Validity and Reliability of a Commercially Available Indoor Tracking System to Assess Distance and Time in Court-Based Sports

The aim of this study was to evaluate the validity and reliability of a commercially available local position measurement (LPM) tracking system when assessing distance and running time at different speeds. Fifteen male healthy athletes performed 15 m displacements at walking, running and sprinting speed. Data recorded by the LPM system were compared to those from the reference equipment, consisting of measuring tape and electronic timing gates placed at 0, 5, 10, and 15 m. Mean error, mean absolute error (MAE), standard deviation (SD) of the measurement error, maximum measurement error and root mean square error (RMSE) were calculated to determine the validity for distance and the running time variables. Product-moment correlation and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were also used for the running time. Finally, the reliability of the distance was carried out comparing data from the three repetitions with the standard tape measure using a linear mixed model and the typical error as mean coefficient of variation (CV) (%). MAE shows errors under 0.18 m for the distance variable at all speeds and under 0.08 s for the running time variable at all speeds, except from 15 m at walking. Product-moment correlations were high to nearly perfect for running time (range: 0.60–0.99), ICC varied between high (0.75–0.90) and extremely high (>0.99) for most measures, and coefficients of variation remained almost invariable as speed increased (walking: 2.16; running: 2.52; sprinting: 2.20). The tested LPM system represents a valid and reliable method for monitoring distance during different constant speeds over a straight line, as long as there is no signal loss. However, the running time errors could be too large for performance tests that require acute precision.

Abstract licence: CC BY

1. 26.

   Validation of electronic performance and tracking systems EPTS under field conditions · 2018

26 more references, whose wording the paper’s licence keeps private.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.