H. Ribeiro, H. Corrêa, Lívia Kelly Barbosa Lima, Maria Barroso Costa Filha, S. L. A. Neto, E. Barros, A. Ferreira
{"title":"在10公里业余赛跑中赛跑速度预测的现场和实验室测试的一致性和可重复性","authors":"H. Ribeiro, H. Corrêa, Lívia Kelly Barbosa Lima, Maria Barroso Costa Filha, S. L. A. Neto, E. Barros, A. Ferreira","doi":"10.26582/K.52.2.16","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Knowing running speed, particularly by means of easy-to-apply tests and\nlow cost, is important for the definition of the race strategy and the most\nappropriate training throughout the preparation period. The aim was to compare\nthe agreement and reproducibility of critical velocity (CV), anaerobic threshold\n(AT), and the simulated time trial on the track for the determination of the\nrunning speed in a 10-km race in amateur runners. A cross-sectional study was\nconducted with 34 runners of both genders aged 42.4±11.0 years. We measured\ntheir CV, assessed their body composition and AT. Participants performed also a\nsimulated time trial on a 10-km running track and an official 10-km race. The\ndelta of the comparisons and the standard error of estimate between the running\nvelocities determined by the CV, AT, and the simulated time trial on the track\nranged from 0.55 to -0.79 km/h and 0.14 to 0.59 km/h, respectively.\nFurthermore, CV and AT were compared to the 10-km running speed. Good agreement\nand reproducibility were observed between the velocities determined by the CV,\nAT, and the simulated time trial on the track with the real-time of a 10-km\nofficial race.","PeriodicalId":49943,"journal":{"name":"Kinesiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Agreement and reproducibility of field and laboratory tests in the prediction of running speed in a 10-km race in amateur runners\",\"authors\":\"H. Ribeiro, H. Corrêa, Lívia Kelly Barbosa Lima, Maria Barroso Costa Filha, S. L. A. Neto, E. Barros, A. Ferreira\",\"doi\":\"10.26582/K.52.2.16\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Knowing running speed, particularly by means of easy-to-apply tests and\\nlow cost, is important for the definition of the race strategy and the most\\nappropriate training throughout the preparation period. The aim was to compare\\nthe agreement and reproducibility of critical velocity (CV), anaerobic threshold\\n(AT), and the simulated time trial on the track for the determination of the\\nrunning speed in a 10-km race in amateur runners. A cross-sectional study was\\nconducted with 34 runners of both genders aged 42.4±11.0 years. We measured\\ntheir CV, assessed their body composition and AT. Participants performed also a\\nsimulated time trial on a 10-km running track and an official 10-km race. The\\ndelta of the comparisons and the standard error of estimate between the running\\nvelocities determined by the CV, AT, and the simulated time trial on the track\\nranged from 0.55 to -0.79 km/h and 0.14 to 0.59 km/h, respectively.\\nFurthermore, CV and AT were compared to the 10-km running speed. Good agreement\\nand reproducibility were observed between the velocities determined by the CV,\\nAT, and the simulated time trial on the track with the real-time of a 10-km\\nofficial race.\",\"PeriodicalId\":49943,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kinesiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kinesiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26582/K.52.2.16\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kinesiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26582/K.52.2.16","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Agreement and reproducibility of field and laboratory tests in the prediction of running speed in a 10-km race in amateur runners
Knowing running speed, particularly by means of easy-to-apply tests and
low cost, is important for the definition of the race strategy and the most
appropriate training throughout the preparation period. The aim was to compare
the agreement and reproducibility of critical velocity (CV), anaerobic threshold
(AT), and the simulated time trial on the track for the determination of the
running speed in a 10-km race in amateur runners. A cross-sectional study was
conducted with 34 runners of both genders aged 42.4±11.0 years. We measured
their CV, assessed their body composition and AT. Participants performed also a
simulated time trial on a 10-km running track and an official 10-km race. The
delta of the comparisons and the standard error of estimate between the running
velocities determined by the CV, AT, and the simulated time trial on the track
ranged from 0.55 to -0.79 km/h and 0.14 to 0.59 km/h, respectively.
Furthermore, CV and AT were compared to the 10-km running speed. Good agreement
and reproducibility were observed between the velocities determined by the CV,
AT, and the simulated time trial on the track with the real-time of a 10-km
official race.
期刊介绍:
Kinesiology – International Journal of Fundamental and Applied Kinesiology (print ISSN 1331- 1441, online ISSN 1848-638X) publishes twice a year scientific papers and other written material from kinesiology (a scientific discipline which investigates art and science of human movement; in the meaning and scope close to the idiom “sport sciences”) and other adjacent human sciences focused on sport and exercise, primarily from anthropology (biological and cultural alike), medicine, sociology, psychology, natural sciences and mathematics applied to sport in its broadest sense, history, and others. Contributions of high scientific interest, including also results of theoretical analyses and their practical application in physical education, sport, physical recreation and kinesitherapy, are accepted for publication. The following sections define the scope of the journal: Sport and sports activities, Physical education, Recreation/leisure, Kinesiological anthropology, Training methods, Biology of sport and exercise, Sports medicine and physiology of sport, Biomechanics, History of sport and Book reviews with news.