Foot strike patterns of runners at the 15-km point during an elite-level half marathon
Foot strike patterns of runners at the 15-km point during an elite-level half marathon
复制标题
DOI：
10.1519/r-22096.1
复制
发表时间：
2007-08-01
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
Kraemew, William J.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hasegawa, Hiroshi;Yamauchi, Takeshi;Kraemew, William J.
在长跑中，很多教练都有关于足部着地技术的各种建议，旨在提高跑步表现和防止受伤。一些研究调查了脚着地时后脚着地（RFS）、中脚着地（MFS）和前脚着地（FFS）模式的运动学和动力学差异，以及它们对跑步机跑步效率的影响。以及地面情况。然而，在实际的公路比赛中，在精英水平的比赛中，很少有人知道脚击球模式的实际情况。本研究的目的是记录包括奥运选手在内的国际精英选手参加半程马拉松比赛时的实际脚击模式。在15.0 km处放置2台120 hz摄像机，高度为0.15，对415名跑步者进行拍摄，获得283名跑步者的矢状脚着地和起跳图像。在所有被分析的跑步者中，74.9%的人有后脚撞击，23.7%的人有后脚撞击，1.4%的人有后脚撞击。当所有跑步者在比赛的15.0公里处被排名并分成50组时，MFS的百分比在跑得快的组中更高。在前50名中，包括实际排名第69位的选手，他们以45分53秒（这一速度代表5.45毫秒（-1），即每5公里15分17秒）通过15公里点，RIPS， MFS和FFS分别为62.0,36.0%和2.0%。较慢的跑步者接触时间（CT）明显增加，或者放置顺序增加（r = 0）。7, p
There are various recommendations by many coaches regarding foot landing techniques in distance running that are meant to improve running performance and prevent injuries. Several studies have investigated the kinematic and kinetic differences between rearfoot strike (RFS), midfoot strike (MFS), and forefoot strike (FFS) patterns at foot landing and their effects on running efficiency on a treadmill. and over ground conditions. However, little is known about the actual condition of the foot strike pattern during an actual road race at the elite level of competition. The purpose of the present study was to document actual foot strike patterns during a half marathon in which elite international level runners, including Olympians, compete. Four hundred fifteen runners were filmed by 2 120-Hz video cameras in the height of 0.15 in placed at the 15.0-km point and obtained sagittal foot landing and taking off images for 283 runners. Rearfoot strike was observed in 74.9% of all analyzed runners, MFS in 23.7%, and FFS in 1.4%. The percentage of MFS was higher in the faster runners group, when all runners were ranked and divided into 50 runner groups at the 15.0-km point of the competition. In the top 50, which included up to the 69th place runner in actual order who passed the 15-km point at 45 minutes, 53 second (this speed represents 5.45 m.s(-1), or 15 minutes, 17 seconds per 5 km), RIPS, MFS, and FFS were 62.0, 36.0, and 2.0%, respectively. Contact time (CT) clearly increased for the slower runners, or the placement order increased (r = 0. 7 1, p