Hp Touchpad Webos Doctor 3.0.5 Download Extra Quality

The aim of the present study was threefold. First, the study aimed to assess the reproducibility of methods to capture and analyse static and dynamic match-play characteristics, as a basis for future studies on longitudinal and intervention effects. Secondly, the study aimed to investigate the applicability of different motion capture systems and inertial measurement units in different contexts and applied in different populations. Finally, the study aimed to identify potential speed thresholds for a successful sprint for different playing positions.

Data were collected over 13 competitive microcycles. At the beginning of each microcycle, a fixed period of 13 min was recorded for each players. In addition, each player completed a 5-min running test on a 3.5-km outdoor running track. On each measurement day, the position of each player was registered as fast as possible using a kinematic camera system and to ensure the best possible spatial and temporal alignment, each kinematic camera system was linked to the same inertial measurement unit. Acceleration and decelerations beyond a certain magnitude were annotated as true sprint actions, whereas all other movements were considered as non-sprint actions. The sprint profile was calculated for each microcycle of match-play and validated using the REFAPRO method to analyse the 10 sprints performed by each microcycle. The REFAPRO method [22] is a manual and semi-automatic method for assessing the distance, speed, start velocity, and acceleration time for each sprinting action. Thus, the aim of the method was to provide a detailed, precise, and accurate analysis of the sprinting profile, which could be applied in a future intervention study. Although the REFAPRO method has been used to analyse sprints carried out in various modern sports [23–26], it has previously not been used to analyse sprints in football.

Results show that the 3D kinematic capture system and the IMU had the best spatial and temporal alignment for the following variables: total distance covered, sprint duration, start velocity of the sprints, and acceleration time of the sprints. The kinematic camera system, when compared to the IMU, had superior reliability results (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.88 vs. 0.77; ICC: 0.98 vs. 0.89) and was the best system for analysing the acceleration time and deceleration time of the sprints. d2c66b5586