Functional Threshold Power Estimated from a 20-minute Time-trial Test
                    is Warm-up-dependent

Tramontin, Artur Ferreira; Borszcz, Fernando Klitzke; Costa, Vitor Pereira

doi:10.1055/a-1524-2312

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 27 publications

(55 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, it must be taken into account that the design of the study performed by Borszcz et al was different: a self-selected 10-min warm up was performed before the 60-min time trial in this case, compared to the current study, in which the long warm-up proposed by Allen & Coggan was performed during both time trials. This could have influenced the results as previous research has shown that different warm-up protocols may alter the power output during a 20-min test [21][22][23]. Additionally, the "durability" of each cyclist (the time of onset and magnitude of deterioration in physiological-profiling characteristics) may determine the response to the longer warm-up and accordingly the ability to perform during the 60-min test [24].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Update Of The Allen & Coggan Equation To Predict 60-Min Power Output In Cyclists Of Different Performance Levels

Sitko,

Cirer-Sastre,

López-Laval

2023

Int J Sports Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Allen & Coggan protocol suggests that 95% of the power output during a 20-min time trial is a valid surrogate for 60-min maximal power. The validity of this concept has not been studied previously in cyclists with different performance levels. As a result, we classified 120 cyclists in our study as recreationally trained, trained, well trained or professional, based on their maximal oxygen consumption. Participants performed a functional threshold power testing protocol based on a 20-min time trial and a 60-min time trial, separated by a 72-hour rest. Sixty-minute maximal power was successfully modeled with 20-min maximal power and performance group using 2/3 of the dataset (R2=0.77, 95% CrI [0.74, 0.79]) with different coefficients for each group: Professional: PO60min=PO20min × 0.96; well trained: PO60min=PO20min × 0.95; trained: PO60min=PO20min × 0.92 and recreationally trained: PO60min=PO20min × 0.88. The predictions of the original equation and our model were assessed using the remaining third of the data. The predictive performance of the updated equation was better (original: R2=0.51, mean absolute error=27 W, mean bias=–12 W; updated: R2=0.54, mean absolute error=25 W, mean bias=–7 W).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Update Of The Allen & Coggan Equation To Predict 60-Min Power Output In Cyclists Of Different Performance Levels

Sitko,

Cirer-Sastre,

López-Laval

2023

Int J Sports Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since most athletes spend time with the warm-up, the activities performed within it should be well thought out and meaningful. Across an entire season, the accumulated volume of all warm-ups likely represents a significant percentage of the whole training volume, especially if using long warm-ups, which may last up to 45 min [ 21 , 36 , 37 ] or more [ 38 , 39 ]. Therefore, the warm-up may play a relevant role in the overall learning of content and long-term training adaptations [ 40 ].…”

Section: What Is the Warm-up Used For?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Revisiting the ‘Whys’ and ‘Hows’ of the Warm-Up: Are We Asking the Right Questions?

Afonso,

Brito,

Abade

et al. 2023

Sports Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The warm-up is considered beneficial for increasing body temperature, stimulating the neuromuscular system and overall preparing the athletes for the demands of training sessions and competitions. Even when warm-up–derived benefits are slight and transient, they may still benefit preparedness for subsequent efforts. However, sports training and competition performance are highly affected by contextual factors (e.g., how is the opponent acting?), and it is not always clear what should be the preferred warm-up modalities, structure and load for each athlete and context. Further, we propose that the warm-up can also be used as a pedagogical and training moment. The warm-up may serve several different (albeit complementary) goals (e.g., rising body temperature, neuromuscular activation, attentional focus) and be performed under a plethora of different structures, modalities, and loads. The current commentary highlights the warm-up period as an opportunity to teach or improve certain skills or physical capacities, and not only as a preparation for the subsequent efforts. Moreover, the (justified) call for individualized warm-ups would benefit from educating athletes about exploring different warm-up tasks and loads, providing a broad foundation for future individualization of the warm-up and for more active, engaged, and well-informed participation of the athletes in deciding their own warm-up practices.

show abstract

“…it likely overestimates the endurance of most athletes. Whilst this may be somewhat counterbalanced by the fact that the FTP testing protocol asks cyclists to do a hard 5-minute effort before starting their 20-minute effort, this could explain why the 95-% rule often still overestimates MMP 60 (Borszcz et al, 2018; Tramontin et al, 2022).…”

Section: Contribution Iv: Relationship With Popular Performance Predi...mentioning

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

Functional Threshold Power Estimated from a 20-minute Time-trial Test is Warm-up-dependent

Cited by 4 publications

References 27 publications

An Update Of The Allen & Coggan Equation To Predict 60-Min Power Output In Cyclists Of Different Performance Levels

An Update Of The Allen & Coggan Equation To Predict 60-Min Power Output In Cyclists Of Different Performance Levels

Revisiting the ‘Whys’ and ‘Hows’ of the Warm-Up: Are We Asking the Right Questions?

Modelling human endurance: Power laws vs critical power

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About