Skip to content

Study note

Pacing pattern and speed skating performance in competitive long-distance events.

PMID 19924002 (2010): pacing — Time-trial performance (study note for endurance athletes).

Updated Jul 10, 2026

Read the study note

Study note • PMID 19924002

Pacing pattern and speed skating performance in competitive long-distance events.

Journal of strength and conditioning research2010 • DOI 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181c6a04a

How to use this page

This note summarizes one study record. Check the participants, methods, results, and limitations before applying it to training.

  • Design signal: controlled study.
  • Population relevance: athlete/trained context.
  • Consistency: single-study evidence.
  • Practical recommendation depends on tolerance, context, and whether it protects training consistency.

ELI5

In plain language

The present study was aimed to compare the pacing pattern adopted by women and men in races performed during a complete World Cup series. (controlled study; elite athletes).

The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Time-trial performance under the tested conditions. Treat this as a signal, not a guarantee; confirm methods and context in the full paper.

Takeaways

What the abstract suggests

  • Study question: The present study was aimed to compare the pacing pattern adopted by women and men in races performed during a complete World Cup series.
  • The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Time-trial performance under the tested conditions.
  • Population: elite athletes.
  • Protocol cues (title/abstract): 000 m.

Protocol

Protocol (as reported)

  • Intervention/exposure: pacing (vs comparison group).
  • Dose/time/duration cues in abstract/title: 000 m.
  • Outcomes: Time-trial performance.
  • Replication note: abstracts often omit adherence and timing; confirm details before changing training or supplementation.

Fit

Who it may help, and who should be cautious

Who it helps

  • Athletes similar to the study population (elite athletes) working on pacing.
  • Athletes who can measure Time-trial performance with a repeatable workout or time-trial effort.

Who should be cautious

  • If you have symptoms or conditions that make the intervention risky, get professional guidance.
  • If you’re near race day and can’t safely test, defer the experiment.

Methods

What the study actually did

  • Design: controlled study.
  • Population: elite athletes.
  • Comparator: comparison group.
  • Outcomes measured: Time-trial performance.
  • Protocol cues mentioned: 000 m.
  • Source: PubMed PMID 19924002 (2010) — Journal of strength and conditioning research.

Results excerpt

What the abstract reports

Top-ranked compared with bottom-ranked skaters (p < 0.001) and male compared with female skaters (p < 0.001) were significantly faster at each lap, suggesting that technical or physiological or both aspects need to be developed in those.

Note: excerpts are short; for full context, read the paper.

Limits

Limitations and bias

  • Abstract-only summaries can miss critical details (population, protocol, adherence, and context).
  • Single studies often don’t generalize to your event, history, and training load; treat results as a starting point.
  • If your context differs (elite vs recreational; cycling vs running), adjust expectations and be conservative.
  • This is performance information, not medical advice.

Adaptive AI coach for iPhone

Meet your adaptive AI coach.

Tell your coach what you are training for. It builds the plan, follows the work you complete, and adapts upcoming training when recovery, your schedule, or real life changes.

Keep going

Sources