High agreement between laboratory and field estimates of critical power in cycling

B. Karsten, S. A. Jobson, J. Hopker, A. Jimenez, C. Beedie

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the level of agreement between laboratory-based estimates of critical power (CP) and results taken from a novel field test. Subjects were fourteen trained cyclists (age 40±7 yrs; body mass 70.2±6.5kg; VO2max 3.8±0.5L·min -1). Laboratory-based CP was estimated from 3 constant work-rate tests at 80%, 100% and 105% of maximal aerobic power (MAP). Field-based CP was estimated from 3 all-out tests performed on an outdoor velodrome over fixed durations of 3, 7 and 12min. Using the linear work limit (Wlim) vs. time limit (Tlim) relation for the estimation of CP1 values and the inverse time (1/t) vs. power (P) models for the estimation of CP2 values, field-based CP1 and CP2 values did not significantly differ from laboratory-based values (234±24.4W vs. 234±25.5W (CP1); P<0.001; limits of agreement [LOA], -10.98-10.8W and 236±29.1W vs. 235±24.1W (CP2); P<0.001; [LOA], -13.88-17.3W. Mean prediction errors for laboratory and field estimates were 2.2% (CP) and 27% (W′). Data suggest that employing all-out field tests lasting 3, 7 and 12min has potential utility in the estimation of CP.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)298-303
Number of pages6
JournalInternational Journal of Sports Medicine
Volume35
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2014

Keywords

  • critical intensity
  • exercise testing
  • power-duration relationship

Cite this

Karsten, B., Jobson, S. A., Hopker, J., Jimenez, A., & Beedie, C. (2014). High agreement between laboratory and field estimates of critical power in cycling. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 35(4), 298-303. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1349844
Karsten, B. ; Jobson, S. A. ; Hopker, J. ; Jimenez, A. ; Beedie, C. / High agreement between laboratory and field estimates of critical power in cycling. In: International Journal of Sports Medicine. 2014 ; Vol. 35, No. 4. pp. 298-303.
@article{b3720a5ef8de40c7a9a59ddf85fce249,
title = "High agreement between laboratory and field estimates of critical power in cycling",
abstract = "The purpose of this study was to investigate the level of agreement between laboratory-based estimates of critical power (CP) and results taken from a novel field test. Subjects were fourteen trained cyclists (age 40±7 yrs; body mass 70.2±6.5kg; VO2max 3.8±0.5L·min -1). Laboratory-based CP was estimated from 3 constant work-rate tests at 80{\%}, 100{\%} and 105{\%} of maximal aerobic power (MAP). Field-based CP was estimated from 3 all-out tests performed on an outdoor velodrome over fixed durations of 3, 7 and 12min. Using the linear work limit (Wlim) vs. time limit (Tlim) relation for the estimation of CP1 values and the inverse time (1/t) vs. power (P) models for the estimation of CP2 values, field-based CP1 and CP2 values did not significantly differ from laboratory-based values (234±24.4W vs. 234±25.5W (CP1); P<0.001; limits of agreement [LOA], -10.98-10.8W and 236±29.1W vs. 235±24.1W (CP2); P<0.001; [LOA], -13.88-17.3W. Mean prediction errors for laboratory and field estimates were 2.2{\%} (CP) and 27{\%} (W′). Data suggest that employing all-out field tests lasting 3, 7 and 12min has potential utility in the estimation of CP.",
keywords = "critical intensity, exercise testing, power-duration relationship",
author = "B. Karsten and Jobson, {S. A.} and J. Hopker and A. Jimenez and C. Beedie",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1055/s-0033-1349844",
language = "English",
volume = "35",
pages = "298--303",
number = "4",

}

Karsten, B, Jobson, SA, Hopker, J, Jimenez, A & Beedie, C 2014, 'High agreement between laboratory and field estimates of critical power in cycling', International Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 298-303. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1349844

High agreement between laboratory and field estimates of critical power in cycling. / Karsten, B.; Jobson, S. A.; Hopker, J.; Jimenez, A.; Beedie, C.

In: International Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol. 35, No. 4, 01.01.2014, p. 298-303.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - High agreement between laboratory and field estimates of critical power in cycling

AU - Karsten, B.

AU - Jobson, S. A.

AU - Hopker, J.

AU - Jimenez, A.

AU - Beedie, C.

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - The purpose of this study was to investigate the level of agreement between laboratory-based estimates of critical power (CP) and results taken from a novel field test. Subjects were fourteen trained cyclists (age 40±7 yrs; body mass 70.2±6.5kg; VO2max 3.8±0.5L·min -1). Laboratory-based CP was estimated from 3 constant work-rate tests at 80%, 100% and 105% of maximal aerobic power (MAP). Field-based CP was estimated from 3 all-out tests performed on an outdoor velodrome over fixed durations of 3, 7 and 12min. Using the linear work limit (Wlim) vs. time limit (Tlim) relation for the estimation of CP1 values and the inverse time (1/t) vs. power (P) models for the estimation of CP2 values, field-based CP1 and CP2 values did not significantly differ from laboratory-based values (234±24.4W vs. 234±25.5W (CP1); P<0.001; limits of agreement [LOA], -10.98-10.8W and 236±29.1W vs. 235±24.1W (CP2); P<0.001; [LOA], -13.88-17.3W. Mean prediction errors for laboratory and field estimates were 2.2% (CP) and 27% (W′). Data suggest that employing all-out field tests lasting 3, 7 and 12min has potential utility in the estimation of CP.

AB - The purpose of this study was to investigate the level of agreement between laboratory-based estimates of critical power (CP) and results taken from a novel field test. Subjects were fourteen trained cyclists (age 40±7 yrs; body mass 70.2±6.5kg; VO2max 3.8±0.5L·min -1). Laboratory-based CP was estimated from 3 constant work-rate tests at 80%, 100% and 105% of maximal aerobic power (MAP). Field-based CP was estimated from 3 all-out tests performed on an outdoor velodrome over fixed durations of 3, 7 and 12min. Using the linear work limit (Wlim) vs. time limit (Tlim) relation for the estimation of CP1 values and the inverse time (1/t) vs. power (P) models for the estimation of CP2 values, field-based CP1 and CP2 values did not significantly differ from laboratory-based values (234±24.4W vs. 234±25.5W (CP1); P<0.001; limits of agreement [LOA], -10.98-10.8W and 236±29.1W vs. 235±24.1W (CP2); P<0.001; [LOA], -13.88-17.3W. Mean prediction errors for laboratory and field estimates were 2.2% (CP) and 27% (W′). Data suggest that employing all-out field tests lasting 3, 7 and 12min has potential utility in the estimation of CP.

KW - critical intensity

KW - exercise testing

KW - power-duration relationship

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84898048595&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1055/s-0033-1349844

DO - 10.1055/s-0033-1349844

M3 - Article

VL - 35

SP - 298

EP - 303

IS - 4

ER -

Karsten B, Jobson SA, Hopker J, Jimenez A, Beedie C. High agreement between laboratory and field estimates of critical power in cycling. International Journal of Sports Medicine. 2014 Jan 1;35(4):298-303. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1349844