Literature DB >> 31147098

Most marathon runners at the 2017 IAAF World Championships were rearfoot strikers, and most did not change footstrike pattern.

Brian Hanley1, Athanassios Bissas2, Stéphane Merlino3, Allison H Gruber4.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to analyze footstrike patterns in elite marathon runners at the 2017 IAAF World Championships. Seventy-one men and 78 women were analyzed in their respective races. Athletes' footstrike patterns were recorded (120 Hz) at approximately 8.5, 19, 29.5 and 40 km ("Laps 1 - 4") and categorized as either rearfoot (RFS), midfoot or forefoot striking; the latter two were classified together as non-rearfoot striking (NRFS). The most common footstrike pattern was RFS, with proportions never less than 54% of men or 67% of women at any distance. There were no sex-based differences for proportion of footstrike patterns, and there were no differences between footstrike proportions when comparing the top and bottom 50% of men finishers, or between women during Laps 1 and 2. A greater proportion of the top 50% of women maintained NRFS than amongst the bottom 50%. The proportion of RFS increased with distance run in the men's race, although more than 75% of athletes across both marathons had consistent footstrike patterns between laps (79 RFS and 36 NRFS). As most athletes were RFS (including the top four finishing men), there appears to be no clear advantage to NRFS in marathon running. Coaches should note that it is normal for elite marathon runners to be either RFS or NRFS; however, forefoot striking was rare. The high proportion of athletes who maintained their footstrike pattern reflected individualized preferences for a given footstrike pattern.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Athletics; Biomechanics; Endurance; Fatigue; Videography

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31147098     DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2019.05.024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech        ISSN: 0021-9290            Impact factor:   2.712


  6 in total

1.  Influence of the Shod Condition on Running Power Output: An Analysis in Recreationally Active Endurance Runners.

Authors:  Diego Jaén-Carrillo; Luis E Roche-Seruendo; Alejandro Molina-Molina; Silvia Cardiel-Sánchez; Antonio Cartón-Llorente; Felipe García-Pinillos
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-26       Impact factor: 3.847

Review 2.  From barefoot hunter gathering to shod pavement pounding. Where to from here? A narrative review.

Authors:  Peter Francis; Grant Schofield
Journal:  BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med       Date:  2020-04-21

3.  Running Velocity Does Not Influence Lower Limb Mechanical Asymmetry.

Authors:  Olivier Girard; Jean-Benoit Morin; Joong Ryu; Paul Read; Nathan Townsend
Journal:  Front Sports Act Living       Date:  2019-09-24

4.  Men's and Women's World Championship Marathon Performances and Changes With Fatigue Are Not Explained by Kinematic Differences Between Footstrike Patterns.

Authors:  Brian Hanley; Athanassios Bissas; Stéphane Merlino
Journal:  Front Sports Act Living       Date:  2020-08-06

5.  PIMP Your Stride: Preferred Running Form to Guide Individualized Injury Rehabilitation.

Authors:  Cyrille Gindre; Bastiaan Breine; Aurélien Patoz; Kim Hébert-Losier; Adrien Thouvenot; Laurent Mourot; Thibault Lussiana
Journal:  Front Rehabil Sci       Date:  2022-05-31

6.  Lower leg muscle-tendon unit characteristics are related to marathon running performance.

Authors:  Bálint Kovács; István Kóbor; Zsolt Gyimes; Örs Sebestyén; József Tihanyi
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-10-21       Impact factor: 4.379

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.