Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
We compared the accuracy of 2 GPS systems with different sampling rates for the determination of distances covered at high-speed and metabolic power derived from a combination of running speed and acceleration. 8 participants performed 56 bouts of shuttle intermittent running wearing 2 portable GPS devices (SPI-Pro, GPS-5 Hz and MinimaxX, GPS-10 Hz). The GPS systems were compared with a radar system as a criterion measure. The variables investigated were: total distance (TD), high-speed distance (HSR>4.17 m·s(-1)), very high-speed distance (VHSR>5.56 m·s(-1)), mean power (Pmean), high metabolic power (HMP>20 W·kg(-1)) and very high metabolic power (VHMP>25 W·kg(-1)). GPS-5 Hz had low error for TD (2.8%) and Pmean (4.5%), while the errors for the other variables ranged from moderate to high (7.5-23.2%). GPS-10 Hz demonstrated a low error for TD (1.9%), HSR (4.7%), Pmean (2.4%) and HMP (4.5%), whereas the errors for VHSR (10.5%) and VHMP (6.2%) were moderate. In general, GPS accuracy increased with a higher sampling rate, but decreased with increasing speed of movement. Both systems could be used for calculating TD and Pmean, but they cannot be used interchangeably. Only GPS-10 Hz demonstrated a sufficient level of accuracy for quantifying distance covered at higher speeds or time spent at very high power.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rampinini et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: