You could be reading the full-text of this article now if you...

If you have access to this article through your institution,
you can view this article in

Speed, Force, and Power Values Produced From Nonmotorized Treadmill Test Are Related to Sprinting Performance

Mangine, Gerald T.; Hoffman, Jay R.; Gonzalez, Adam M.; Wells, Adam J.; Townsend, Jeremy R.; Jajtner, Adam R.; McCormack, William P.; Robinson, Edward H.; Fragala, Maren S.; Fukuda, David H.; Stout, Jeffrey R.

Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research:
doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000316
Original Research

Abstract: Mangine, GT, Hoffman, JR, Gonzalez, AM, Wells, AJ, Townsend, JR, Jajtner, AR, McCormack, WP, Robinson, EH, Fragala, MS, Fukuda, DH, and Stout, JR. Speed, force, and power values produced from nonmotorized treadmill test are related to sprinting performance. J Strength Cond Res 28(7): 1812–1819, 2014—The relationships between 30-m sprint time and performance on a nonmotorized treadmill (TM) test and a vertical jump test were determined in this investigation. Seventy-eight physically active men and women (22.9 ± 2.7 years; 73.0 ± 14.7 kg; 170.7 ± 10.4 cm) performed a 30-second maximal sprint on the curve nonmotorized TM after 1 familiarization trial. Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients produced significant (p ≤ 0.05) moderate to very strong relationships between 30-m sprint time and body mass (r = −0.37), %fat (r = 0.79), peak power (PP) (r = −0.59), relative PP (r = −0.42), time to peak velocity (r = −0.23) and TM sprint times at 10 m (r = 0.48), 20 m (r = 0.59), 30 m (r = 0.67), 40 m (r = 0.71), and 50 m (r = 0.75). Strong relationships between 30-m sprint time and peak (r = −0.479) and mean vertical jump power (r = −0.559) were also observed. Subsequently, stepwise regression was used to produce two 30-m sprint time prediction models from TM performance (TM1: body mass + TM data and TM2: body composition + TM data) in a validation group (n = 39), and then crossvalidated against another group (n = 39). As no significant differences were observed between these groups, data were combined (n = 72) and used to create the final prediction models (TM1: r2 = 0.75, standard error of the estimate (SEE) = 0.27 seconds; TM2: r2 = 0.84, SEE = 0.22 seconds). These final movement-specific models seem to be more accurate in predicting 30-m sprint time than derived peak (r2 = 0.23, SEE = 0.48 seconds) and mean vertical jump power (r2 = 0.31, SEE = 0.45 seconds) equations. Consequently, sprinting performance on the TM can significantly predict short-distance sprint time. It, therefore, may be used to obtain movement-specific measures of sprinting force, velocity, and power in a controlled environment from a single 30-second maximal sprinting test.

Author Information

Institute of Exercise Physiology and Wellness, Sport and Exercise Science, University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida

Address correspondence to Jay R. Hoffman,

Copyright © 2014 by the National Strength & Conditioning Association.