Santiago A Ruiz-Alias, Alberto A Ñancupil-Andrade, Alejandro Pérez-Castilla, Felipe García-Pinillos
{"title":"确定运行中的临界功率和W ':使用功率度量的不同两点模型的准确性","authors":"Santiago A Ruiz-Alias, Alberto A Ñancupil-Andrade, Alejandro Pérez-Castilla, Felipe García-Pinillos","doi":"10.1177/17543371231200295","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to determine the validity of the critical power (CP) and the work capacity over CP (W′) obtained from different two-time trial combinations with respect a five-point model. In a 3-week training period, 15 athletes (age: 23 ± 5 years; height: 166 ± 6 cm; body mass: 58 ± 8 kg; 5 km season-best: 15:29 ± 00:53 mm:ss) performed five time-trials (i.e. 3, 4, 5, 10, 20 min) on a 400 m track, from which the mean power outputs were obtained through the Stryd Power Meter. An acceptable level of agreement was considered if the following criteria were met: low bias and standard error of the estimate (SEE) (<14 W [values corresponding to the ±5% of the mean CP]; W′: <2.0 kJ [values corresponding to the ±10% of the mean W′]), R 2 > 0.90, and ICC > 0.81. The CP presented an acceptable SEE for CP work (1.3 ± 0.5%) and CP 1/time (2.7 ± 1.1%) when using the five time-trials. For both CP models, the 3–10 min was the shortest valid combination, whereas the 3–20, 4–20, and 5–20 min showed the greatest level of agreement. The W′ presented a high SEE for CP work (14.1 ± 5.2%) and CP 1/time (13.8 ± 6.2%) when using the five time-trials, therefore, none of the two time-trials combinations were considered. The CP parameter can be accurately estimated from different two time-trial combinations, whereas none reached an acceptable level of accuracy for the determination of W′.","PeriodicalId":20674,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part P: Journal of Sports Engineering and Technology","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Determining critical power and <i>W′</i> in running: Accuracy of different two-point models using the power metric\",\"authors\":\"Santiago A Ruiz-Alias, Alberto A Ñancupil-Andrade, Alejandro Pérez-Castilla, Felipe García-Pinillos\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17543371231200295\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study aims to determine the validity of the critical power (CP) and the work capacity over CP (W′) obtained from different two-time trial combinations with respect a five-point model. In a 3-week training period, 15 athletes (age: 23 ± 5 years; height: 166 ± 6 cm; body mass: 58 ± 8 kg; 5 km season-best: 15:29 ± 00:53 mm:ss) performed five time-trials (i.e. 3, 4, 5, 10, 20 min) on a 400 m track, from which the mean power outputs were obtained through the Stryd Power Meter. An acceptable level of agreement was considered if the following criteria were met: low bias and standard error of the estimate (SEE) (<14 W [values corresponding to the ±5% of the mean CP]; W′: <2.0 kJ [values corresponding to the ±10% of the mean W′]), R 2 > 0.90, and ICC > 0.81. The CP presented an acceptable SEE for CP work (1.3 ± 0.5%) and CP 1/time (2.7 ± 1.1%) when using the five time-trials. For both CP models, the 3–10 min was the shortest valid combination, whereas the 3–20, 4–20, and 5–20 min showed the greatest level of agreement. The W′ presented a high SEE for CP work (14.1 ± 5.2%) and CP 1/time (13.8 ± 6.2%) when using the five time-trials, therefore, none of the two time-trials combinations were considered. The CP parameter can be accurately estimated from different two time-trial combinations, whereas none reached an acceptable level of accuracy for the determination of W′.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20674,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part P: Journal of Sports Engineering and Technology\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part P: Journal of Sports Engineering and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17543371231200295\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part P: Journal of Sports Engineering and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17543371231200295","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Determining critical power and W′ in running: Accuracy of different two-point models using the power metric
This study aims to determine the validity of the critical power (CP) and the work capacity over CP (W′) obtained from different two-time trial combinations with respect a five-point model. In a 3-week training period, 15 athletes (age: 23 ± 5 years; height: 166 ± 6 cm; body mass: 58 ± 8 kg; 5 km season-best: 15:29 ± 00:53 mm:ss) performed five time-trials (i.e. 3, 4, 5, 10, 20 min) on a 400 m track, from which the mean power outputs were obtained through the Stryd Power Meter. An acceptable level of agreement was considered if the following criteria were met: low bias and standard error of the estimate (SEE) (<14 W [values corresponding to the ±5% of the mean CP]; W′: <2.0 kJ [values corresponding to the ±10% of the mean W′]), R 2 > 0.90, and ICC > 0.81. The CP presented an acceptable SEE for CP work (1.3 ± 0.5%) and CP 1/time (2.7 ± 1.1%) when using the five time-trials. For both CP models, the 3–10 min was the shortest valid combination, whereas the 3–20, 4–20, and 5–20 min showed the greatest level of agreement. The W′ presented a high SEE for CP work (14.1 ± 5.2%) and CP 1/time (13.8 ± 6.2%) when using the five time-trials, therefore, none of the two time-trials combinations were considered. The CP parameter can be accurately estimated from different two time-trial combinations, whereas none reached an acceptable level of accuracy for the determination of W′.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Sports Engineering and Technology covers the development of novel sports apparel, footwear, and equipment; and the materials, instrumentation, and processes that make advances in sports possible.