Table 1.
Physical characteristics of the subjects.
Figure 1.
Regressions of VO2 versus RESrms acceleration during walking and running in highly trained (T) and untrained (UT) runners.
Green points – UT individual values. Green line – UT regression (r = 0.92; p<.001). Blue points – T individual values. Blue line – T regression (r = 0.96; p<.001).
Table 2.
Regression parameters of VO2 vs individual axes.
Table 3.
Reliability parameters for test-retest conditions and VO2.
Table 4.
Acceleration parameters versus speed in trained (T) and untrained (UT) runners during walk stages only.
Table 5.
Metabolic parameters in trained (T) and untrained (UT) runners during walk stage only.
Figure 2.
RMS of accelerations (g) for individual axes versus speed in highly trained collegiate (Blue) and untrained (Green) runners during the run stages only.
a) VT b) ML c) AP d) RES. Significant effects for speed (p<.001), and for training present in all axes (p<.001).
Figure 3.
Economy of acceleration for individual axes versus speed in highly trained collegiate (Blue) and untrained (Green) runners during the run stages only.
a) VT b) ML c) AP d) RES. Significant effects for speed in VT and RES (p<.001) and for training present in all axes (p<.001).
Figure 4.
Ratio of acceleration for individual axes versus speed in highly trained collegiate (Blue) and untrained (Green) runners during the run stages only.
a) VT b) ML c) AP. Significant effects for speed (p<.001) and for training present in all axes (p<.001).
Figure 5.
Metabolic parameters in highly trained collegiate (Blue) and untrained (Green) runners during the run stages only.
a) VO2 b) RER c) Energy Expenditure. Significant effects for speed for all parameters (p<.001). Significant effects for training for RER (p<.001) and VO2 (p = .03). Training effect for Energy Expenditure not significant (p = .76).