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

Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar este ítem: http://hdl.handle.net/10045/75448
Información del item - Informació de l'item - Item information
Título: Accuracy of single beam timing lights for determining velocities in a flying 20-m sprint: Does timing light height matter?
Autor/es: Altmann, Stefan | Spielmann, Max | Engel, Florian Azad | Ringhof, Steffen | Oriwol, Doris | Härtel, Sascha | Neumann, Rainer
Palabras clave: Sprint performance | Timing gates | Validity | High-speed video analysis | Photocells
Área/s de conocimiento: Educación Física y Deportiva
Fecha de publicación: 2018
Editor: Universidad de Alicante. Área de Educación Física y Deporte
Cita bibliográfica: Journal of Human Sport and Exercise. 2018, 13(3): 601-610. doi:10.14198/jhse.2018.133.10
Resumen: Background: 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.
URI: https://doi.org/10.14198/jhse.2018.133.10 | http://hdl.handle.net/10045/75448
ISSN: 1988-5202
DOI: 10.14198/jhse.2018.133.10
Idioma: eng
Tipo: info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Derechos: Licencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 4.0
Revisión científica: si
Versión del editor: http://www.jhse.ua.es/
Aparece en las colecciones:Journal of Human Sport and Exercise - 2018, Vol. 13, No. 3

Archivos en este ítem:
Archivos en este ítem:
Archivo Descripción TamañoFormato 
ThumbnailJHSE_13-3_10.pdf211,53 kBAdobe PDFAbrir Vista previa


Este ítem está licenciado bajo Licencia Creative Commons Creative Commons