Effects of Load on Wingate Test Performances and Reliability

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of 2 braking forces (8.7 and 11% of body mass, BM) on Wingate test performance, peak lactate ([La]pk), peak heart rate (HRpk), and rate of perceived exertion (RPE). Sixteen male physical education students (age: 22.7 ± 1.3 years, height: 1.81 ± 0.07 m, BM: 74.3 ± 9.6 kg) performed, in a randomized order, 2 Wingate tests at 8.7% BM and 2 Wingate tests at 11% BM on a Monark cycle ergometer on 4 separate sessions. The results showed that the reliability level of mechanical measures was not affected by the braking force and was relatively similar for each variable in both braking forces (0.886 < ICC < 0.985). In addition, peak power, mean power, fatigue slope, and RPE were significantly higher (8.2, 7.0, 11.9, and 4.1%, respectively, all < 0.05) using a braking force of 11% BM compared with 8.7% BM, whereas there was no significant effect of braking force on [La]pk and HRpk. In conclusion, the results of this study suggested that the reliability of the Wingate test does not depend on the used load, and a braking force of 11% BM is more optimal for power output during Wingate test in active adults.

Reliability and sensitivity of the 6 and 30 second Wingate tests in physically active males and females

“…However, Mendez-Villanueva and Bishop [19] assessed reliability of the 6 s Wingate performed in a standing position, and Secrest et al [26] recruited a small female sample (n = 5) that would have limited the veracity of the statistical analyses. Other work has reported no significant practice effects for cycle sprints lasting ∼ 5-30 s [9,13,21], indicating that familiarisation is not always required for achievement of stable performance. Performance reliability can be influenced by many factors including training status, time between trials, ergometer quality, and participantspecific characteristics [12], which may help to explain conflicting findings regarding the presence of a practice effect.…”

“…Most studies conducted two trials [4,13,19,21,23], but at least one familiarisation trial is recommended for assessment of cycle sprint performance, as there is often a larger performance change between the first two trials than subsequent pairs of trials [12]. This suggests that two trials may not be sufficient to fully evaluate performance reliability or the magnitude of a practice effect.…”

The Effect of Active versus Passive Recovery Periods during High Intensity Intermittent Exercise on Local Tissue Oxygenation in 18 – 30 Year Old Sedentary Men

“…The mean mechanical power achieved during the exercise bouts was lower than that achieved by active individuals performing repeat Wingate tests [ 64 ]. Mean mechanical power declined significantly from the first to the fourth bout in both the HIITPASS and HIITACT conditions.…”

Reliability of Force-Velocity Tests in Cycling and Cranking Exercises in Men and Women

“…Furthermore, the study of the changes in power-velocity relationship during an annual training cycle has been proposed in volleyball players [ 21 ], which assumes that the results of the force-velocity tests on cycle ergometers are reliable. The reliability of the cycling all-out tests has mainly been investigated by studying either the test-retest correlation coefficients ( r test-retest ) or the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) or the standard errors of estimations (SEE) or the coefficients of variation (CV) for the indices of maximal power (Wingate peak power or P max⁡ ) with the different protocols [ 1 – 4 , 6 , 9 , 22 – 27 ]. In contrast, the reliability of the parameters of the force-velocity relationship (slope, T 0 , F 0 , and V 0 ) has been investigated in a few studies, only [ 4 , 6 , 26 ].…”