Determination of aerobic and anaerobic performance: A methodological consideration

Abbie E. Smith, Kristina L. Kendall, David H. Fukuda, Joel T. Cramer, Jeffrey R. Stout

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Scopus citations

Abstract

This study was designed to compare critical velocity (CV) and anaerobic running capacity (ARC) estimates using the criterion method of four runs with two and three combination bouts to reduce the time and energy demands of the subjects. Twenty-eight men and women (mean ± SD; age = 21.9 ± 3.0 years; stature = 171.7 ± 9.7 cm; body mass = 69.7 ± 13.4 kg) performed an incremental test to exhaustion to determine peak velocity (PV) at maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max). Four high-speed runs to exhaustion were conducted on separate days with 110% PV, 90% PV (day 1), 100% PV and 105% PV (day 2). The distances achieved were plotted over the times to exhaustion. Linear regression was used to determine the slopes (CV) and y-intercepts (ARC) using four velocities and the other ten possible velocity combinations. Two runs to exhaustion, at 90% PV and 110% PV, produced similar CV and ARC results to the standard four bouts (ICC = 0.995, SEM = 0.298). Three velocities at 90% PV, 100% PV and 110% PV also resulted in no differences from the criterion method (ICC = 0.999, SEM = 0.075). These results suggest that CV and ARC can be estimated from two velocities, but to ensure a linear relationship, three velocities are recommended.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)423-431
Number of pages9
JournalPhysiological Measurement
Volume32
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2011

    Fingerprint

Keywords

  • anaerobic running capacity
  • critical velocity
  • field-based method
  • high-speed running

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biophysics
  • Physiology
  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Physiology (medical)

Cite this