This study aimed to compare the Maximum Accumulated Oxygen Deficit determined by
the conventional method (MAODC) with that determined by the backward
extrapolation technique (MAODEXTR) in runners. Fourteen runners
underwent a maximal incremental test for determination of iVO2MAX,
ten submaximal efforts (50–95% of iVO2MAX for
7 min). During the submaximal efforts oxygen consumption
(VO2) values were obtained conventionally and through the backward
extrapolation technique (~ 3 s after the end of each effort). A
supramaximal effort (110% of iVO2MAX) (tLimC) and
five supramaximal bouts (tLimEXTR) were performed. MAODC
and MAODEXTR were determined from the difference between the
VO2 accumulated during tLimC and tLimEXTR
and the predicted values. The tLimC was lower than
tLimEXTR (164.06±36.32 s,
200.23±63.78 s, p<0.05). No significant differences were
found between absolute and relative MAODC and MAODEXTR
values, however, low intraclass correlations (0.26 and 0.24), high typical
errors (2.03 L and 24 mL∙kg−1) were
observed, and coefficients of variation (46 and 48%), respectively. The
graphical analysis of the differences showed agreement and correlation between
the methods (r=0.86 and 0.85). Thus, it can be concluded that the
MAODEXTR is not a valid method for estimating the anaerobic
capacity of runners, moreover, unreliable.