Position for the Sprint: A performance analysis of intermediate sprints in the Men’s Elite Omnium Points Race

Abstract

Introduction: In the Omnium Points Race, points are awarded to the first 4 participants (sprint ranks) to cross the finish line at the end of every tenth lap (intermediate sprint), with 5 points given to first place, 3 to second, 2 to third, and 1 awarded to fourth with the winner being the participant with the most points at the end. Therefore, there is an advantage to maximising points scored however, there is no research exploring how this is achieved. This study aimed to identify determinants of performance in intermediate sprints during the Men’s Elite Omnium Points Race.

Method: Seven UCI competitions in the 2019/2020 season were video recorded. After the competition, the videos were analysed to assess peak speeds, pacing and positioning of the 4 sprint ranks in each intermediate sprint. Time stamps recorded each time a points scoring sprint rank completed a half lap by crossing the Pursuit Line. The time stamped data was used to calculate average speed for each half lap, the time taken to complete each half lap and the position of sprint ranks within the bunch at the end of each half lap during the 10 laps in the lead up to each sprint (subsection_tenlap).

Results: A one-way ANOVA demonstrated no significant differences (P>.05) in the peak half lap, 1 lap, 2 lap or 5 lap average speeds between 1^st to 4^th place sprint ranks. The Smallest Worthwhile Change (SWC) in difference of time taken to complete each half lap between points scoring sprint ranks was calculated as -0.15s. The median difference between 1^st sprint rank and the other points scoring sprint ranks was greater (faster) than the SWC for half laps: 4 and 6 from 2^nd sprint rank, 2, 5.5 and 6 from 3^rd sprint rank and 4, 4.5, 5.5, 6 and 6.5 from 4^th sprint rank. Conversely, there were only 3 differences greater than SWC for the other sprint ranks: half laps 1.5 and 2 for 2^nd sprint rank from 3^rd and half lap 6 for 4^th place from 3^rd. Kruskal Wallis Tests with Dunn’s Multiple Comparisons of rank order at the end of each half lap show 1^st place sprint rank is more likely to be in a more advanced position than the 3rd place sprint rank at: lap 6 (P=.048) lap 7 (P=.016) and laps 8, to 10 (P≤.01), than the 4^th place sprint rank from laps 8 to 10 (P≤.01) and from 2^nd place sprint ranks at laps 9.5 and 10 (P=.03, <.01). 2^nd place sprint rank was likely to be in a more advanced position from 4th place sprint rank for laps 9, 9.5 and 10 (P=.04, <.01, <.01) and from 3^rd place sprint rank for laps 9.5 and 10 (P=<.01, <.01). 3^rd place sprint rank was only likely to be in a more advanced position from 4^th place sprint rank at the last half lap (P=<.01).

Conclusion: All sprint ranks achieve similar peak speeds over half lap to 5 lap durations. Therefore the difference between earning maximal points is due to the distribution of speed throughout the subsection_tenlap and the relationship between pacing and the positioning relative to opponents.  Participants finishing in 1^st place sprint rank were more likely to travel faster throughout the middle section of the subsection_tenlap which concurs with the observation of the 1^st place sprint rank being more likely to move to a more advanced position at the midway point in the subsection_tenlap.

This research has shown, there is a minimum peak speed demand that athletes must achieve to be competitive within the elite men’s omnium points race – the ticket to race – but, to win an Intermediate sprint, athletes must gain an advantage on their opponents by pacing themselves to position further forwards in the bunch and subsequently in distance during the middle section of each subsection_tenalp.