ABSTRACT

Track and field is one of the world's oldest sporting activities. We

can trace the origin of track-and-field events in ancient Egyptian art. Its
dominant presence can also be identified with frequent "races" that took
place in ancient Greece before 1000 BC. Without an iota of doubt, it is
rightly been designated as the "mother of all games".

The poor performance of Indian track-and-field athletics at the

International level has been a cause of great concern, especially to the
coaches, physical educationists and sports scientists. Efforts have been
made to improve the standard of our sportsmen for long, but little
success has been achieved, so for, in this respect.

It is important to note that in contemporary India the choice of

sports is determined by the child's interest, facilities available and
popularity of the sports in that particular society, but it is immaterial
whether, his body structure is fulfilling the mechanical requirements of
the game or not. If he chooses a wrong activity for which his body
structure is not suited a limit is set beyond which, his performance
cannot be improved, and however hard he and his coach may try.

There are numerous factors that are responsible for the

performance of Athletes. The physique and body composition including
size, shape and form of the player are known to play a significant role in
their performance. Along with these the performance of a sports man in
any game is also dependent on his suppleness, skill, training,
motivation and on various other factor of physiological and bio -
chemical nature. Age, sex and physical growth have also been noticed
to influence a person's capacity for physical activity.

This study was an attempt to highlight physical and physiological

differences among elite middle and long distance runners of our
country. The aim of this study was to compare the selected physical and
physiological parameters of elite middle and long distance runners.

For the purpose of this study 50 Indian elite male middle and long
distance runners were selected from

> India camp held at Patiala - Data of 7 athletes of 800 m runners, 9

athletes of 1500 - 5000 m runners and 10 athletes of 5000 - 10000
m runners were collected from 14"^ May to 24^*^ May 2005.
> All India Inter-varsity, held at Ranchi - Data of 3 placeholder athletes
of 800 m runners, 4 placeholder (1 athlete of previous year) athletes
of 1500 - 5000 m runners and 4 placeholder (1 athlete of previous
year) athletes of 5000 - 10000 m runners were collected from 25"^
Jan to 1"'Feb 2004.
> Lucknow and Allahabad sports hostel - Data of 4 athletes of 800 m
runners, 4 athletes of 1500 - 5000 m runners and 5 athletes of
5000 - 10000 m runners were collected from 24'^ June to 30"" June
2005.
The study was delimited to the following physical and
physiological parameters.

Physical parameters; 1) Weight, 2) Stature, 3) Sitting Height, 4)

Shoulder breadth 5) Hip breadth, 6) Upper arm length, 7) Fore arm
length, 8) Thigh length, 9) Lower leg length, 10) Biceps muscle girth,
11) Calf muscle girth, 12) Triceps skin fold, 13) Sub-scapular skin fold,
14) Suprailium skin fold, 15) Calf skin fold, 16) Thigh skin fold, 17)
Humerus biepic condyle diameter, 18) Femur biepic condyle diameter,
19) Somatotype i) Endomorphic rating, ii) Mesomorphic rating, iii)
Ectomorphic rating, 20) Body proportionality i) Sitting height - stature
index, ii) Ponderal index, iii) Thigh length - lower leg length index, iv)
Upper arm length - lower arm length index, v) Hip breadth - stature
index, vi) Shoulder breadth - stature index.

Physiological parameters: 1) Heart rate, 2) Vital capacity.

 The researcher had gone to various parts of India for gathering
the relevant data, all standards equipments and techniques were used.

F - test and scheffe's test at 0.05 level of significance were used

to find out the significant difference among 800 m, 1500 - 5000 m and
5000 - 10000 m runner groups.

Results of the statistical analysis shows significant F - value for

weight = 49.89, stature = 22.40, sitting height = 4.70, shoulder
breadth = 5.93, hip breadth = 20.63, upper arm length = 38.09, fore arm
length = 10.48, thigh length = 21.61, lower leg length = 25.69, biceps
muscles girth = 10.76, calf muscles girth = 4.96, sum of five skin
fold = 12.01, endomorphic rating = 3.71, mesomorphic rating = 10.84,
ponderal index = 14.25, thigh length - lower leg length index = 22.28,
hip breadth - stature index = 9.25, heart rate = 12.91 and vital
capacity = 3.97

However insignificant F - value were obtained for humerus biepic

condyle diameter, femur biepic condyle diameter, ectomorphic rating,
sitting height - stature index, upper arm length - lower arm length index
and shoulder breadth - stature index.

F - Value required for significance at .05 level of confidence was

3.20

Further, scheffe's test analysis indicated that the 800 m runners'

mean weight, stature, hip breadth, upper arm length, fore arm length,
thigh length, lower leg length, sum of five skin fold, thigh length - lower
leg length index, hip breadth - stature index and heart rate were
significantly greater than 1500 - 5000 m runners and 800 m runners'
mean ponderal index was lesser than 1500 - 5000 m runners.

However no differences were found between sitting height,

shoulder breadth, biceps muscles girth, calf muscles girth, humerus
biepic condyle diameter, femur biepic condyle diameter, endomorphic
rating, mesomorphic rating, ectomorphic rating, sitting height - stature
index, upper arm length - lower arm length index, shoulder breadth -
stature index and vital capacity of 800 m and 1500 - 5000 m runners.

