In contrast to previous findings, the knee moment did not contribute substantially to power generation during the latter part of the support phase. This may be explained in part by the specific technical requirements of the maximum-velocity phase of the sprint. However, major periods of power generation of the hip extensors in early stance and of the plantar flexors in late stance were observed. The action of the knee joint during the support phase may therefore have been more of a facilitator for the radial transfer of power from the hip through the ankle on to the track.

Sprint push-off technique is fundamental to sprint performance and joint stiffness has been identified as a performance-related variable during dynamic movements. However, joint stiffness for the push-off and its relationship with performance (times and velocities) has not been reported. The aim of this study was to quantify and explain lower limb net joint moments and mechanical powers, and ankle stiffness during the first stance phase of the push-off. One elite sprinter performed 10 maximal sprint starts. An automatic motion analysis system (CODA, 200 Hz) with synchronized force plates (Kistler, 1000 Hz) collected kinematic profiles at the hip, knee, and ankle and ground reaction forces, providing input for inverse dynamics analyses. The lower-limb joints predominately extended and revealed a proximal-to-distal sequential pattern of maximal extensor angular velocity and positive power production. Pearson correlations revealed relationships (P < 0.05) between ankle stiffness (5.93 ± 0.75 N x m x deg(-1)) and selected performance variables. Relationships between negative power phase ankle stiffness and horizontal (r = -0.79) and vertical (r = 0.74) centre of mass velocities were opposite in direction to the positive power phase ankle stiffness (horizontal: r = 0.85; vertical: r = -0.54). Thus ankle stiffness may affect the goals of the sprint push-off in different ways, depending on the phase of stance considered.

This study investigated whether the “constant limb force” hypothesis can be applied to bend sprinting on an athletics track and to understand how force production influences performance on the bend compared with the straight. Force and three‐dimensional video analyses were conducted on seven competitive athletes during maximal effort sprinting on the bend (radius 37.72 m) and straight. Left step mean peak vertical and resultant force decreased significantly by 0.37 body weight (BW) and 0.21 BW, respectively, on the bend compared with the straight. Right step force production was not compromised in the same way, and some athletes demonstrated substantial increases in these variables on the bend. More inward impulse during left (39.9 ± 6.5 Ns) than right foot contact (24.7 ± 5.8 Ns) resulted in 1.6° more turning during the left step on the bend. There was a 2.3% decrease in velocity from straight to bend for both steps. The constant limb force hypothesis is not entirely valid for maximal effort sprinting on the bend. Also, the force requirements of bend sprinting are considerably different to straight‐line sprinting and are asymmetrical in nature. Overall, bend‐specific strength and technique training may improve performance during this portion of 200‐ and 400‐m races.

The aim of this study was to examine lower limb joint kinetics during the block and first stance phases in athletic sprinting. Ten male sprinters (100 m PB, 10.50 ± 0.27 s) performed maximal sprint starts from blocks. External force (1000 Hz) and three-dimensional kinematics (250 Hz) were recorded in both the block (utilising instrumented starting blocks) and subsequent first stance phases. Ankle, knee and hip resultant joint moment, power and work were calculated at the rear and front leg during the block phase and during first stance using inverse dynamics. Significantly (P < 0.05) greater peak moment, power and work were evident at the knee joint in the front block and during stance compared with the rear block. Ankle joint kinetic data significantly increased during stance compared with the front and rear block. The hip joint dominated leg extensor energy generation in the block phase (rear leg, 61 ± 10%; front leg, 64 ± 8%) but significantly reduced during stance (32 ± 9%), where the ankle contributed most (42 ± 6%). The current study provides novel insight into sprint start biomechanics and the contribution of the lower limb joints towards leg extensor energy generation.

Previous studies have generally identified only one of these variables to be the main reason for faster running velocities. However, this study showed that there is a large variation of performance patterns among the elite athletes and, overall, SF or SL reliance is a highly individual occurrence. It is proposed that athletes should take this reliance into account in their training, with SF-reliant athletes needing to keep their neural system ready for fast leg turnover and SL-reliant athletes requiring more concentration on maintaining strength levels.