Biomechanical structure of sprint start and effect of biological feedback methods on sprint start performance

Abstract

One of the profound factors that affect sprint performance of athletes is the transfer of the possible highest propulsive force onto the starting blocks using an ideal sprint start body position. Hence, in the literature, there are a great deal of studies related to assessment and improvement of sprint start performance. In this review, evaluation of the literature based on improving the sprint start performance and sharing obtained instructions with sport scientists, trainers and athletes were aimed. According to the literature knowledge, it is stated that higher propulsive force onto the starting block and acceleration are two most important factors affecting on the results of sprint running. Also, it is rational to state that permanent kinesthetic awareness of individualized sprint start position could lead to significant improvements in sprint performances. For this reason, biofeedback trainings will be useful methods that provide a kinesthetic awareness of individualized sprint start position for athletes. Thus, athletes increase the probability of learning motor skill when they have opportunity to compare the actual motor performance output with expected ideal performance output. It is stated that motor skill acquisition level of athletes increases considerably if feedback is provided appropriately. Accordingly, the aim of this review is to present literature based knowledge about biomechanics of sprint start and effects of biological feedback methods on sprint start performance.

Kinematic analysis of the block start and 20-metre acceleration phase in two highly-trained sprinters: A case report

“…Both of the athletes had a consistent pattern regarding their position of the hip of their rear leg. Similar observations have been reported by other scientists as well, for instance Ozsu [22] and Coh [16]. It seems that there is more than one particular standard model of body setting replicated during each trial by the athletes.…”

“…Main hardware specifications included: full scale of angle ranges ±515°, full scale of accelerations ±16 g, internal sampling rate 800 Hz, and the minimal time sampling no smaller than 1 millisecond (ms). Studies using biomechanical analysis have been suggested as welcome and necessary by Graham and Harrison [21] as well as by Ozsu [22].…”

Biomechanical Differences in the Sprint Start Between Faster and Slower High-Level Sprinters

“…Several authors have reported starting block velocity to vary between 3.40 and 3.90 m•s-1 (Coh, 2008; Harisson and Comyns, 2006; Hunter et al, 2004; Ozsu, 2014). As previously mentioned, block velocity in the group of faster sprinters was 3.38 ± 0.10 m•s-1, while in the slower group block it equalled 3.16 ± 0.19 m•s-1 (p = 0.0294).…”

Acute Effects of a Speed Training Program on Sprinting Step Kinematics and Performance

“…Upon reaching the 20 m mark, the sprinter continued to sprint for exactly 20 m at their maximal velocity. This sprint modality had been previously applied in research and is considered sufficient to achieve maximal velocity [3,6,16,25,26]. Two trials were executed and separated by 2 min of rest.…”