 M Run

This paper aims to test the hypothesis whereby freely chosen running pace is less effective than pace controlled by a steady-state physiological variable. Methods Eight runners performed four maximum-effort 3000 m time trials on a running track. The first time trial (TT1) was freely paced. In the following 3000 m time trials, the pace was controlled so that the average speed (TT2), average VO2 (TT3) or average HR (TT4) recorded in TT1 was maintained throughout the time trial. Results: Physiologically controlled pace was associated with a faster time (mean +/- standard deviation: 740 +/- 34 s for TT3 and 748 +/- 33 s for TT4, vs. 854 +/- 53 s for TT1; p < 0.01), a lower oxygen cost of running (200 +/- 5 and 220 +/- 3 vs. 310 +/- 5 mLO(2)center dot kg(-1)center dot km(-1), respectively; p < 0.02), a lower cardiac cost (0.69 +/- 0.08 and 0.69 +/- 0.04 vs. 0.86 +/- 0.09 beat center dot m(-1), respectively; p < 0.01), and a more positively skewed speed distribution (skewness: 1.7 +/- 0.9 and 1.3 +/- 0.6 vs. 0.2 +/- 0.4, p < 0.05). Conclusion: Physiologically controlled pace (at the average VO2 or HR recorded in a freely paced run) was associated with a faster time, a more favorable speed distribution and lower levels of physiological strain, relative to freely chosen pace. This finding suggests that non-elite runners do not spontaneously choose the best pace strategy.

Automated summary

This study found that physiologically controlled pacing was more effective than freely chosen pacing, leading to better performance, reduced physiological strain, and a more positively skewed speed distribution in 3000m running races.