Accuracy of single beam timing lights for determining velocities in a flying 20-m sprint: Does timing light height matter?

Empreu sempre aquest identificador per citar o enllaçar aquest ítem http://hdl.handle.net/10045/75448
Registre complet
Registre complet
Camp Dublin Core Valor Idioma
dc.contributor.authorAltmann, Stefan-
dc.contributor.authorSpielmann, Max-
dc.contributor.authorEngel, Florian Azad-
dc.contributor.authorRinghof, Steffen-
dc.contributor.authorOriwol, Doris-
dc.contributor.authorHärtel, Sascha-
dc.contributor.authorNeumann, Rainer-
dc.date.accessioned2018-05-11T07:53:20Z-
dc.date.available2018-05-11T07:53:20Z-
dc.date.issued2018-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Human Sport and Exercise. 2018, 13(3): 601-610. doi:10.14198/jhse.2018.133.10es_ES
dc.identifier.issn1988-5202-
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.14198/jhse.2018.133.10-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10045/75448-
dc.description.abstractBackground: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of timing lights (TL) at different heights for measuring velocities during sprinting. Methods: Two sets of single beam TL were used to determine velocities reached in a flying 20-m sprint in 15 healthy and physically active male participants. In TL64, all TL were set up at a height of 64 cm, and in TL100, all TL were set up at 100 cm, respectively. Participants performed three valid trials. The recordings of high-speed video cameras were used as a reference. Results: ICC and Pearson’s r values between both timing light heights and the reference system were almost perfect (0.969–0.991). Bland & Altman’s LOA (95 %) indicated low systematic and unsystematic errors, with somewhat smaller LOA for TL100 (-0.013–0.121 m/s) than for TL64 (-0.060–0.120 m/s). Measures of between-trial reliability of running velocities showed a high relative (ICC) and absolute (RMSE) reliability, with the reference system showing slightly better values in all reliability measures (ICC=0.935; RMSE<0.001 m/s) compared to TL64 and TL100 (ICC=0.894, 0.887; RMSE=0.107 m/s, 0.124 m/s, respectively). The usefulness, determined by comparing the typical error (TE) with the smallest worthwhile change (SWC), was considered as “OK” (TE ≈ SWC) for all three systems. Conclusions: Results suggest that TL at both heights (TL64 and TL100) can be considered as accurate, reliable, and useful in computing velocities during a flying 20-m sprint, and therefore can be recommended to both coaches and researchers.es_ES
dc.languageenges_ES
dc.publisherUniversidad de Alicante. Área de Educación Física y Deportees_ES
dc.rightsLicencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 4.0es_ES
dc.subjectSprint performancees_ES
dc.subjectTiming gateses_ES
dc.subjectValidityes_ES
dc.subjectHigh-speed video analysises_ES
dc.subjectPhotocellses_ES
dc.subject.otherEducación Física y Deportivaes_ES
dc.titleAccuracy of single beam timing lights for determining velocities in a flying 20-m sprint: Does timing light height matter?es_ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees_ES
dc.peerreviewedsies_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.14198/jhse.2018.133.10-
dc.relation.publisherversionhttp://www.jhse.ua.es/es_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesses_ES
Apareix a la col·lecció: Journal of Human Sport and Exercise - 2018, Vol. 13, No. 3

Arxius per aquest ítem:
Arxius per aquest ítem:
Arxiu Descripció Tamany Format  
ThumbnailJHSE_13-3_10.pdf211,53 kBAdobe PDFObrir Vista prèvia


Aquest ítem està subjecte a una llicència de Creative Commons Llicència Creative Commons Creative Commons