This study determined Maximal Aerobic Speed (MAS) at a speed that utilizes maximal aerobic and minimal anaerobic contributions. This method of determining MAS was compared between endurance (ET) and sprint (ST) trained athletes. Nineteen and 21 healthy participants were selected for the determination and validation of MAS respectively. All athletes completed five exercise sessions in the laboratory. Participants validating MAS also ran an all-out 5000 m at the track. Oxygen uptake at MAS was at 96.09 ± 2.51% maximal oxygen consumption ($${{\dot{\rm{V}}}}\text{O}_{\text{2max}}$$ V ˙ O 2max ). MAS had a significantly higher correlation with velocity at lactate threshold (vLT), critical speed, 5000 m, time-to-exhaustion velocity at delta 50 in addition to 5% velocity at $${{\dot{\rm{V}}}}\text{O}_{\text{2max}}$$ V ˙ O 2max (TlimυΔ50 + 5%v$${{\dot{\rm{V}}}}\text{O}_{\text{2max}}$$ V ˙ O 2max ), and Vsub%95 (υΔ50 or υΔ50 + 5%v$${{\dot{\rm{V}}}}\text{O}_{\text{2max}}$$ V ˙ O 2max ) compared with v$${{\dot{\rm{V}}}}\text{O}_{\text{2max}}$$ V ˙ O 2max , and predicted 5000 m speed (R2 = 0.90, p < 0.001) and vLT (R2 = 0.96, p < 0.001). ET athletes achieved significantly higher MAS (16.07 ± 1.58 km·h−1 vs. 12.77 ± 0.81 km·h−1, p ≤ 0.001) and maximal aerobic energy (EMAS) (52.87 ± 5.35 ml·kg−1·min−1 vs. 46.42 ± 3.38 ml·kg−1·min−1, p = 0.005) and significantly shorter duration at MAS (ET: 678.59 ± 165.44 s; ST: 840.28 ± 164.97 s, p = 0.039). ST athletes had significantly higher maximal speed (35.21 ± 1.90 km·h−1, p < 0.001) at a significantly longer distance (41.05 ± 3.14 m, p = 0.003) in the 50 m sprint run test. Significant differences were also observed in 50 m sprint performance (p < 0.001), and peak post-exercise blood lactate (p = 0.005). This study demonstrates that MAS is more accurate at a percentage of v$${{\dot{\rm{V}}}}\text{O}_{\text{2max}}$$ V ˙ O 2max than at v$${{\dot{\rm{V}}}}\text{O}_{\text{2max}}$$ V ˙ O 2max . The accurate calculation of MAS can be used to predict running performances with lower errors (Running Energy Reserve Index Paper).

No abstract

The purpose of this study was to utilize the Running Energy Reserve Index (RERI) model and two-trial procedure to predict all-out athletic performances. Twenty-nine trained athletes tested for differences between RERIE and RERIspd (hypothesis 1). Six sprint trained (ST), six middle distance (MD), and six endurance trained (ET) athletes were selected to test for differences in the value of the constant. The prediction of all-out run performances using the RERI model (hypothesis 2) and two treadmill trials procedure (hypothesis 3) were tested on eighteen trained athletes. Lastly, three trained athletes were utilized to predict all-out running performances utilizing two track trials equation (hypothesis 3). RERIE and RERIspd were significantly different between ST, MD, and ET athletes. The RERIE model with a fixed cE value of 0.0185 s−1 predicted all-out running performances to within an average of 2.39 ± 2.04% (R2 = 0.99, nT = 252) for all athletes, with treadmill trials to within an average of 2.26 ± 1.89% (R2 = 0.99, nT = 203) and track trials to within an average of 2.95 ± 2.51% (R2 = 0.99, nT = 49). The two trials equations predicted all-out track performances to within errors of 2.43%. The RERI model may be accurate in determining running performances of 200 m and 5000 m, and treadmill performances ranging between 5 and 1340 s with a high level of accuracy. In addition, the two-trial procedure can be used to determine short and middle distance running performances of athletes and world-class runners.

No abstract

No abstract