Menu

HomeHow it worksContact UsContact Us

Assessing Sprint Mechanical Outputs Derived from LPS, Radar and Laser Technologies in Basketball.

Irid Y, Fenaux É, Legoupil R, Tachdjian M, Leduc C, Toussaint JF et al. · Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026

Researchers had 22 elite youth basketball players run maximal 28 m indoor sprints while simultaneously measuring them with a Kinexon local positioning system (LPS), radar, and laser, then compared the sprint speed and acceleration values each produced. Radar and laser agreed closely on top speed, while LPS consistently read speed about 5-6% higher, and acceleration-related measures (A0 and Tau) differed most between systems; all three, however, were repeatable trial-to-trial.
Takeaway: Stick with one measurement system when tracking sprint speed and acceleration over time, since numbers from LPS, radar, and laser aren't interchangeable.
Abstract (source)

Sprint mechanical profiling is widely used in team sports, yet the agreement between field-based measurement systems in indoor environments remains unclear. This study compared sprint mechanical outputs derived from a Kinexon local positioning system (LPS), radar, and laser during maximal indoor basketball sprints and examined their inter-system agreement and inter-trial reliability. Twenty-two elite youth basketball players performed maximal 28 m linear sprints recorded simultaneously using the three technologies. Sprint kinematics were modeled using a mono-exponential approach applied to the native signals provided by each system to derive theoretical maximal velocity (S 0 ), theoretical maximal acceleration (A 0 ), and acceleration time constant (Tau). Inter-system agreement was assessed using mean bias and 95% limits of agreement, while inter-trial reliability was evaluated using coefficients of variation (CV), change in the mean, and standard error of measurement. Radar and laser showed close agreement for S 0 (bias = -0.07 ± 0.17 m·s -1 ; relative error = 0.89%), whereas LPS systematically overestimated S 0 , with relative systematic errors of 5.26-6.49%. Acceleration-related parameters exhibited larger inter-system discrepancies, with relative errors up to 3.92% for A 0 and 10.55% for Tau. Inter-trial reliability was high across all systems (CV 0 and 3.7-4.7% for A 0 and Tau). These

Findings: indicate that sprint mechanical outputs should not be used interchangeably across technologies, particularly for acceleration-related variables, although all systems remain suitable for within-system longitudinal monitoring in applied basketball settings.

Read the original