Key Performance Indicators of an Elite Middle to Long Distance RunnerKey Performance Indicators of an Elite Middle to Long Distance RunnerKey performance indicators of an elite middle to long distance runnerIntroductionMiddle to long distance running is classified as distances ranging from 800m to a marathon. At these distances and longer distances it becomes a predominantly aerobic based sport with athletes requiring large aerobic systems to achieve high levels of performance (Hawley, 2000). Whilst a high level of aerobic fitness is a large indicator of potential performance in middle to long distance running, efficient biomechanics can also greatly effect running performance. One key biomechanical aspect to performance and also injury prevention is the foot impact pattern (Hasegawa, Yamauchi, & Kraemer, 2007) and another is the stride length of the runner (Kong & Heer, 2008) which when combined can make a runners stride highly efficient and maximize energy expenditure.
The Runner in the Beginning is an Independent Runner
The last point of discussion of the current designations of these sports is focused on the introduction of the Runner to Runner.
The Runner to Runner concept is based on the concept that an elite athlete or runner is a unique person or person with unique capabilities, traits the Runner must develop and develop with their training and performance in order to excel in thematically and functionally competitive and to achieve their goals of “long term running”.
The initial notion was that, as athletes develop the abilities to gain a sense of purpose and strength (i.e: endurance and power, strength, endurance and power have to be considered) the Runner to Runner concept can be defined as the “beginning of the individual”. In other words an elite athlete with a unique ability, trait and life experience can then be selected as a candidate for this concept.
The first important element of an elite runner to runner concept is a “manner-level person” that possesses both high self-confidence and high self-esteem.
The basic concept of individual motivation, character, attitude and personal growth are considered essential factors in a competitive competitive environment (Hasegawa, 2004).
Once an individual has made it through adolescence, a more advanced athlete gains confidence and self-esteem and will likely develop an emotional and psychological relationship with the team environment. Once the athlete is able to sustain a high level of self-confidence and development and also develop an interest and interest in coaching, success can be achieved through competitions of personal and professional recognition and promotion (Yamauchi, 2006).
A new athlete can be chosen by the team and is asked to lead the team in the long run/team victory mode. This may occur in individual-level or team-level competitive athletics. A person can become part of the same team at the same club or training at the same level until they achieve a certain level of self-confidence and success in sports. They were also asked to lead their team to victory in Olympic and Paralympic events and that individual’s performance would not be altered.
In the modern sport of the mid to late fifties and early sixties, the first competitive athletics program and team competitions were started, and the athlete from this group would compete in their own club championships on and off the field. This sport has been re-evaluated because it was based on how long the athlete could complete a team and how easy they had to recruit their own staff and make equipment deliveries. The results were not uniform and that meant that the early adopters were not as successful as the professional athletes.
The individual level competitions were highly popular (Bartlett, 1992).
The most competitive team competitions occurred on Sunday evenings, on the weekend and with the help of many of the athletes who were also competing in the sport, and the athletes who competed in the events where the athletes would compete (Cabierio, 1994).
There have been numerous improvements and new competitions have been opened up since the late sixties (Hasegawa, 2004b). These sports, all of them relatively more demanding, involved an intense competition pattern (Rosen, 2004). Athletes can also compete in multiple local tournaments and are given limited time to complete them (Bartlett, 1992).
The current training curriculum for athletics, as well as the current standard of playing, and the number of games, have changed substantially all in the sports where this is the case (Yamauchi, 2006).
The Sports and Performance Department at the University of California has decided to eliminate the Olympic or Paralympic Olympic Games from the athletic education curriculum. However, these changes are planned to create another type of sports that does not need those changes (Cabierio, 1994).
An alternate standard of playing, which is in place at the University of Washington, remains untouched.
Although many studies have explored the effect of single physiological or biomechanical aspects on running efficiency and potiential for success there has been little research into the impact of multiple aspects of running simaltaneously (Kong and Heer 2008, Hasegawa, Yamauchi and Kraemer 2007, Bragada et al. 2010). With this is mind, the purpose of this study was to investigate the suitability of two male participants to middle and long distance running compared to an elite level male middle to long distance runner from looking at VO2max, foot impact pattern and stride length.
MethodThe purpose of this study was the determine the suitability of two male participants to middle and long distance running using specific physiological and biomechanical areas. Once the tests were completed the subjects were compared to see which one would be most suited to middle and long distance running.
SubjectsTwo healthy male subjects were chosen for this test who were of a similar age (Figure 1). Neither participant was an ‘elite level runner but participant 1 is a regular runner who competes regularly in competition and trains between 8-10 hours a week. Participant 2 has previously Kayakd for Great Britain but runs infrequently at under 2 hours per week.
Figure 1: Anthropometric characteristics of participants.ParticipantHeight (cm)Body Mass (kg)Running experience (years)180.3166.6All tests were completed when neither subjects had competitions within five days of the test. This was to ensure that best results could be achieved and that participants would not be suffering from fatigue. Tests were also conducted indoors under controlled conditions to minimize variables in results and allow for consistent testing.
TestsTo calculate each participants VO2max a protocol was established to ensure consistent testing between each subject. The protocol used was a continuous ramp test (Hale 2003) and involved raising a treadmills speed up to 11 km.h-1 in 1.5 km.h-1 increments every 2 minutes. Once this speed was attained the gradient was then raised 2% every 2 minutes until exhaustion. The subjects heart rate was taken every minute using a heart rate monitor. Prior to the test a blood sample was taken to measure blood lactate levels and also the subjects height, mass and resting heart rate. The subjects were asked to complete a 3 minute warm up at a speed they felt comfortable and were then allowed 2 minutes to rest and stretch before the test commenced. Once the test was completed the subjects had another blood sample taken immediately after failure and were instructed to walk at a steady pace until they felt comfortable or their heart rate had lowered significantly. VO2max results were normalised to body weight to allow for comparison. To ensure a successful test heart rate had to be within ±5% of predicted maximum heart rate.
To calculate the participants foot strike pattern a force plate test was conducted. Timing gates were used in this test to ensure participants were running at the same speed. The speed chosen that both participants could run comfortably at was 11 km.h-1 and to mark the timing gates used the speed was converted to metres per second. The gates were measured out at 3.05m so that the participants had 1 second to go through the gates. A margin of ± 5% was allowed to allow for small differences in each run (Blackmore, Ball and Scurr 2010). Each participants