Pacing profiles of senior men and women at the 2017 IAAF World Cross Country Championships

Pacing profiles and tactical behaviors of elite runners

The pacing behaviors used by elite athletes differ among individual sports, necessitating the study of sport-specific pacing profiles. Additionally, pacing behaviors adopted by elite runners differ depending on race distance. An "all-out" strategy, characterized by initial rapid acceleration and reduction in speed in the later stages, is observed during 100 m and 200 m events; 400 m runners also display positive pacing patterns, which is characterized by a reduction in speed throughout the race. Similarly, 800 m runners typically adopt a positive pacing strategy during paced "meet" races. However, during championship races, depending on the tactical approaches used by dominant athletes, pacing can be either positive or negative (characterized by an increase in speed throughout). A U-shaped pacing strategy (characterized by a faster start and end than during the middle part of the race) is evident during world record performances at meet races in 1500 m, 5000 m, and 10,000 m events. Although a parabolic J-shaped pacing profile (in which the start is faster than the middle part of the race but is slower than the endspurt) can be observed during championship 1500 m races, a negative pacing strategy with microvariations of pace is adopted by 5000 m and 10,000 m runners in championship races. Major cross country and marathon championship races are characterized by a positive pacing strategy; whereas a U-shaped pacing strategy, which is the result of a fast endspurt, is adopted by 3000 m steeplechasers and half marathoners. In contrast, recent world record marathon performances have been characterized by even pacing, which emphasizes the differences between championship and meet races at distances longer than 800 m. Studies reviewed suggest further recommendations for athletes. Throughout the whole race, 800 m runners should avoid running wide on the bends. In turn, during major championship events, 1500 m, 5000 m, and 10,000 m runners should try to run close to the inside of the track as much as possible during the decisive stages of the race when the speed is high. Staying within the leading positions during the last lap is recommended to optimize finishing position during 1500 m and 5000 m major championship races. Athletes with more modest aims than winning a medal at major championships are advised to adopt a realistic pace during the initial stages of long-distance races and stay within a pack of runners. Coaches of elite athletes should take into account the observed difference in pacing profiles adopted in meet races vs. those used in championship races: fast times achieved during races with the help of one or more pacemakers are not necessarily replicated in winner-takes-all championship races, where pace varies substantially. Although existing studies examining pacing characteristics in elite runners through an observational approach provide highly ecologically valid performance data, they provide little information regarding the underpinning mechanisms that explain the behaviors shown. Therefore, further research is needed in order to make a meaningful impact on the discipline. Researchers should design and conduct interventions that enable athletes to carefully choose strategies that are not influenced by poor decisions made by other competitors, allowing these athletes to develop more optimal and successful behaviors.

Pacing Profiles of Olympic and IAAF World Championship Long-Distance Runners

ABSTRACT

Filipas, L, La Torre, A, and Hanley, B. Pacing profiles of Olympic and International Association of Athletics Federations World Championship long-distance runners. J Strength Cond Res 35(4): 1134-1140, 2021-The aim of this study was to analyze the pacing profiles of Olympic and International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) World Championship long-distance finalists, including the relationship with their recent best times. The times for each 1,000-m split were obtained for 394 men and women in 5,000- and 10,000-m finals at 5 championships. Athletes' best times from the previous 32 months were also obtained. Similar pacing profiles were used by athletes grouped by finishing position in 5,000-m races. Women adopted a more even pacing behavior, highlighting a possible sex-based difference over this distance. Pacing behavior over 10,000 m was more similar between men and women compared with over 5,000 m. The main difference between men and women was that in the men's 10,000 m, as in the men's 5,000 m, more athletes were able to follow the leading group until the final stages. There were large or very large correlations between athletes' best times from the previous 32 months and their result; the fastest finishers also ran closer to their previous 32 months' best times. Despite differences in pacing behavior between events, long-distance runners should nonetheless stay close to the front from the beginning to win a medal.

The interaction of competition and terrain on pacing during cross-county running races in junior athletes

The aim of this study was to assess pacing during cross-country racing in relation to race length, surface-terrain and racing dynamics. Athletes (n = 148) competed for school teams (U15, U17, U20) over 2.9, 4.2, 6.3 km, respectively. The course lap (2.067 m) was timed using UHF-RFID and divided into six sections based on surface-terrain and length (549, 619, 207, 338, 150, 156m). Overall pace differed between races (4.56 ± 0.30, 4.42 ± 0.38, 4.40 ± 0.31 m∙s^-1, p=0.042) but not for the top-20 of each race (p=0.174). Moreover, within lap pacing followed a repeated reverse-"J"-parabolic strategy for all races. Race length (no. of laps) and category affected pacing with regards to finish position banding (1st-10th, 11th-20th) where effect size differences showed large to extremely large (1.21 - >4.00) difference between top-10 and other bands. Exceptions to this included the finish sprint where it was typically trivial-moderate (<0.2-1.2) and in key areas where social facilitation occurred. Athlete/coaches need to be aware of between and within lap variations in pace/effort, the effects of race dynamics, and spectator influences, while all athletes need to be educated as part of their training to run their own optimal strategy for best performance.

