Pace Controlled by a Steady-State Physiological Variable Is Associated with Better Performance in a 3000 M Run

This paper aims to test the hypothesis whereby freely chosen running pace is less effective than pace controlled by a steady-state physiological variable. Methods Eight runners performed four maximum-effort 3000 m time trials on a running track. The first time trial (TT1) was freely paced. In the following 3000 m time trials, the pace was controlled so that the average speed (TT2), average [Formula: see text] O(2) (TT3) or average HR (TT4) recorded in TT1 was maintained throughout the time trial. Results: Physiologically controlled pace was associated with a faster time (mean ± standard deviation: 740 ± 34 s for TT3 and 748 ± 33 s for TT4, vs. 854 ± 53 s for TT1; p < 0.01), a lower oxygen cost of running (200 ± 5 and 220 ± 3 vs. 310 ± 5 mLO(2)·kg(−1)·km(−1), respectively; p < 0.02), a lower cardiac cost (0.69 ± 0.08 and 0.69 ± 0.04 vs. 0.86 ± 0.09 beat·m(−1), respectively; p < 0.01), and a more positively skewed speed distribution (skewness: 1.7 ± 0.9 and 1.3 ± 0.6 vs. 0.2 ± 0.4, p < 0.05). Conclusion: Physiologically controlled pace (at the average [Formula: see text] O(2) or HR recorded in a freely paced run) was associated with a faster time, a more favorable speed distribution and lower levels of physiological strain, relative to freely chosen pace. This finding suggests that non-elite runners do not spontaneously choose the best pace strategy.