The purpose of this study was to evaluate the standard field tests of flexibility of the lower extremity through their (a) intratrial and test-retest reliability, (b) concurrent validity with respect to a high-precision 3D system for kinematic recording, and (c) factorial validity. Physically active men (n = 84) were tested over 2 separate sessions by means of standard simple devices (kinanthropometry, ruler, and protractor) on the following flexibility tests: leg raise in a supine position, hip abduction test, single-legged knee bend (SLKB), sideward leg splits (SdLS), sit and reach (SR), sideways leg splits, and lengthwise leg splits. Additionally, 17 participants were simultaneously tested by means of a laboratory 3D kinematic analysis system. Most of the tests demonstrated high intratrial and test-retest reliability and concurrent validity. The exceptions were SLKB and SR tests that revealed not only a somewhat lower reliability but also a lower concurrent validity. For estimation of factorial validity, we applied a principal component analysis of the intercorrelations among the evaluated flexibility tests that revealed a single extracted principal component. Strong mutual relationships among them also suggest that very few of them, if not a single one, should be applied within the standard batteries of physical performance tests. We particularly recommend using SdLS over the most frequently used SR not only because of its relatively high reliability and validity but also because of its postural properties. Finally, we conclude that most of the standard field tests of flexibility of the lower extremity based on using inexpensive field equipment could be both reliable and valid and, therefore, justified for use in routine testing.

A range of force (F) and velocity (V) data obtained from functional movement tasks (e.g., running, jumping, throwing, lifting, cycling) performed under variety of external loads have typically revealed strong and approximately linear F–V relationships. The regression model parameters reveal the maximum F (F-intercept), V (V-intercept), and power (P) producing capacities of the tested muscles. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the level of agreement between the routinely used “multiple-load model” and a simple “two-load model” based on direct assessment of the F–V relationship from only 2 external loads applied. Twelve participants were tested on the maximum performance vertical jumps, cycling, bench press throws, and bench pull performed against a variety of different loads. All 4 tested tasks revealed both exceptionally strong relationships between the parameters of the 2 models (median R = 0.98) and a lack of meaningful differences between their magnitudes (fixed bias below 3.4%). Therefore, addition of another load to the standard tests of various functional tasks typically conducted under a single set of mechanical conditions could allow for the assessment of the muscle mechanical properties such as the muscle F, V, and P producing capacities.

The main aim of the present study was to examine differences in pacing between half-marathon and marathon in men and women. A total of 17,525 finishers in the marathon (n = 4807 men; n = 1278 women) and half-marathon race (n = 7624 men; n = 3816 women) in Vienna 2017 were considered. Their pacing was assessed through five race segments (0–23.7%, 23.7–47.4%, 47.4–71.1%, 71.1–94.8% and 94.8–100%) of the race. Compared to marathon (where absolute average change of speed [ACS] was 5.46% and 4.12% in men and women, respectively), a more even pacing was observed in half-marathon in both sexes (ACS = 3.60% and 3.36% in men and women, respectively). The more even pacing in women previously observed in marathon races was verified in half-marathon, too. However, the sex difference in pacing was smaller in half-marathon than in marathon. Since men and women endurance runners participate in both races, sport practitioners would have great benefit from these results since they could establish sex-based personalized race strategies and training programmes.

The aims of the present study were to investigate the shape and strength of the force-velocity relationships observed in different functional movement tests and explore the parameters depicting force, velocity and power producing capacities of the tested muscles. Twelve subjects were tested on maximum performance in vertical jumps, cycling, bench press throws, and bench pulls performed against different loads. Thereafter, both the averaged and maximum force and velocity variables recorded from individual trials were used for force–velocity relationship modeling. The observed individual force-velocity relationships were exceptionally strong (median correlation coefficients ranged from r = 0.930 to r = 0.995) and approximately linear independently of the test and variable type. Most of the relationship parameters observed from the averaged and maximum force and velocity variable types were strongly related in all tests (r = 0.789-0.991), except for those in vertical jumps (r = 0.485-0.930). However, the generalizability of the force-velocity relationship parameters depicting maximum force, velocity and power of the tested muscles across different tests was inconsistent and on average moderate. We concluded that the linear force-velocity relationship model based on either maximum or averaged force-velocity data could provide the outcomes depicting force, velocity and power generating capacity of the tested muscles, although such outcomes can only be partially generalized across different muscles.