LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Karsten, B; Hopker, J.; Jobson, S.; Baker, J.; Petrigna, L.; Klose, A.; Beedie, C. (2016)
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: RC1200, RC1235, GV, QP
Critical Power (CP) and W' are often determined using multi-day testing protocols. To investigate this cumbersome testing method, the purpose of this study was to compare the differences between the conventional use of a 24-h inter-trial recovery time with those of 3 h and 30 min for the determination of CP and W'.\ud METHODS:\ud 9 moderately trained cyclists performed an incremental test to exhaustion to establish the power output associated with the maximum oxygen uptake (p[Formula: see text]max), and 3 protocols requiring time-to-exhaustion trials at a constant work-rate performed at 80%, 100% and 105% of p[Formula: see text]max. Design: Protocol A utilised 24-h inter-trial recovery (CP24/W'24), protocol B utilised 3-h inter-trial recovery (CP3/W'3), and protocol C used 30-min inter-trial recovery period (CP0.5/W'0.5). CP and W' were calculated using the inverse time (1/t) versus power (P) relation (P = W'(1/t) + CP).\ud RESULTS:\ud 95% Limits of Agreement between protocol A and B were -9 to 15 W; -7.4 to 7.8 kJ (CP/W') and between protocol A and protocol C they were -27 to 22 W; -7.2 to 15.1 kJ (CP/W'). Compared to criterion protocol A, the average prediction error of protocol B was 2.5% (CP) and 25.6% (W'), whilst for protocol C it was 3.7% (CP) and 32.9% (W').\ud CONCLUSION:\ud 3-h and 30-min inter-trial recovery time protocols provide valid methods of determining CP but not W' in cycling.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Page 21 of 21 Protocol A vs. B p-value 0.83 0.18 0.84 100% TTE (s) 251 ± 81 222 ± 81 210 ± 79 Protocol A vs. C p-value 0.75 0.10 0.12 Protocol B vs. C p-value 0.87 0.37 0.08
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article