Skip to main content
Log in

A comparison between the force–velocity relationships of unloaded and sled-resisted sprinting: single vs. multiple trial methods

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Applied Physiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

We sought to compare force–velocity relationships developed from unloaded sprinting acceleration to that compiled from multiple sled-resisted sprints.

Methods

Twenty-seven mixed-code athletes performed six to seven maximal sprints, unloaded and towing a sled (20–120% of body-mass), while measured using a sports radar. Two methods were used to draw force–velocity relationships for each athlete: A multiple trial method compiling kinetic data using pre-determined friction coefficients and aerodynamic drag at maximum velocity from each sprint; and a validated single trial method plotting external force due to acceleration and aerodynamic drag and velocity throughout an acceleration phase of an unloaded sprint (only). Maximal theoretical force, velocity and power were determined from each force–velocity relationship and compared using regression analysis and absolute bias (± 90% confidence intervals), Pearson correlations and typical error of the estimate (TEE).

Results

The average bias between the methods was between − 6.4 and − 0.4%. Power and maximal force showed strong correlations (r = 0.71 to 0.86), but large error (TEE = 0.53 to 0.71). Theoretical maximal velocity was nearly identical between the methods (r = 0.99), with little bias (− 0.04 to 0.00 m s−1) and error (TEE = 0.12).

Conclusions

When horizontal force or power output is considered for a given speed, resisted sprinting is similar to its associated phase during an unloaded sprint acceleration [e.g. first steps (~ 3 m s−1) = heavy resistance]. Error associated with increasing loading could be resultant of error, fatigue, or technique, and more research is needed. This research provides a basis for simplified assessment of optimal loading from a single unloaded sprint.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

α :

Acceleration

BM:

Body mass

ES:

Cohen’s effect size

F :

Horizontal force

F aero :

Aerodynamic friction force

F f :

Friction force

F n :

Normal force

F opt :

Optimal horizontal force

F peak :

Horizontal force at maximum velocity

Fv:

Horizontal force–velocity relationship

F 0 :

Maximum theoretical horizontal force

h t :

Attachment height of tether to athlete

L opt :

Optimal external normal loading

m :

System mass

P :

Horizontal power

P max :

Maximum horizontal power

Pv:

Horizontal power–velocity relationship

S Fv :

Slope of the linear Fv relationship

TEE:

Typical error of estimate

v :

Horizontal velocity

v max :

Maximum horizontal velocity

v opt :

Optimal horizontal velocity

v 0 :

Maximum theoretical horizontal velocity

θ :

Angle of pull

μ k :

Coefficient of friction

References

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Simon Rogers, Dr Michael McGuigan and Dr Matt Brughelli for their feedback during the development of this manuscript. Matt R. Cross is supported by the New Zealand-France Friendship Fund Excellence scholarship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

MRC, JBM and PS conceived and designed research. MRC and SRB piloted, and conducted the experiments. MRC performed the analysis and statistical procedures. MRC wrote the manuscript, and all parties read, contributed to review, and gave final approval of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matt R. Cross.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Communicated by Jean-René Lacour.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cross, M.R., Samozino, P., Brown, S.R. et al. A comparison between the force–velocity relationships of unloaded and sled-resisted sprinting: single vs. multiple trial methods. Eur J Appl Physiol 118, 563–571 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-017-3796-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-017-3796-5

Keywords

Navigation