Download PDF
Int J Sports Med 2015; 36(13): 1063-1068
DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1549958
Training & Testing
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Critical Power in Laboratory and Field Conditions Using Single-visit Maximal Effort Trials

C. Triska
1   Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Applied Sciences, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
2   Center of Sport Science and University Sport, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
,
H. Tschan
2   Center of Sport Science and University Sport, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
,
G. Tazreiter
1   Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Applied Sciences, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
,
A. Nimmerichter
1   Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Applied Sciences, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History



accepted after revision 14 April 2015

Publication Date:
10 August 2015 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

To compare critical power (CP) and the maximum work performed above CP (W′) obtained from a single-visit laboratory test with a single-visit field test, 10 trained cyclists (V˙O2max 63.2±5.5 mL·min−1·kg−1) performed a laboratory and a field test. The laboratory test consisted of 3 trials to exhaustion between 2–15 min and the field test comprised 3 maximal efforts of 2, 6 and 12 min, where power output was measured using a mobile power meter. CP and W′ were estimated using 3 mathematical models (hyperbolic, linear work-time, linear power −1/time). The agreement between laboratory and field conditions was assessed with the 95% limits of agreement (LoA). CP was not significantly different between laboratory (280±33 W) and field conditions (281±28 W) (P=0.950). W′ was significantly higher in laboratory (21.6±7.1 kJ) compared to field conditions (16.3±7.4 kJ) (P=0.013). The bias was −2.8±27 W (95% LoA: −55 to 50 W) and 6.4±5.1 kJ (95% LoA: −3.5 to 16.4 kJ) for CP and W′, respectively. No differences between the mathematical models were found for CP and W′ (P=0.054–1.000). Although CP was not significantly different between conditions, a high random variation does not support its interchangeable use. The mathematical model used has no influence on estimates of CP and W′.

Key words

critical power - anaerobic work capacity - limits of agreement - field testing - laboratory testing
 

