Power-Force-Velocity Profiling During Sprint Running
Methods and their applications
Key Findings (abstract)
The ability to generate maximal power is linked to many performance outcomes and sporting success; power-force-velocity relationships characterise the limits of the neuromuscular system to produce power, and their measurement has been a research topic for about a century
Methods, chronologically: stationary cycle ergometers (the most common mode to date) → specialised treadmills profiling the mechanical outputs of the limbs during sprint running → multiple in-ground force plates giving a composite profile of over-ground sprint kinetics across repeated sprints → macroscopic inverse-dynamics approaches that model mechanical variables during over-ground sprinting from simple time-distance measures of a single sprint
The review emphasises the computational theory behind each approach and how it shaped later methods
Training application: the theory underlying the assessment of optimal loading conditions for power production during resisted sprinting; future implications based on past and present methodological limitations
The force-dominant / velocity-dominant profile framework and its individualised training use (Morin & Samozino) is the applied layer built on these methods; it is described in the full text, not in this abstract (full text; not checked against the abstract)
Practical Application
Methods review (Cross, Brughelli, Samozino, Morin): sprint power-force-velocity profiles can be measured on cycle ergometers, sprint treadmills, in-ground force plates, or — the most recent approach — modelled from the simple time-distance data of a single over-ground sprint; the same theory defines the optimal load for resisted-sprint power training. For a masters athlete this means a finish-sprint profile can be built from split times, no lab needed
Force deficit → heavier resisted accelerations; velocity deficit → maximal-speed short sprints. Not from this paper; the base's own practice built on the Morin/Samozino profiling framework (see REF-515 for RFD, REF-552 for the strength base)
Field F-v estimates are sensitive to the measurement protocol (timing gates, wind, start) — the review's own caveat about methodological limitations; repeat tests under the same conditions
Sprint mechanics support finish accelerations in cycling/running races. Inference, not tested in endurance athletes
Limitations
A methods review; the abstract reports no numbers, no athlete data and no training outcomes
Sprint-specific; transfer to endurance finishes is logical, but direct data on endurance masters is scarce
How this entry was checked and changed
Why this level
regraded 2026-09-27 from A: narrative methods review (leading sprint-mechanics group)
Content correction 2026-09-27
Key findings rewritten: "force-dominant vs velocity-dominant profiles, optimal profile (Morin 2022)" -> the abstract's actual content: measurement methods (cycle ergometer, treadmill, force plates, time-distance model) and optimal resisted-sprint loading; the profile framework labelled as full text
Training prescriptions labelled as the base's own practice
Level A -> B+ (narrative methods review); Sport line "running, speed-skating, sprint" -> "running, cycling"; title suffix "mechanical determinants" -> "methods and their applications"