Beat Knechtle

Background and Objectives: Pacing analyses for increasingly popular long-distance running disciplines have been in researchers’ spotlight for several years. In particular, assessing pacing variability in long-distance running was hardly achievable since runners must repeat long-running trials for several days. Potential solutions for these problems could be multi-stage long-distance running disciplines. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the long-distance running variability as well as the reliability, validity, and sensitivity of the variables often used for pacing analyses. Materials and Methods: This study collected the split times and finish times for 20 participants (17 men and three women; mean age 55.5 years ± 9.5 years) who completed the multiday marathon running race (five marathons in 5 days), held as part of the Bretzel Ultra Tri in Colmar, France, in 2021. Seven commonly used pacing variables were subsequently calculated: Coefficient of variation (CV), Change in mean speed (CS), Change in first lap speed (CSF), Absolute change in mean speed (ACS), Pace range (PR), Mid-race split (MRS), and First 32 km–10 km split (32-10). Results: Multi-stage marathon running showed low variability between days (Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) > 0.920), while only the CV, ACS, and PR variables proved to have moderate to good reliability (0.732 < ICC < 0.785). The same variables were also valid (r > 0.908), and sensitive enough to discern between runners of different performance levels (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Researchers and practitioners who aim to explore pacing in long-distance running should routinely utilize ACS, CV, and PR variables in their analyses. Other examined variables, CS, CSF, MRS, and 32-10, should be used cautiously. Future studies might try to confirm these results using different multi-stage event’s data as well as by expanding sensitivity analysis to age and gender differences.