RESUMEN

Recent improvements in elite running performances across all distances have been largely attributed to the introduction of advanced footwear technology (AFT), which features a curved and stiff plate working synergistically with a new generation of midsole foams demonstrating enhanced resilience and compliance. These recent improvements appear to be considerably more pronounced in women's events, highlighted by improvements in road racing world records by an average of 3.7% (range: 2.6%-5.2%) compared to mean progressions of 1.5% (range: 1.3%-1.9%) in the same men's events. Although there is a growing body of research investigating the mechanisms underpinning running performance enhancements derived from AFT, there remains no explanation for potential sex-based differences in their benefits. We overview the currently available evidence and highlight why the recent direction of AFT research provides a barrier to progress by focusing primarily on male athletes. We subsequently provide our perspective on why women may be benefiting from the new generation of shoes more than men, suggest potential mechanisms leading to hypotheses that need to be further investigated in upcoming studies, and finally propose that factors outside of footwear innovation may have concurrently driven the recently observed performance evolutions.

RESUMEN

Human, but not canine or equine running performance, is significantly stratified by sex. The degree of stratification has obvious implications for classification and regulation in athletics. However, whether the widely cited sex difference of 10%-12% applies equally to sprint and endurance running events is unknown. Here, different determining factors for sprint (ground force/body mass) versus endurance performance (energy supply and demand) and existing trends, led us to hypothesize that sex performance differences for sprint running would increase with distance and be relatively small. We quantified sex performance differences using: 1) the race times of the world's fastest males and females (n = 40 each) over a 15-year period (2003-2018) at nine standard racing distances (60-10,000 m), and 2) the 10-m segment times of male (n = 14) and female (n = 12) athletes in World Championship 100-m finals. Between-sex performance time differences increased with sprint event distance (60 m-8.6%, 100 m-9.6%, 200 m-11.0%, 400 m-11.7%) and were smaller than the relatively constant mean (12.4 ± 0.3%) observed across the five longer events from 800 to 10,000 m. Between-sex time differences for the 10-m segments within the 100-m dash event increased throughout spanning 5.6%-14.2% from the first to last segment. We conclude that sex differences in sprint running performance increase with race and running distance.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Sex performance differences for sprint running bursts are small (<6%), but widen as the distance sprinted increases (range: 5.6%-14.2%). The distance dependency identified here for sprinting differs from the prevailing literature view of between-sex performance differences for the human running of 10%-12% regardless of distance. The variable sprint margins observed reflect the relative performance benefits shorter females have for brief, acceleration-dependent efforts versus those taller males have for longer steadier-speed sprint efforts.

Asunto(s)

Rendimiento Atlético , Carrera , Aceleración , Animales , Atletas , Rendimiento Atlético/fisiología , Perros , Femenino , Caballos , Humanos , Masculino , Carrera/fisiología , Caracteres Sexuales

RESUMEN

This comment addresses the incomplete presentation and incorrect conclusion offered in the recent manuscript of Beck et al. (R. Soc. Open Sci. 9, 211799 (doi:10.1098/rsos.211799)). The manuscript introduces biomechanical and performance data on the fastest-ever, bilateral amputee 400 m runner. Using an advantage standard of not faster than the fastest non-amputee runner ever (i.e. performance superior to that of the intact-limb world record-holder), the Beck et al. manuscript concludes that sprint running performance on bilateral, lower-limb prostheses is not unequivocally advantageous compared to the biological limb condition. The manuscript acknowledges the long-standing support of the authors for the numerous eligibility applications of the bilateral-amputee athlete. However, it does not acknowledge that the athlete's anatomically disproportionate prosthetic limb lengths (+15 cm versus the World Para Athletics maximum) are ineligible in both Olympic and Paralympic track competition due to their performance-enhancing properties. Also not acknowledged are the slower sprint performances of the bilateral-amputee athlete on limbs of shorter length that directly refute their manuscript's primary conclusion. Our contribution here provides essential background information and data not included in the Beck et al. manuscript that make the correct empirical conclusion clear: artificially long legs artificially enhance long sprint running performance.