Aim: Important factors in the regulation of pacing are the sensation of fatigue experienced at a certain point of the race, the perceived exertion (RPE) expected at that time point integrated with the time remaining to complete the task (1). Optimal pacing strategies have been analyzed for elite athletes while less is known for master athletes that represent the majority of participants in these events. Therefore, the aim of the study was to monitor pacing adopted by master runners during a simulated and an official half marathon. Methods 26 master endurance runners signed a written informed consent, filled in a training history questionnaire and complete a profile of mood state (POMS) questionnaire before and after the race. Athletes were monitored during an official (Roma Ostia) and a simulated (R4S) half marathon and were instructed to rate their RPE every 5 or 7 km. Pacing is presented as percent difference compared to average running speed. The Hazard Score (HS) was calculated (2) as the product of the momentary RPE and the remaining fraction of the event. Differences in speed, HS or POMS between the 2 different competitions and over time was calculated by a 2 way ANOVA (p<0.05) Results Pacing adopted during an official competition was even, while during R4S athletes adopted a positive pacing, with a very fast start and a significant decrease at km 15 and end. HS was higher during the R4S at km 14 compared to km 15 of the official competition and could not predict changes in pace. POMS showed in both situations a significant increase in fatigue and a decrease in tension comparing PRE and POST. Conclusions Despite the POMS showed similar changes in both competitions, pacing strategies adopted and HS were different. The HS has been tested previously only in laboratory conditions, therefore testing fatigue and pacing strategies seem to give different results in laboratory, simulated or real competition settings, probably depending also on different motivational approaches to the event. REFERENCES 1 Roelands B, de Koning J Foster C, Hettinga, F, Meeusen R. Neurophysiological Determinants of Theoretical Concepts and Mechanisms Involved in Pacing. Sports Med 2013 43(5):301-11 2 de Koning JJ, Foster C, Bakkum A, Kloppenburg S, Thiel C, Joseph T, Cohen J. & Porcari J.P. Regulation of pacing strategy during athletic competition. PLoSONE 2011; 6(1) : e15863.
Differences in mood and pacing during an official and simulated hal marathon competition / M.F. Piacentini, L. Molinari, F. Annis, A. La Torre, L. Festa, C. Tarperi, K. Skroce, F. Schena. - In: SPORT SCIENCES FOR HEALTH. - ISSN 1824-7490. - 10:suppl. 1(2014 Sep), pp. S10-S10. (Intervento presentato al 6. convegno SISMES National Congress tenutosi a Napoli nel 2014).
Differences in mood and pacing during an official and simulated hal marathon competition
A. La Torre;
2014
Abstract
Aim: Important factors in the regulation of pacing are the sensation of fatigue experienced at a certain point of the race, the perceived exertion (RPE) expected at that time point integrated with the time remaining to complete the task (1). Optimal pacing strategies have been analyzed for elite athletes while less is known for master athletes that represent the majority of participants in these events. Therefore, the aim of the study was to monitor pacing adopted by master runners during a simulated and an official half marathon. Methods 26 master endurance runners signed a written informed consent, filled in a training history questionnaire and complete a profile of mood state (POMS) questionnaire before and after the race. Athletes were monitored during an official (Roma Ostia) and a simulated (R4S) half marathon and were instructed to rate their RPE every 5 or 7 km. Pacing is presented as percent difference compared to average running speed. The Hazard Score (HS) was calculated (2) as the product of the momentary RPE and the remaining fraction of the event. Differences in speed, HS or POMS between the 2 different competitions and over time was calculated by a 2 way ANOVA (p<0.05) Results Pacing adopted during an official competition was even, while during R4S athletes adopted a positive pacing, with a very fast start and a significant decrease at km 15 and end. HS was higher during the R4S at km 14 compared to km 15 of the official competition and could not predict changes in pace. POMS showed in both situations a significant increase in fatigue and a decrease in tension comparing PRE and POST. Conclusions Despite the POMS showed similar changes in both competitions, pacing strategies adopted and HS were different. The HS has been tested previously only in laboratory conditions, therefore testing fatigue and pacing strategies seem to give different results in laboratory, simulated or real competition settings, probably depending also on different motivational approaches to the event. REFERENCES 1 Roelands B, de Koning J Foster C, Hettinga, F, Meeusen R. Neurophysiological Determinants of Theoretical Concepts and Mechanisms Involved in Pacing. Sports Med 2013 43(5):301-11 2 de Koning JJ, Foster C, Bakkum A, Kloppenburg S, Thiel C, Joseph T, Cohen J. & Porcari J.P. Regulation of pacing strategy during athletic competition. PLoSONE 2011; 6(1) : e15863.
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