Deliberate practice in training differentiates the best Kenyan and Spanish long-distance runners

The aim of this novel research was to compare the amount of systematic training and the different training activities undertaken by elite-standard long-distance runners during their first seven years of systematic training. Participants were divided into three performance groups: world-class Kenyans (N = 19), European-standard Spanish athletes (N = 18), and Spanish national-standard athletes (N = 18). Performance and training data were obtained for two-year periods using retrospective recall (including training diaries) from the time the athletes began systematic training, until the seventh year after. These activities included high-intensity training sessions considered deliberate practice (DP) and easy runs. There was no evidence that starting systematic training at a younger age was advantageous, and easy runs (a non-DP activity) were the most used by participants as a proportion of overall running distance. As part of an overall higher accumulation of distance run (P < 0.001, d ≥ 1.35), the Kenyans completed more tempo runs and short-interval training than the other groups (P < 0.001, d ≥ 1.38), but did not complete more long intervals or races. There were few differences between the European- and national-standard athletes except for easy runs, which highlights the value of these easy runs but also the need for higher-intensity training to compete with world-class performers. When planning for training overload and progression, long-distance running coaches should consider increasing the volume of tempo runs and short intervals, in addition to easier runs that develop cardiovascular conditioning.

The Science Behind Competition and Winning in Athletics: Using World-Level Competition Data to Explore Pacing and Tactics

The purpose of this study was to examine whether World Championship and Olympic medallist endurance athletes pace similarly to their race opponents, where and when critical differences in intra-race pacing occur, and the tactical strategies employed to optimally manage energy resources. We analyzed pacing and tactics across the 800, 1,500, 5,000, 10,000 m, marathon and racewalk events, providing a broad overview for optimal preparation for racing and pacing. Official electronic splits from men's (n = 275 performances) and women's (n = 232 performances) distance races between 2013 and 2017 were analyzed. Athletes were grouped for the purposes of analysis and comparison. For the 800 m, these groups were the medalists and those finishing 4th to 8th ("Top 8"). For the 1,500 m, the medalists and Top 8 were joined by those finishing 9th to 12th ("Top 12"), whereas for all other races, the Top 15 were analyzed (those finishing 9th to 15th). One-way repeated measures analysis of variance was conducted on the segment speeds (p < 0.05), with effect sizes for differences calculated using Cohen's d. Positive pacing profiles were common to most 800 m athletes, whereas negative pacing was more common over longer distances. In the 1,500 m, male medalists separated from their rivals in the last 100 m, whereas for women it was after 1,200 m. Similarly, over 5,000 m, male medalists separated from the slowest pack members later (4,200 m; 84% of duration) than women (2,500 m; 50% of duration). In the 10,000 m race, the effect was very pronounced with men packing until 8,000 m, with the Top 8 athletes only dropped at 9,600 m (96% of duration). For women, the slowest pack begin to run slower at only 1,700 m, with the Top 8 finishers dropped at 5,300 m (53% of duration). Such profiles and patterns were seen across all events. It is possible the earlier separation in pacing for women between the medalists and the other runners was because of tactical racing factors such as an early realization of being unable to sustain the required speed, or perhaps because of greater variation in performance abilities.

Pacing Decision Making in Sport and the Effects of Interpersonal Competition: A Critical Review

An athlete's pacing strategy is widely recognised as an essential determinant for performance during individual events. Previous research focussed on the importance of internal bodily state feedback, revealed optimal pacing strategies in time-trial exercise, and explored concepts such as teleoanticipation and template formation. Recently, human-environment interactions have additionally been emphasized as a crucial determinant for pacing, yet how they affect pacing is not well understood. Therefore, this literature review focussed on exploring one of the most important human-environment interactions in sport competitions: the interaction among competitors. The existing literature regarding the regulation of exercise intensity and the effect of competition on pacing and performance is critically reviewed in this paper. The PubMed, CINAHL and Web of Science electronic databases were searched for studies about pacing in sports and (interpersonal) competition between January 2000 to October 2017, using the following combination of terms: (1) Sports AND (2) Pacing, resulting in 75 included papers. The behaviour of opponents was shown to be an essential determinant in the regulation of exercise intensity, based on both observational (N = 59) and experimental (N = 16) studies. However, adjustment in the pacing response related to other competitors appears to depend on the competitive situation and the current internal state of the athlete. The findings of this review emphasize the importance of what is happening around the athlete for the outcome of the decision-making process involved in pacing, and highlight the necessity to incorporate human-environment interactions into models that attempt to explain the regulation of exercise intensity in sports and exercise.