An updated methodology to estimate critical velocity in front crawl swimming: A scoping review

Petrigna, Luca; Karsten, Bettina; Delextrat, Anne; Pajaujienė, Simona; Mani, Diba; Paoli, Antonio; Palma, Antonio; Bianco, Antonino

doi:10.1016/j.scispo.2021.06.003

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…exercise classed as “severe”) “with startling precision” (Poole et al 2016 ). It is ubiquitous in cycling (Leo et al 2022a ), where it is implemented in popular online exercise analytics platforms; but it is also widely used for training prescription and performance prediction in other endurance sports, such as running (Kranenburg and Smith 1996 ; Nimmerichter et al 2017 ), rowing (Hill et al 2003 ), swimming (Wakayoshi et al 1992 ; Petrigna et al 2022 ) as well as walking and skating (Hill 1925 ). Additionally, it has been applied to intermittent sports, such as football, hockey and rugby (Okuno et al 2011 ) in order to optimise the length of recovery needed between exercise bouts (Fukuda et al 2011 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modelling human endurance: power laws vs critical power

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The power–duration relationship describes the time to exhaustion for exercise at different intensities. It is believed to be a “fundamental bioenergetic property of living systems” that this relationship is hyperbolic. Indeed, the hyperbolic (a.k.a. critical-power) model which formalises this belief is the dominant tool for describing and predicting high-intensity exercise performance, e.g. in cycling, running, rowing or swimming. However, the hyperbolic model is now the focus of a heated debate in the literature because it unrealistically represents efforts that are short (< 2 min) or long (> 15 min). We contribute to this debate by demonstrating that the power–duration relationship is more adequately represented by an alternative, power-law model. In particular, we show that the often-observed good fit of the hyperbolic model between 2 and 15 min should not be taken as proof that the power–duration relationship is hyperbolic. Rather, in this range, a hyperbolic function just happens to approximate a power law fairly well. We also prove mathematical results which suggest that the power-law model is a safer tool for pace selection than the hyperbolic model and that the former more naturally models fatigue than the latter.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modelling human endurance: power laws vs critical power

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…critical-power) model is considered to be the “gold standard” for modelling endurance when exercising in the severe-intensity domain (Jones et al, 2019). It is ubiquitous in cycling (Leo et al, 2022a), where it is implemented in popular online training analytic platforms; but it is also widely used for training prescription and performance prediction in other endurance sports such as running (Kranenburg and Smith, 1996; Nimmerichter et al, 2017), rowing (Hill et al, 2003), swimming (Wakayoshi et al, 1992; Petrigna et al, 2022) as well as walking and skating (Hill, 1925). Additionally, it has been applied to intermittent sports such as football, hockey and rugby (Okuno et al, 2011) in order to optimise the length of recovery needed between exercise bouts (Fukuda et al, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modelling human endurance: Power laws vs critical power

Drake

Finke²,

Ferguson³

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The power–duration relationship describes the time to exhaustion for exercise at different intensities. It is generally believed to be a "fundamental bioenergetic property of living systems" that this relationship is hyperbolic. Indeed, the hyperbolic (a.k.a. critical-power) model which formalises this belief is viewed as the "gold standard" for assessing exercise capacity, e.g. in cycling, running, rowing, and swimming. However, the hyperbolic model is now the focus of two heated debates in the literature because: (a) it unrealistically represents efforts that are short (< 2 minutes) or long (> 15 minutes); (b) it contradicts widely-used performance predictors such as the so-called functional threshold power (FTP) in cycling. We contribute to both debates by demonstrating that the power–duration relationship is more adequately represented by an alternative, power-law model. In particular, we show that the often observed good fit of the hyperbolic model between 2 and 15 minutes should not be taken as proof that the power–duration relationship is hyperbolic. Rather, in this range, a hyperbolic function just happens to approximate a power law fairly well. We also prove a mathematical result which suggests that the power-law model is a safer tool for pace selection than the hyperbolic model. Finally, we use the power-law model to shed light on popular performance predictors in cycling, running and rowing such as FTP and Jack Daniels' "VDOT" calculator.

show abstract

Which of the Physiological vs. Critical Speed Is a Determinant of Modern Pentathlon 200 m Front Crawl Swimming Performance: The Influence of Protocol and Ergometer vs. Swimming Pool Conditions

Demarie

Chirico

Billat

2022

Sports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Modern pentathlon includes horse riding, fencing, swimming, shooting and cross-country running. Events can last many hours during which the athletes face almost maximal energy and physiological demands, and fatigue. Early recognition and prevention of injuries and overuse syndromes can be achieved by refining the individual training loads. The purpose of the study was to determine which parameter could be the most accurate predictor of swimming working capacity determinants in pentathletes. Methods: Fourteen male pentathletes performed a continuous maximal incremental test in the swimming flume ergometer to measure peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak), and five swimming tests in a 50 m swimming pool to detect critical velocity (CV); velocity at 2 and 4 mM·L−1 of blood lactate (v2, v4) and energy cost (EC). Results: The 200 m swimming time was 2:18–2:32 m:s (340 FINA points). CV was 1.21 ± 0.04 m·s−1, v2 was 1.14 ± 0.09 and v4 1.23 ± 0.08 m·s−1. VO2peak was 3540.1 ± 306.2 mL·min−1 or 48.8 ± 4.6 mL·kg−1·min−1. EC at 1.24 m·s−1 was 45.7 ± 2.4 mL·kg−1·min−1. Our main finding was the large correlation of CV with 200 m swimming performance; Conclusions: Among all the protocols analysed, CV is the most predictive and discriminative of individual swimming performance in this group of pentathletes. It appears as the most suitable test to constantly refine their swimming training loads for both performance enhancement and health promotion.

show abstract

An updated methodology to estimate critical velocity in front crawl swimming: A scoping review

Cited by 3 publications

References 57 publications

Modelling human endurance: power laws vs critical power

Modelling human endurance: power laws vs critical power

Modelling human endurance: Power laws vs critical power

Which of the Physiological vs. Critical Speed Is a Determinant of Modern Pentathlon 200 m Front Crawl Swimming Performance: The Influence of Protocol and Ergometer vs. Swimming Pool Conditions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About