RESUMEN

Background: The pacing strategy embodies the tactical behavior of athletes in distributing their energy across different segments of a race; therefore, a quantitative analysis of pacing strategies in marathon races could deepen the understanding of both pacing behavior and physical capacity in marathon athletics. Objective: The objective of this systematic review was to synthesize and characterize pacing strategies in marathon road races by exploring the categories of pacing strategies and the factors that influence these strategies during marathon events. Methods: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews guidelines were followed for systematic searches, appraisals, and syntheses of literature on this topic. Electronic databases such as Science Direct, SPORTDiscuss, PubMed, and Web of Science were searched up to July 2024. Records were eligible if they included pace performance measurements during competition, without experimental intervention that may influence their pace, in healthy, adult athletes at any level. Results: A total of 39 studies were included in the review. Twenty-nine were observational studies, and 10 were experimental (randomized controlled trials). The assessment of article quality revealed an overall median NOS score of 8 (range 5-9). The included studies examined the pacing profiles of master athletes and finishers in half-marathon (n = 7, plus numbers compared to full marathon), full-marathon (n = 21), and ultramarathon (n = 11) road races. Considering that some studies refer to multiple pacing strategies, in general, 5 studies (∼13 %) reported even pacing, 3 (∼8 %) reported parabolic pacing, 7 (∼18 %) reported negative pacing, and 30 (∼77 %) reported positive pacing during marathon competitions. Gender, age, performance, pack, and physiological and psychological factors influence pacing strategies. Conclusion: This study synthesized pacing performance in marathons and highlighted the significance of examining pacing strategies in these events, offering valuable insights for coaches and athletes. Several key findings were highlighted: (1) pacing profiles and pacing ranges were identified as the primary indicators of pacing strategies; (2) the pacing strategy was found to be dynamic, with the most substantial effects attributed to gender and distance; and (3) three distinct types of pacing strategies for marathons were classified: positive, negative, and even pacing. These findings advance the understanding of marathon pacing strategies by shedding light on the factors that influence athletes' pacing decisions and behaviors. Additionally, these findings offer practical benefits, aiding athletes in making well-informed tactical choices and developing effective pace plans to enhance marathon performance. However, due to the complex nature of marathon racing, further research is required to explore additional factors that might impact pacing strategies. A better grasp of optimal pacing strategies will foster progress in this area and serve as a basis for future research and advancements.