Skip to main content
2023 NSCA National Conference Main banner
Icon Legend
This session is not in your schedule.
This session is in your schedule. Click again to remove it.
Back

Endurance Training/Cardiorespiratory

(06) THE INFLUENCE OF RUNNING SHOE TYPE ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RUNNING POWER AND METABOLIC WORKLOAD

Friday, July 14, 2023
9:45 AM – 10:00 AM East Coast USA Time
Location: Milano I-II
Abstract Details: Commercial running power (RP) meters may provide endurance runners and coaches with improved precision for monitoring running intensity. Previous research has demonstrated strong validity, reliability, and repeatability for a commercial RP meter to estimate metabolic demand under controlled conditions; however, practical influences like shoe type have not yet been determined.

Purpose: To determine the influence of economy-enhancing racing shoes on the relationship between RP and metabolic workload in well-trained runners.

Methods: 14 runners (1 female) capable of running 10km in 40 minutes or less completed the study (age: 29.9±7.6 yr, body mass: 70.7±8.9 kg, height: 180.1±6.1 cm, body fat: 10.3±6.1%, V̇O2max: 59.6±4.2 ml·kg-1·min-1). On two separate days, participants completed a maximal graded running test to volitional exhaustion in either High-End Racing Shoes (HERS; Nike AlphaFly NEXT%) or Low-End Economical Shoes (LEES; Nike Revolution 5). On a third day, participants completed a submaximal treadmill running test consisting of six 5-minute stages in each shoe at 11.3, 12.9, and 14.5 km·hr-1 (7, 8, 9 mi·hr-1) at 1% grade with 5 minutes rest between stages. Shoe order was randomized at each speed for each participant. RP was recorded by a commercial running power meter (Stryd with Wind, Stryd Inc., Boulder, CO). V̇O2 (expired gas analysis), heart rate (HR), and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) were recorded throughout all tests. Linear regression analysis determined the relationship between RP (W) and V̇O2 (L·min-1) in each pair of shoes. Two-way repeated measures ANOVAs determined the effect of shoes and speed on RP, V̇O2, HR, and RPE.

Results: A significant positive relationship between RP and V̇O2 was demonstrated in each pair of shoes across the three speeds (Figure 1 - LEES: r = 0.866, p< 0.001; HERS: r = 0.838, p< 0.001). RP increased with speed (p< 0.001) but was not significantly different between shoe types (p=0.464). V̇O2 and HR were lower when wearing HERS at all speeds (all p< 0.001). RPE was lower when wearing HERS at 12.9 km·hr-1 (p=0.014) and 14.5 km·hr-1 (p< 0.001) but not at 11.3 km·hr-1 (p=0.165).

Conclusions: A linear relationship of similar strength was observed between RP and V̇O2 in LEES and HERS. However, V̇O2, but not RP, was significantly lower in the HERS across running speeds; therefore, the absolute relationship between RP and V̇O2 differed between shoes. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Physiological running intensity at a given RP may be influenced by shoe type (i.e. training vs. racing shoes). Therefore, coaches and endurance runners should consider this when using RP to monitor training or racing intensity.

Acknowledgements: None