Overestimation of maximal aerobic speed by the Université de Montréal track test and a 1500-m-time trial in soccer

Abstract

Introduction: Maximal aerobic speed (MAS), usually measured by cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) on a treadmill, is gaining popularity in soccer to determine aerobic performance. Several field tests are used to estimate MAS, although, gold standard methods are still not clarified. Therefore, this work aims 1) to compare two different CPET based methods to assess MAS and 2) to investigate the convergent validity of two common field tests to estimate MAS in soccer.Methods: Thirteen trained male soccer players completed an CPET on a treadmill to determine two VO2-kinetic based definitions of MAS (MASPlateau = speed at onset of VO2-plateau = gold standard; MAS30s = first speed of 30-s-interval of VO2max), the Université de Montreal Track Test (UMTT; VUMTT = speed of the last stage), and a 1500-m-time trial (1500-m-TT; V1500m = average speed). MASPlateau, MAS30s, VUMTT, and V1500m were compared using ANOVA. Additionally, limits of agreement analysis (LoA), Pearson’s r, and ICC were calculated between tests.Results: MAS30s, VUMTT, and V1500m significantly overestimated MASPlateau by 0.99 km/h (ES = 1.61; p < 0.01), 1.61 km/h (ES = 2.03; p < 0.01) and 1.68 km/h (ES = 1.77; p < 0.01), respectively, with large LoA (-0.21 ≤ LoA≤3.55), however with large-to-very large correlations (0.65 ≤ r ≤ 0.87; p ≤ 0.02; 0.51 ≤ ICC≤ 0.85; p ≤ 0.03).Discussion: The overestimation and large LoA of MASPlateau by all estimates indicate that 1) a uniform definition of MAS is needed and 2) the UMTT and a 1500-m-TT seem questionable for estimating MAS for trained soccer players on an individual basis, while regression equations might be suitable on a team level. The results of the present work contribute to the clarification of acquisition of MAS in soccer.

Assessing Anaerobic Speed Reserve: A Systematic Review on the Validity and Reliability of Methods to Determine Maximal Aerobic Speed and Maximal Sprinting Speed in Running-based Sports

“…Of the 93 articles initially identi ed, 58 ful lled all the criteria for inclusion in the analysis. Of the 28 articles reporting MAS, 23 referred to validity only [6,7,10,12,[32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50] and ve articles to both validity and reliability [13,14,[51][52][53]. Regarding MSS, 30 studies were included from which 12 studies reported only validity [15,19,[54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63], two only reliability [17,64] and 16 both reliability and validity [18,[65][66][67][68][69][70][71][72][73]…”

“…The of methods to assess MAS was reported in 28 studies using 69 different methods. For 23 studies the methodological quality for validity was rated very good [6, 7,13,14,33,[36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53] and for ve studies doubtful [10,12,32,34,35]. Intraday (one method) and interday reliability (six methods) of MAS was reported in one and four studies, respectively.…”

“…The least studied methods were shuttle runs (n = 10). This might be explained by heterogeneous results in studies investigating different de nitions of MAS retrieved by CPET and the validity of UMTT or time trials to estimate MAS, whereas the validity of shuttle runs seems to be reported consistently low [10,31,35,50]. Intraday (n = 1)…”

“…The most used protocols are (square-wave) incremental protocols with and without resting in between the stages with different starting velocities, increments or duration of stages, or protocols based on individual performance, e.g., starting speed related to theoretical maximal heart rate [6, 7, 10, 12-14, 32, 34-37, 39, 42-46, 48-50, 52]. The de nitions of MAS used in the studies were also differente.g., the rst speed when VO 2 max occurred with no further speci cation [6, 39,45,46,48,49,52], calculated based on VO 2 kinetics [7,32,34,35,43,44,50]the rst speed of the 30-s interval of VO 2 max [7,12,13,50], the speed at the onset of the plateau of VO 2 [10,42], or the nal speed reached during CPET [14,[35][36][37]. Regarding validity of CPET on a treadmill to determine MAS, different incremental continuous protocols yielded similar results when the increments and stage durations were multiples of each other (e.g.…”

“…Regarding the protocol, continuous incremental exercises with durations between 8 and 16 min (e.g., starting at 4 or 6 km/h for recreational subjects and at 8 or 10 km/h for trained subjects with 1 km/h increments every minute) are suggested to reach VO 2 max and might therefore also be suitable for assessing MAS [80,81]. When MAS was determined at the onset of the plateau of VO 2 max, i.e., VO 2 reaching a steadystate during an incremental treadmill test, the results differed remarkedly from MAS determined at the 30-s interval of VO 2 max [10].…”