Literature DB >> 25729307

Critical velocity and anaerobic paddling capacity determined by different mathematical models and number of predictive trials in canoe slalom.

Leonardo H D Messias1, Homero G Ferrari1, Ivan G M Reis1, Pedro P M Scariot1, Fúlvia B Manchado-Gobatto1.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to analyze if different combinations of trials as well as mathematical models can modify the aerobic and anaerobic estimates from critical velocity protocol applied in canoe slalom. Fourteen male elite slalom kayakers from Brazilian canoe slalom team (K1) were evaluated. Athletes were submitted to four predictive trials of 150, 300, 450 and 600 meters in a lake and the time to complete each trial was recorded. Critical velocity (CV-aerobic parameter) and anaerobic paddling capacity (APC-anaerobic parameter) were obtained by three mathematical models (Linear1=distance-time; Linear 2=velocity-1/time and Non-Linear = time-velocity). Linear 1 was chosen for comparison of predictive trials combinations. Standard combination (SC) was considered as the four trials (150, 300, 450 and 600 m). High fits of regression were obtained from all mathematical models (range - R² = 0.96-1.00). Repeated measures ANOVA pointed out differences of all mathematical models for CV (p = 0.006) and APC (p = 0.016) as well as R² (p = 0.033). Estimates obtained from the first (1) and the fourth (4) predictive trials (150 m = lowest; and 600 m = highest, respectively) were similar and highly correlated (r=0.98 for CV and r = 0.96 for APC) with the SC. In summary, methodological aspects must be considered in critical velocity application in canoe slalom, since different combinations of trials as well as mathematical models resulted in different aerobic and anaerobic estimates. Key pointsGreat attention must be given for methodological concerns regarding critical velocity protocol applied on canoe slalom, since different estimates were obtained depending on the mathematical model and the predictive trials used.Linear 1 showed the best fits of regression. Furthermore, to the best of our knowledge and considering practical applications, this model is the easiest one to calculate the estimates from critical velocity protocol. Considering this, the abyss between science and practice may be decreased. Coaches of canoe slalom may simply apply critical velocity protocol and calculate by themselves the aerobic and anaerobic estimates.Still considering practical application, the results of this study showed the possibility of calculating the critical velocity estimates by using just two trials. These results are extremely relevant regarding saving time and easy applicability of this protocol for canoe slalom.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Canoe slalom; aerobic parameter; anaerobic parameter; critical velocity; elite athletes; sports performance

Year:  2015        PMID: 25729307      PMCID: PMC4306772     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Sports Sci Med        ISSN: 1303-2968            Impact factor:   2.988


  23 in total

1.  Effect of mathematical modeling on the estimation of critical power.

Authors:  A J Bull; T J Housh; G O Johnson; S R Perry
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 5.411

2.  The effect of mathematical modeling on critical velocity.

Authors:  T J Housh; J T Cramer; A J Bull; G O Johnson; D J Housh
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 3.078

3.  Muscle metabolic responses to exercise above and below the "critical power" assessed using 31P-MRS.

Authors:  Andrew M Jones; Daryl P Wilkerson; Fred DiMenna; Jonathan Fulford; David C Poole
Journal:  Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol       Date:  2007-12-05       Impact factor: 3.619

4.  The critical velocity in swimming.

Authors:  Pietro E di Prampero; Jeanne Dekerle; Carlo Capelli; Paola Zamparo
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2007-09-28       Impact factor: 3.078

Review 5.  Critical power: implications for determination of V˙O2max and exercise tolerance.

Authors:  Andrew M Jones; Anni Vanhatalo; Mark Burnley; R Hugh Morton; David C Poole
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 5.411

6.  A methodological consideration for the determination of critical power and anaerobic work capacity.

Authors:  D J Housh; T J Housh; S M Bauge
Journal:  Res Q Exerc Sport       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 2.500

7.  Differences among estimates of critical power and anaerobic work capacity derived from five mathematical models and the three-minute all-out test.

Authors:  Haley C Bergstrom; Terry J Housh; Jorge M Zuniga; Daniel A Traylor; Robert W Lewis; Clayton L Camic; Richard J Schmidt; Glen O Johnson
Journal:  J Strength Cond Res       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 3.775

8.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 9.  The critical power concept. A review.

Authors:  D W Hill
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 11.136

10.  Estimation of critical power with nonlinear and linear models.

Authors:  G A Gaesser; T J Carnevale; A Garfinkel; D O Walter; C J Womack
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 5.411

View more
  1 in total

1.  Novel paddle stroke analysis for elite slalom kayakers: Relationship with force parameters.

Authors:  Leonardo Henrique Dalcheco Messias; Filipe Antônio de Barros Sousa; Ivan Gustavo Masseli Dos Reis; Homero Gustavo Ferrari; Claudio Alexandre Gobatto; Camila Caputo Saldanha Serra; Marcelo Papoti; Fúlvia Barros Manchado-Gobatto
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-02-28       Impact factor: 3.240

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.