Energy cost differences between marathon runners and soccer players: Constant versus shuttle running

Johnny Padulo; Antonio Buglione; Alin Larion; Fabio Esposito; Christian Doria; Dražen Čular; Pietro Enrico di Prampero; Leonardo Alexandre Peyré-Tartaruga

doi:10.3389/fphys.2023.1159228

Energy cost differences between marathon runners and soccer players: Constant versus shuttle running

Front Physiol. 2023 May 3:14:1159228. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2023.1159228. eCollection 2023.

Authors

Johnny Padulo¹, Antonio Buglione², Alin Larion³, Fabio Esposito^{1

4}, Christian Doria¹, Dražen Čular^{5

6

7}, Pietro Enrico di Prampero⁸, Leonardo Alexandre Peyré-Tartaruga⁹

Affiliations

¹ Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
² Department of Human Sciences and Promotion of the Quality of Life, San Raffaele Roma Open University, Rome, Italy.
³ Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Ovidius University of Constanta, Constanta, Romania.
⁴ IRCSS Galeazzi Orthopaedic Institute, Milan, Italy.
⁵ Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Split, Split, Croatia.
⁶ Einsten, Startup for Research, Development, Education, Trade and Services, Split, Croatia.
⁷ European Institute for Talents, Education, Research and Development, Split, Croatia.
⁸ Professore Emerito di Fisiologia, Università di Udine, Udine, Italy.
⁹ LaBiodin Biodynamics Laboratory, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil.

Abstract

Purpose: In the last decades, the energy cost assessment provided new insight on shuttle or constant running as training modalities. No study, though, quantified the benefit of constant/shuttle running in soccer-players and runners. Therefore, the aim of this study was to clarify if marathon runners and soccer players present specific energy cost values related to their training experience performing constant and shuttle running. Methods: To this aim, eight runners (age 34 ± 7.30y; training experience 5.70 ± 0.84y) and eight soccer-players (age 18.38 ± 0.52y; training experience 5.75 ± 1.84y) were assessed randomly for 6' on shuttle-running or constant-running with 3 days of recovery in-between. For each condition, the blood lactate (BL) and the energy cost of constant (C_r) and shuttle running (C_Sh) was determined. To assess differences for metabolic demand in terms of C_r, C_Sh and BL over the two running conditions on the two groups a MANOVA was used. Results: $V^{\cdot}$ O_2max were 67.9 ± 4.5 and 56.8 ± 4.3 ml·min^-1 kg^-1 (p = 0.0002) for marathon runners and soccer players, respectively. On constant running, the runners had a lower C_r compared to soccer players (3.86 ± 0.16 J kg^-1m^-1 vs. 4.19 ± 0.26 J kg^-1 m^-1; F = 9.759, respectively; p = 0.007). On shuttle running, runners had a higher C_Sh compared to soccer players (8.66 ± 0.60 J kg^-1 m^-1 vs. 7.86 ± 0.51 J kg^-1 m^-1; F = 8.282, respectively; with p = 0.012). BL on constant running was lower in runners compared to soccer players (1.06 ± 0.07 mmol L^-1 vs. 1.56 ± 0.42 mmol L^-1, respectively; with p = 0.005). Conversely, BL on shuttle running was higher in runners compared to soccer players 7.99 ± 1.49 mmol L^-1 vs. 6.04 ± 1.69 mmol L^-1, respectively; with p = 0.028). Conclusion: The energy cost optimization on constant or shuttle running is strictly related to the sport practiced.

Keywords: endurance runners; human locomotion; metabolic cost; running ecomomy; talent detection & development; team sport.

Grants and funding

This work was supported by the Croatian Science Foundation under Project Grant No. IP-2020-02-3366 and partially financed by institutional projects of the University of Split, Faculty of Kinesiology, Split, Croatia. The sponsors did not have any role in the study design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.