Scheffe's test analysis indicated that the 800 m runners' mean

weight, stature, sitting height, shoulder breadth, hip breadth, upper arm
length, fore arm length, thigh length, lower leg length, biceps muscles
girth, calf muscles girth, sum of five skin fold, endomorphic rating,
mesomorphic rating, thigh length - lower leg length index, hip breadth -
stature index, heart rate and vital capacity were greater than
5000 - 10000 m and 800 m runners' mean ponderal index was lesser
than 5000 - 10000 m runners.

However no differences were found between humerus biepic

condyle diameter, femur biepic condyle diameter, ectomorphic rating,
sitting height - stature index, upper arm length - lower arm length index
and shoulder breadth - stature index of 800 m and 5000 - 10000 m
runners

Scheffe's test analysis indicated that the 1500 - 5000 m runners'

mean upper arm length, lower leg length and mesomorphic rating, were
greater than 5000 - 10000 m runners.

However no differences were found between mean weight,

stature, sitting height, shoulder breadth, hip breadth, fore arm length,
thigh length, biceps muscles girth, calf muscles girth, sum of five skin
fold, humerus biepic condyle diameter, femur biepic condyle diameter,
endomorphic rating, ectomorphic rating, sitting height - stature index,
ponderal index, thigh length - lower leg length index, upper arm
length - lower arm length index, hip breadth - stature index, shoulder
breadth - stature index, heart rate and vital capacity of 1500 - 5000 m
and 5000 - 10000 m runners

The reviews of various research studies in light of our findings is

leading us to conclude that the observed significant differences in the
various physical and physiological variables of elite middle and long
distance runners are decisive determinants of the performance limits
binding these athletes. This is conforming the fact that competitive sport
demands event specific physical structure.

Top-level performance demands a particular type of body size,

shape and proportion. Numerous researchers had observed high co-
relations between the body profile of athletes and performance in
specific tasks. Hirata had suggested that Nation with people whose
general physique is limited to the characteristics of champions in certain
events must concentrate their training programme on those events only.
Carter had also suggested that the athletes who wish to achieve
success in sports at high level must compare their physique with
Olympic athletes.
Thus the findings of this study will be useful to coaches in track
and field. As hard empirical facts obtained could from the basis of talent
selection in the very field. It is also to be noted that not much empirical
work has been done to study the physical and physiological differences
between elite middle and long distance runners of India. This research
had highlighted the physical and physiological characteristics of middle
and long distance runners. It had also shown physique in relation to the
mechanical requirement of the two categories of running events.

CONCLUSIONS:

The findings of our study had led us to draw the following

conclusions:

Physical variables:

> 800 m runners' had greater weight, stature, hip breadth, upper
arm length, fore arm length, thigh length, lower leg length, sum of
five skin fold, thigh length - lower leg length index and hip
breadth - stature index than 1500 - 5000 m runners.
> 800 m runners' had lesser ponderal index than 1500 -5000 m
runners.

> No differences were found between sitting height, shoulder

breadth, biceps muscles girth, calf muscles girth, humerus biepic
condyle diameter, femur biepic condyle diameter, endomorphic
rating, mesomorphic rating, ectomorphic rating, sitting height -
stature index, upper arm length - lower arm length index and
shoulder breadth - stature index of 800 m runners and
1500-5000 m runners.

> 800 m runners' had greater mean weight, stature, sitting height,
shoulder breadth, hip breadth, upper arm length, fore arm length,
thigh length, lower leg length, biceps muscles girth, calf muscles
girth, sum of five skin fold, endomorphic rating, mesomorphic
rating, thigh length - lower leg length index and hip breadth -
stature index than 5000 - 10000 m runners.

> 800 m runners' had lesser ponderal index than 5000 - 10000 m
runners.

> No differences were found between humerus biepic condyle

diameter, femur biepic condyle diameter, ectomorphic rating,
sitting height - stature index, upper arm length - lower arm
length index and shoulder breadth - stature index of 800 m and
5000-10000 m runners

> 1500 - 5000 m runners' had greater upper arm length, lower leg
length and mesomorphic rating than 5000 - 10000 m runners.

> No differences were found between mean weight, stature, sitting

height, shoulder breadth, hip breadth, fore arm length, thigh
length, biceps muscles girth, calf muscles girth, sum of five skin
fold, humerus biepic condyle diameter, femur biepic condyle
diameter, endomorphic rating, ectomorphic rating, sitting height-
stature index, ponderal index, thigh length - lower leg length
 index, upper arm length - lower arm length index, hip breadth -
stature index and shoulder breadth - stature index of 1500 - 5000
m and 5000 - 10000 m runners.

Physiological variables:

> 800 m runners' had greater heart rate than 1500 - 5000 m
runners.

> No differences were found in vital capacity of 800 m and 1500-

5000 m runners.

> 800 m runners' had greater heart rate and vital capacity than
5000- 10000 m runners.

> No physiological differences were found between 1500 - 5000 m

and 5000 - 10000 m runners.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1.The findings of the study should be taken in to consideration

while going for talent hunts for probable potential middle and long
distance runners. Children with the inherited physical and
physiological characteristics as observed in our study may only
be recommended for middle and long distance running.

2. Along with physical and physiological parameters, psychological

and biomechanical parameters of middle and long distance
runners should also be studied.

3. Further, a study should be conducted to compare world elite

middle and long distance runners in relation to physical,
physiological, psychological and mechanical parameters.