British medical bulletin · 2026
Indirect calculation of metabolic power in soccer: a critical analysis of a popular model.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Barba Furio, Padulo Johnny, Maffulli Nicola
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The Global Positioning System (GPS)-based metabolic power model for soccer, proposed by di Prampero and applied by Osgnach, rests on a fixed energy cost (EC) of running of 4.6 J·kg-1·m-1 and a biomechanical equivalence between accelerated level and constant-speed uphill running.
SOURCES OF DATA: A narrative review was conducted via PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science using terms like metabolic power, EC of running, GPS soccer, sprint biomechanics, equivalent slope, and running economy (2005-2025).
AREAS OF AGREEMENT: Running EC is relatively speed-independent across submaximal velocities typical of football (~6-18 km·h-1). The geometric principle underlying the accelerated-to-inclined running equivalence is accepted, and GPS metabolic power provides a useful metric for relative load comparisons.
AREAS OF CONTROVERSY: A universal fixed EC ignores interindividual variability (~20%), fatigue, surfaces, and drag. The equivalence model has vector orientation inconsistencies, employs the imprecise term 'equivalent mass', and derives its postural reference from sprint-start conditions unrepresentative of match-play accelerations (~2-4 m·s-2). Validation studies show systematic underestimations of 29%-85% relative to indirect calorimetry. Refinements exist but remain unimplemented in most commercial platforms.
GROWING POINTS: Individually calibrated EC values, inertial measurement unit integration, and hybrid models combining GPS kinematics with cardiorespiratory data are promising. Force-velocity profiling offers a biomechanically grounded alternative for individual sprint characterization.
AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH: Priorities include calorimetric validation under match conditions; player-specific EC models incorporating fatigue, surface, and role; implementing model updates in commercial software; and comparing alternative load metrics for injury-risk prediction.
SOURCES OF DATA: A narrative review was conducted via PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science using terms like metabolic power, EC of running, GPS soccer, sprint biomechanics, equivalent slope, and running economy (2005-2025).
AREAS OF AGREEMENT: Running EC is relatively speed-independent across submaximal velocities typical of football (~6-18 km·h-1). The geometric principle underlying the accelerated-to-inclined running equivalence is accepted, and GPS metabolic power provides a useful metric for relative load comparisons.
AREAS OF CONTROVERSY: A universal fixed EC ignores interindividual variability (~20%), fatigue, surfaces, and drag. The equivalence model has vector orientation inconsistencies, employs the imprecise term 'equivalent mass', and derives its postural reference from sprint-start conditions unrepresentative of match-play accelerations (~2-4 m·s-2). Validation studies show systematic underestimations of 29%-85% relative to indirect calorimetry. Refinements exist but remain unimplemented in most commercial platforms.
GROWING POINTS: Individually calibrated EC values, inertial measurement unit integration, and hybrid models combining GPS kinematics with cardiorespiratory data are promising. Force-velocity profiling offers a biomechanically grounded alternative for individual sprint characterization.
AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH: Priorities include calorimetric validation under match conditions; player-specific EC models incorporating fatigue, surface, and role; implementing model updates in commercial software; and comparing alternative load metrics for injury-risk prediction.