The energetics of endurance running

Prampero, P. E. di; Atchou, G.; Brückner, J. C.; Moia, Christian

doi:10.1007/bf02343797

Cited by 309 publications

(247 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

225

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The energy cost of running on level and on positive gradients has been extensively investigated (1,2), and the place of Cr among ultra-endurance performance factors is still debated (3,4). According to (2) and (5) (2016) demonstrated that this statistical relationship could hide individual variations with a significant impact on the performance during mountain races (6) in a homogeneous group of high level mountain endurance runners.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Calculation of the Uphill Energy Cost of Running from the Level Energy Cost of Running in a Heterogeneous Group of Mountain Ultra Endurance Runners

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ultra-endurance mountain running has become extremely popular in recent years, and the energy cost is one of the factors that influence the final performance. The aim of this study was to determine if the energy cost of uphill running (uphill Cr) can be calculated from level Cr (Energy cost of running in mLO2.kg -1 .mn -1 ) in a heterogeneous group of mountain ultra-endurance runners using the di Prampero equation, and if fatigue could change this relationship. Twenty-four male ultra-trail runners ran on a level and uphill (10%) treadmill at 60% of velocity at V O2max (velocity at V O2 max in m.s -1 ) before and after a mountain ultra-marathon (MUM).The mean performance on the MUM was 728 ± 117 minutes. Positive and strong correlations were found between level and uphill Cr pre-MUM (r = 0.84, P < 0.001) and post-MUM (r = 0.86, P < 0.001), in mLO2.kg -1 .mn -1 . This study demonstrated that level and uphill Crs are related in a heterogeneous group of mountain runners. However, the differences observed between theoretical and real uphill Crs (7.9 and 8.5% pre and post-MUM) demonstrated that an uphill Cr measurement is necessary to predict the performance of high level runners.Keywords: Uphill Running, Energy Cost of Running, Endurance Mountain Runners BackgroundThe energy cost of running on level and on positive gradients has been extensively investigated (1, 2), and the place of Cr among ultra-endurance performance factors is still debated (3, 4). According to (2) and (5) (2016) demonstrated that this statistical relationship could hide individual variations with a significant impact on the performance during mountain races (6) in a homogeneous group of high level mountain endurance runners. Indeed, it was found that uphill Crs at 25% and 12.5% grades (respectively Cr 25% and Cr 12.5% ) were associated with each other (r = 0.78, P < 0.01) whereas level Cr was not associated with either Cr 25% or Cr 12.5% (r = 0.09 and r = 0.10). The fact that some runners have an inferior (greater) Cr in level running and a superior (lower) Cr in uphill running can be related to muscular and mechanical factors and other individual characteristics (7,8). However, this absence of relationship was observed in a smaller group of runners (n = 10).The aim of the present study was to determine if level and uphill Crs are correlated in a heterogeneous population of mountain runners, and if this relationship is strong enough to calculate uphill Cr from level Cr with di Prampero equation. We hypothesized that level and uphill Crs were correlated in this type of population and we evaluated the differences between the real and the calculated uphill Cr. Methods ParticipantsA total number of 24 healthy male and experienced mountain runners participated in this study (mean ± SD: age 41.7 ± 9.5 years, height 1.77 ± 0.04 m, mass 71.7 ± 5.5 kg, Body Mass Index 22.9 ± 1.3 kg.m -2 , V O 2 max 4.64 ± 0.36 m.s -1 ). Subjects were recruited on a voluntary basis. They had to be classified by the International Trail Running Association, with at...

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Calculation of the Uphill Energy Cost of Running from the Level Energy Cost of Running in a Heterogeneous Group of Mountain Ultra Endurance Runners

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Variability in between-subject distance running performance is explained by three aerobic capacities: maximal oxygen uptake (V ・ O2max), lactate threshold (LT) intensity and running economy (RE) 1) . In particular, distance running performance has been observed to have a strong relation with the RE in well-trained runners 2) and highly trained athletes 3) .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship between 800-m running performance and running economy during high-intensity running in well-trained middle-distance runners

Tanji

Tsuji

Shimazu

et al. 2017

JPFSM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Running economy (RE) at an intensity above the lactate threshold (LT) is reported to be the most important aerobic capacity for estimating 1,500-m running performance. The reason that the RE at intensity better reflects the energy metabolism during a 1,500-m run, is that it is performed above the LT intensity running. This study clarified the relationship between an 800-m run, which is performed above the LT intensity, and aerobic capacities, including the RE measured at intensities below and above the LT. This study included 12 well-trained male middle-distance runners (800-m velocity: 25.5 ± 0.5 km·h −1 , LT intensity: 79.7 ± 5.1% maximal oxygen uptake [V ・ O2max]). Both the RE of below and above the LT intensity were calculated at 65%V ・ O2max (RE 65 ) and 90%V ・ O2max (RE90). The 800-m velocity was not related to the V ・ O2max or the LT intensity (r = -0.16 and -0.10, respectively). This velocity correlated with both RE90 and RE65, with the correlation coefficient being higher for RE90 (r = -0.80 vs -0.75). Furthermore, the coefficient of determination for the 800-m velocity determined from V ・ O2max, LT intensity and RE90 was higher than that determined from V ・ O2max, LT intensity and RE65(R 2 = 0.522 vs 0.428, P = 0.03 vs 0.06). Based on these results, we concluded that the RE at an intensity above the LT might be better than other aerobic capacities for estimating the 800-m running performance, and more than 50% of this performance can be explained by V ・ O2max, LT intensity and RE at an intensity above the LT.

show abstract

“…several hours [22,23]) is undergoing unprecedented popularity. Additionally, the potential link with the energy cost of running [24,25] is a crucial factor of human running performance [26]; for moderate intensity Heise and Martin found an inverse relationship between aerobic demand and stiffness [25]. For severe intensity, Dalleau et al [24], Slawinski et al [20], and Rabita et al [19], confirmed that, during a constant-velocity, time-to-exhaustion run on track or treadmill, the same inverse relationship was observed.…”

mentioning

confidence: 81%

Lower Limb Mechanical Properties: Significant References Omitted

Morin¹,

Girard²,

Slawinski³

et al. 2012

Sports Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International audienceWe read with attention the recent narrative literature review by Pearson and McMahon [1]. We were very surprised and quite disappointed by the amount of relevant literature omitted by the authors on lower limb mechanical properties and, specifically, how ‘limb stiffness’ could affect performance and risk of injury. Although this review focuses on muscle-tendon unit (MTU) stiffness, the more global vertical, leg and joint stiffness (i.e. referred to as limb stiffness, collectively) are also reviewed, as the authors assume that limb stiffness is primarily controlled by MTU stiffness

show abstract

The energetics of endurance running

Cited by 309 publications

References 12 publications

The Calculation of the Uphill Energy Cost of Running from the Level Energy Cost of Running in a Heterogeneous Group of Mountain Ultra Endurance Runners

The Calculation of the Uphill Energy Cost of Running from the Level Energy Cost of Running in a Heterogeneous Group of Mountain Ultra Endurance Runners

Relationship between 800-m running performance and running economy during high-intensity running in well-trained middle-distance runners

Lower Limb Mechanical Properties: Significant References Omitted

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About