Author(s): Jonathan R Switalla, M Travis Byrd, Mark G Abel, Bradley S Fleenor and Haley C Bergstrom

Abstract:
This study examined the accuracy of estimated performance times to define the parameters of the critical velocity (CV) model. Twelve subjects provided an estimated time to complete (ETcom) maximal-effort runs at four different distances (400m, 800m, 1600m, and 3200m). The CV and anaerobic running capacity (ARC) were derived from the total distance (TD) versus ETcom relationship. The equation: predicted time to completion ([PTcom] = ARC/(velocity - CV)) was used to determine the PTcom for runs at three different distances (200m, 600m, and 1000m). The PTcom was validated against the actual time to complete (ATcom) runs at the same three distances. The TD versus ETcom relationship was highly linear and indicated a close relationship between running distance and time. The PTcom overestimated the ATcom at 200m, but there were no significant differences between the PTcom and ATcom at 600m and 1000m. There were, however, no significant relationships between PTcom and ATcom at any of the three distances. These findings indicated that the CV model could be applied to estimated running times to derive the CV and ARC parameters, but the parameters of the test could not be used to accurately estimate individual performance times above CV using the equation PTcom = ARC / (V – CV).

Pages: 205-209  |  1269 Views  101 Downloads

Download Full Article: Click Here