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.

The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between the forces applied to the starting blocks and the start performances (SPs) of amputee sprinters (ASs) and non-amputee sprinters (NASs). SPs of 154 male and female NASs (100-m personal records [PRs], 9.58–14.00 s) and 7 male ASs (3 unilateral above knee, 3 unilateral below knee, 1 bilateral below knee; 100 m PRs, 11.70–12.70 s) with running specific prostheses (RSPs) were analysed during full-effort sprint starts using instrumented starting blocks that measured the applied forces in 3D. Using the NAS dataset and a combination of factor analysis and multiple regression techniques, we explored the relationship between force characteristics and SP (quantified by normalized average horizontal block power). Start kinetics were subsequently compared between ASs and NASs who were matched based on their absolute 100 m PR and their 100 m PR relative to the world record in their starting class. In NASs, 86% of the variance in SP was shared with five latent factors on which measured parameters related to force application to the rear and front blocks and the respective push-off directions in the sagittal plane of motion were loaded. Mediolateral force application had little influence on SP. The SP of ASs was significantly reduced compared to that of NASs matched on the basis of relative 100-m PR (−33.8%; d = 2.11, p < 0.001), while a non-significant performance reduction was observed when absolute 100-m PRs were used (−17.7%; d = 0.79, p = 0.09). These results are at least partially explained by the fact that force application to the rear block was clearly impaired in the affected legs of ASs.

The aim of this study was to explore the relationships between lower limb joint kinetics, external force production and starting block performance (normalised average horizontal power, NAHP). Seventeen male sprinters (100 m PB, 10.67 ± 0.32 s) performed maximal block starts from instrumented starting blocks (1000 Hz) whilst 3D kinematics (250 Hz) were also recorded during the block phase. Ankle, knee and hip resultant joint moment and power were calculated at the rear and front leg using inverse dynamics. Average horizontal force applied to the front (r = 0.46) and rear (r = 0.44) block explained 86% of the variance in NAHP. At the joint level, many "very likely" to "almost certain" relationships (r = 0.57 to 0.83) were found between joint kinetic data and the magnitude of horizontal force applied to each block although stepwise multiple regression revealed that 55% of the variance in NAHP was accounted for by rear ankle moment, front hip moment and front knee power. The current study provides novel insight into starting block performance and the relationships between lower limb joint kinetic and external kinetic data that can help inform physical and technical training practices for this skill.

The effect of the inclusion of a high hurdle 13.72 m after the start line on elite sprint start and initial acceleration technique has yet to be investigated or understood. This highly novel study addresses that lack of information in an exceptional manner, through detailed biomechanical analysis of the world's best sprint and hurdle athletes, with data collected in situ at the 2018 IAAF World Indoor Championships, held in Birmingham, UK. High speed videos (150 Hz) were compared for eight sprinters and seven hurdlers for the start and initial acceleration phase of the finals of the men's 60 m and 60 m hurdles. Temporal and kinematic data were supplemented by vector coding analysis to investigate mechanisms by which these world-class athletes translate their centres of mass (CM) up to the fourth touchdown post-block exit. The sprinters and hurdlers coordinated their lower limb and trunk movement in a similar manner throughout the start and initial acceleration phases, which contributes new conceptual understanding of the mechanisms that underpin start and initial acceleration performance. Differences between groups were initiated from block set-up, with the hurdlers utilising a larger block spacing, but with the front block nearer to the start line than sprinters. Even after accounting for stature, the biggest differences in the raising of the CM occurred during the block phase, with hurdlers greater than sprinters (difference in vertical CM displacement scaled to stature = −0.037, very large effect size). Subsequent flight phases showed the biggest differences in the translation of the CM, in part due to longer flight times in the hurdlers, whilst the techniques of the two groups generally converged during the ground contact phases of initial acceleration. In highlighting that similar techniques are used by world-class sprinters and hurdlers, despite differing task constraints, this study has provided invaluable insights for scientists, coaches, and athletes, that will inform further developments in understanding and practice across both sprints and hurdles.

Cerebral palsy is known to generally limit range of motion and force producing capability during movement. It also limits sprint performance, but the exact mechanisms underpinning this are not well known. One elite male T36 multiple-Paralympic sprint medallist (T36) and 16 well-trained able-bodied (AB) sprinters each performed 5-6 maximal sprints from starting blocks. Whole-body kinematics (250 Hz) in the block phase and first two steps, and synchronised external forces (1,000 Hz) in the first stance phase after block exit were combined to quantify lower limb joint kinetics. Sprint performance (normalised average horizontal external power in the first stance after block exit) was lower in T36 compared to AB. T36 had lower extensor range of motion and peak extensor angular velocity at all lower limb joints in the first stance after block exit. Positive work produced at the knee and hip joints in the first stance was lower in T36 than AB, and the ratio of positive:negative ankle work produced was lower in T36 than AB. These novel results directly demonstrate the manner in which cerebral palsy limits performance in a competition-specific sprint acceleration movement, thereby improving understanding of the factors that may limit performance in elite sprinters with cerebral palsy.