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 language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 298-303 |
| Number of pages | 6 |
| Journal | International Journal of Sports Medicine |
| Volume | 35 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Jan 2014 |
Keywords
- critical intensity
- exercise testing
- power-duration relationship
Cite this
}
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 journal › Article › Research › peer-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 -