English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The aim of this study was to assess the metabolic cost (Cr) with marathon shoes (Adidas Adizero 3 [AA]) vs. track spikes (Nike Zoom Matumbo 3 [NZM]) on track. For this, five experienced runners were randomly assessed (NZM/AA) on a running track at 73% and 85% of best performance speed on 1500-m race. At first, speed (4.39 ± 0.53 m·s −1 ), Crs with AA and NZM resulted 3.63 ± 0.29 and 3.64 ± 0.43 J·kg −1 ·m −1  (+0.3% with NZM, effect size [ES] small and  p  = 0.951), respectively. Besides, at second speed (5.20 ± 0.18 m·s −1 ), Crs were 4.09 ± 0.28 and 4.07 ± 0.22 J·kg −1 ·m −1  (−0.5% with NZM, ES small and  p  = 0.919) with AA and NZM, respectively. It resulted in an increased Cr (+12.2%) between s1 and s2 with both shoe conditions (ES large and  p  = 0.009 and 0.011 with AA and NZM, respectively). There is a pattern yet to be confirmed for track spikes to become more beneficial at higher speeds (when duty factor becomes lower and therefore grip on track is crucial).

Marathon shoes vs. track spikes: a crossover pilot study on metabolic demand at different speeds in experienced runners