No description available.

The purpose was to examine the acute effects of a HBO 2 treatment on (1) recovery following prolonged exercise and (2) aerobic performance in a trained population. Subjects were 6 male and 6 female, trained runners with mean VO2max values of 64.6 +/- 5.6 and 51.9 +/- 6.6 ml·g-1·min-1 respectively. Subjects were randomly assigned to four exercise-HBO2 conditions: (1) control, (2) exercise - no HBO2. (3) no exercise - HBO2, and (4) exercise - HBO2. Exercise was a 90-minute run at 75--80% of VO2max. HBO2 treatments consisted of breathing 95% O2 at 2.5 atm abs for 90 minutes. At the end of each condition, aerobic performance was assessed with a VO 2max test and by the oxygen cost of running on a treadmill at three submaximal velocities. Recovery was not enhanced following a single HBO 2 treatment at 2.5 atm abs for 90 minutes, nor did it alter submaximal or maximal running performance.

The purposes of this study were to determine if (1) RE is adversely affected by intense interval bouts of 10 x 400-m, and (2) if there is an interaction effect between RE and recovery duration during the workouts. Twelve highly trained male runners (VO$ rm sb{2max} = 72.5 pm 4.3 ml cdot kg sp{-1} cdot min sp{-1}$) performed 3 interval workouts of 10 x 400-m with a minimum of 4 days between runs. Recovery between repetitions was randomly assigned at 60, 120 or 180 s. The velocity for each 400-m run was determined from a treadmill VO$ rm sb{2max}$ test. The average running velocity was 357.9 $ pm$ 9.0 $ rm m cdot min sp{-1}$. Following the workout, rating of perceived exertion (RPE) increased significantly (p $<$ 0.01) as recovery duration decreased (14.4 at 180 s; 16.1 at 120 s; 17.7 at 60 s recovery). Prior to and following each workout, RE was measured at speeds of 200 and 268 $ rm m cdot min sp{-1}$. Changes from pre to post RE tests in VO$ sb2$, HR, and RER were similar for the three recovery conditions. Averaged across conditions, VO$ sb2$ increased significantiy (p $<$ 0.01) pre to post tests (38.5 to 40.5 $ rm ml cdot kg sp{-1}min sp{-1}$ at 200 $ rm m cdot min sp{-1}$ and from 53.1 to 54.5 $ rm ml cdot kg sp{-1}min sp{-1}$ at 268 $ rm m cdot min sp{-1}$) HR increased (124 to 138; and 151 to 157 bpm) and RER decreased (0.90 to 0.78; and 0.93 to 0.89) at 200 and 268 $ rm m cdot min sp{-1}$, respectively (p $<$ 0.01). This study showed that RE can be perturbed after a high-intensity interval workout and that changes in VO$ sb2$, HR and RER were independent of the recovery duration between repetitions.

The purposes of this study were to determine (1) how running kinematics varied across two different speeds (200 and 268m/min), (2) to what degree intense interval training sessions affected running mechanics and (3) whether these changes correlated to changes in running economy (RE). Eleven highly trained male endurance athletes (average VO2max = 72.5 +/- 4.3 ml/kg/min) performed three intense interval running workouts of 10 x 400m at an average running velocity of 357.9 +/- 9.0 m/min, with a minimum of 4 days between runs. Recovery duration between trials was randomly assigned at 60s, 120s, and 180s. The following biomechanical variables were used to assess running kinematics during the last 3 minutes prior to and following each workout at speeds of 200 and 268m/min: maximum knee flexion in support (KFLEX), minimum knee velocity during stance (KVEL), maximum plantar flexion angle at toe-off (PFLEX), shank angle at heel strike (SANG), mean trunk angle during stride cycle (TANG), mean vertical oscillation of center of mass (VOSC), and stride cycle length (SL). Results of this study affirmed our hypothesis that speed significantly impacts on some kinematic variables (KVEL, SANG, SL), and to a degree has shown that pre and post test and recovery conditions creating a fatigued state altered 2 of the kinematic variables (KVEL and VOSC). However, none of the other kinematic variables measured were altered by speed or fatigue in any substantial way, nor were there any clear correlations between changes in running economy and mechanics. Whether the significant kinematic changes that occurred reflect adaptations to fatigue, rather than a failure to compensate for it, is not clear. The interrelationship between metabolic and biomechanical markers of training and performance appears to be complex and somewhat individualistic.

The biomechanics of running on level surfaces has been extensively researched, but there is limited knowledge on the biomechanical adaptations of curvilinear running. The purpose of this study was to investigate the electromyographic activity (EMG) of the lower leg muscles while running at two speeds (3.8 and 7.0 m/s) under three conditions (straight-away, flat curve, and banked curve of 11 degrees). Seven male elite track runners participated. Surface electrodes were placed bilaterally on the tibialis anterior (TA), peroneus longus (PL), and gastrocnemius lateralis (GL) muscles. In general, there was greater EMG activity and body lean at the higher speeds for each muscle (p&lt; 0.05); however minimal differences in EMG between the three surface running conditions (except for the second peak of TA). No bi-lateral asymmetry in muscle activation occurred during curved running, whether flat or banked. Future study should address more proximal segment and trunk muscular adaptations.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the dynamic patterns of pressure distribution of curved running with and without banked surfaces at two speeds. Seven male elite runners ran at 3.8 m/s and 7.0 m/s in three different conditions: (1) straight, and along a curve with either (2) no side inclination or (3) an inclination of 19%. Running speed significantly affected peak pressure for plantar foot regions (p&lt;0.05); however, few significant main effects were found for surface running condition or foot side. Center of pressure displacement showed similar patterns in both the medial-lateral and heel to toe excursion regardless the running condition, speed, or foot side. Future study needs to reduce measurement variability as well as to consider other dynamic foot-to-shoe components such as shear stresses.

No description available.

The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of the McDavid Knee Brace on forward and backward running kinematics and ground reaction forces. The subjects were 10past history of knee problems or any other physical disabilities that could affect their performance. The subjects were unpaid volunteers. Stride length and stride frequency values were determined during forward and backward treadmill run under each experimental condition (with a brace and without a brace). An ANOVA indicated no significant knee brace effect for either forward or backward treadmill running stride length or stride frequency. In the second phase of this study, ground reaction forces were determined for each experimental condition. The ground reaction peak forces under each experimental condition were not significantly different during either forward or backward running. Other statistical analysis of other dependent variables of forward and backward running indicated no significant bracing effect for ankle, knee and hip angular acceleration, angular displacement and angular velocity. Within the limitation of this study it is concluded that the McDavid Knee Brace had no effect on forward or backward running kinematics or ground reaction forces. / School of Physical Education

There is no abstract available for this thesis.

This study investigated the personality differences between collegiate sprinters and long-distance runners. The top 10 sprinters and the ton 10 long-distance runners at both Ball State University and Kent State University, as nominated by their respective head coaches, comprised the sample of subjects used in this study. The instrument used to assess the personality differences between these two groups of athletes was derived from various subscales selected from the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory and the Cattell Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire. An analysis of the data showed significant differences between the two inventory, the following significant differences were revealed: sprinters are outgoing, happy-go-lucky, venturesome, tough-minded, and less-intelligent, while long-distance runners are reserved, sober, shy, tender-minded, and more-intelligent.The results of this study ray be of future value for track and cross country coaches in the selection and recruiting of athletes in these two specialty fields.