Comparison of two measurement devices for obtaining horizontal force-velocity profile variables during sprint running. Issue 6 (December 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Feser, Erin; Lindley, Kyle; Clark, Kenneth; Bezodis, Neil; Korfist, Christian; Cronin, John
• Is Part Of: International journal of sports science & coaching. Volume 17:Issue 6(2022)
• Page Start: 1455
• Page End: 1461
• Publication Date: 2022-12
• Subjects: Acceleration -- peak power -- radar -- random error -- systematic bias; Coaching (Athletics) -- Periodicals; Sports sciences -- Periodicals; Coaching (Athletics); Sports sciences; Periodicals; 796.077
• DOI: 10.1177/17479541211067211
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1747-9541

Abstract

This study established the magnitude of systematic bias and random error of horizontal force-velocity (F-v) profile variables obtained from a 1080 Sprint compared to that obtained from a Stalker ATS II radar device. Twenty high-school athletes from an American football training group completed a 30 m sprint while the two devices simultaneously measured velocity-time data. The velocity-time data were modelled by an exponential equation fitting process and then used to calculate individual F-v profiles and related variables (theoretical maximum velocity, theoretical maximum horizontal force, slope of the linear F-v profile, peak power, time constant tau, and horizontal maximal velocity). The devices were compared by determining the systematic bias and the 95% limits of agreement (random error) for all variables, both of which were expressed as percentages of the mean radar value. All bias values were within 6.32%, with the 1080 Sprint reporting higher values for tau, horizontal maximal velocity, and theoretical maximum velocity. Random error was lowest for velocity-based variables but exceeded 7% for all others, with slope of the F-v profile being greatest at ±12.3%. These results provide practitioners with the information necessary to determine if the agreement between the devices and the magnitude of random error is acceptable within the context of their specific application.