  • References

  • 1 Abbiss CR, Menaspa P, Villerius V, Martin DT. Distribution of power output when establishing a breakaway in cycling. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2013; 8: 452-455
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Amann M, Hopkins WG, Marcora SM. Similar sensitivity of time to exhaustion and time-trial time to changes in endurance. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2008; 40: 574-578
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Bailey SJ, Vanhatalo A, Wilkerson DP, Dimenna FJ, Jones AM. Optimizing the „priming“ effect: influence of prior exercise intensity and recovery duration on O2 uptake kinetics and severe-intensity exercise tolerance. J Appl Physiol 2009; 107: 1743-1756
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Beaver WL, Wasserman K, Whipp BJ. A new method for detecting anaerobic threshold by gas exchange. J Appl Physiol 1986; 60: 2020-2027
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Bergstrom HC, Housh TJ, Zuniga JM, Traylor DA, Lewis Jr. RW, Camic CL, Schmidt RJ, Johnson GO. Differences among estimates of critical power and anaerobic work capacity derived from five mathematical models and the three-minute all-out test. J Strength Cond Res 2014; 28: 592-600
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1: 307-310
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Bull AJ, Housh TJ, Johnson GO, Rana SR. Physiological responses at five estimates of critical velocity. Eur J Appl Physiol 2008; 102: 711-720
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Caputo F, Denadai BS. The highest intensity and the shortest duration permitting attainment of maximal oxygen uptake during cycling: effects of different methods and aerobic fitness level. Eur J Appl Physiol 2008; 103: 47-57
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Costa VP, Matos DG, Pertence LC, Martins JAN, Lima JRP. Reproducibility of cycling time to exhaustion at VO2max in competitive cyclists. JEPonline 2011; 14: 28-34
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 di Prampero PE. The concept of critical velocity: a brief analysis. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1999; 80: 162-164
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Foss O, Hallen J. Cadence and performance in elite cyclists. Eur J Appl Physiol 2005; 93: 453-462
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Galbraith A, Hopker J, Lelliott S, Diddams L, Passfield L. A single-visit field test of critical speed. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2014; 9: 931-935
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Galbraith A, Hopker JG, Jobson SA, Passfield L. A novel field test to determine critical speed. J Sport Medic Doping Studie 2011; 1: 1-4
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Hanley B. Pacing profiles and pack running at the IAAF World Half Marathon Championships. J Sports Sci 2014; 1-7
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Harriss DJ, Atkinson G. Ethical standards in sport and exercise science research: 2014 update. Int J Sports Med 2013; 34: 1025-1028
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Hill DW. The critical power concept. A review. Sports Med 1993; 16: 237-254
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Hopkins WG. Measures of reliability in sports medicine and science. Sports Med 2000; 30: 1-15
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Hopkins WG, Schabort EJ, Hawley JA. Reliability of power in physical performance tests. Sports Med 2001; 31: 211-234
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Housh TJ, Cramer JT, Bull AJ, Johnson GO, Housh DJ. The effect of mathematical modeling on critical velocity. Eur J Appl Physiol 2001; 84: 469-475
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Jeukendrup A, Saris WH, Brouns F, Kester AD. A new validated endurance performance test. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1996; 28: 266-270
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Jobson SA, Nevill AM, George SR, Jeukendrup AE, Passfield L. Influence of body position when considering the ecological validity of laboratory time-trial cycling performance. J Sports Sci 2008; 26: 1269-1278
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Jobson SA, Nevill AM, Palmer GS, Jeukendrup AE, Doherty M, Atkinson G. The ecological validity of laboratory cycling: Does body size explain the difference between laboratory- and field-based cycling performance?. J Sports Sci 2007; 25: 3-9
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Jones AM, Vanhatalo A, Burnley M, Morton RH, Poole DC. Critical power: implications for determination of VO2max and exercise tolerance. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2010; 42: 1876-1890
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Jones AM, Wilkerson DP, DiMenna F, Fulford J, Poole DC. Muscle metabolic responses to exercise above and below the „critical power“ assessed using 31P-MRS. Am J Physiol 2008; 294: R585-R593
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Karsten B, Jobson SA, Hopker J, Jimenez A, Beedie C. High agreement between laboratory and field estimates of critical power in cycling. Int J Sports Med 2014; 35: 298-303
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Karsten B, Jobson SA, Hopker J, Passfield L, Beedie C. The 3-min test does not provide a valid measure of critical power using the SRM isokinetic mode. Int J Sports Med 2014; 35: 304-309
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Karsten B, Jobson SA, Hopker J, Stevens L, Beedie C. Validity and reliability of critical power field testing. Eur J Appl Physiol 2015; 115: 197-204
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Kranenburg KJ, Smith DJ. Comparison of critical speed determined from track running and treadmill tests in elite runners. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1996; 28: 614-618
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Kuipers H, Verstappen FT, Keizer HA, Geurten P, van Kranenburg G. Variability of aerobic performance in the laboratory and its physiologic correlates. Int J Sports Med 1985; 6: 197-201
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Leirdal S, Ettema G. Freely chosen pedal rate during free cycling on a roller and ergometer cycling. Eur J Appl Physiol 2009; 106: 799-805
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Lucia A, Hoyos J, Chicharro JL. Preferred pedalling cadence in professional cycling. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2001; 33: 1361-1366
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 McLellan TM, Cheung SS, Jacobs I. Variability of time to exhaustion during submaximal exercise. Can J Appl Physiol 1995; 20: 39-51
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Midgley AW, Bentley DJ, Luttikholt H, McNaughton LR, Millet GP. Challenging a dogma of exercise physiology: does an incremental exercise test for valid VO 2 max determination really need to last between 8 and 12 minutes?. Sports Med 2008; 38: 441-447
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Monod H, Scherrer J. The work capacity of a synergic muscular group. Ergonomics 1965; 8: 329-338
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Moritani T, Nagata A, deVries HA, Muro M. Critical power as a measure of physical work capacity and anaerobic threshold. Ergonomics 1981; 24: 339-350
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 Nimmerichter A, Eston R, Bachl N, Williams C. Effects of low and high cadence interval training on power output in flat and uphill cycling time-trials. Eur J Appl Physiol 2012; 112: 69-78
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 Nimmerichter A, Williams C, Bachl N, Eston R. Evaluation of a field test to assess performance in elite cyclists. Int J Sports Med 2010; 31: 160-166
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 Poole DC, Ward SA, Gardner GW, Whipp BJ. Metabolic and respiratory profile of the upper limit for prolonged exercise in man. Ergonomics 1988; 31: 1265-1279
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 Quod MJ, Martin DT, Martin JC, Laursen PB. The power profile predicts road cycling MMP. Int J Sports Med 2010; 31: 397,401-397,401
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 40 Smith MF, Davison RC, Balmer J, Bird SR. Reliability of mean power recorded during indoor and outdoor self-paced 40 km cycling time-trials. Int J Sports Med 2001; 22: 270-274
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 41 Vandewalle H, Vautier JF, Kachouri M, Lechevalier JM, Monod H. Work-exhaustion time relationships and the critical power concept. A critical review. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 1997; 37: 89-102
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 42 Wooles A, Robinson A, Keen P. A static method for obtaining a calibration factor for SRM bicycle power cranks. Sports Engineering 2005; 8: 137-144
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar