Currently a 3rd year undergraduate completing my dissertation on priming exercise and VO2 kinetics. Really enjoyed watching these last few videos. A really helpful resource. Thank you.
Really enjoyed that, Mark. I did a 90 s version that Jeanne was trialling once and that was bad enough! Twice as long really must be a WTF experience. Looking forward to the next in the series
Thank you Mark, this was a pleasure to watch. I will do some running experiments with a Stryd power meter and compare with CP derived from time trials/ various models (GoldenCheetah/WKO5/Powercenter). Do you recommend a specific warm-up protocol, like including few VO2max /CP bursts? Does VO2 kinetics influence the outcome? I would think it would help on a time trial but here the scope is to empty W'. But it could help endure the burn a little longer. Thanks, István
Thank you István. There will be a video on just this topic in a few weeks' time. It will be on priming exercise and its effects on VO2 kinetics. I'll try and be specific there.
Great présentation Mark! Thanks a lot. Is there a consensus on the best way of calculating CP with a 3 or 4 test approach? Is it to ride out to failure at certain outputs or to find your max average power on fixed times? Thanks in advance!
Great video! Critical power testing is just painful, and it even gets worse when you get stronger. Do know of any studies that have looked at the reliability of CP-testing when you have athletes with verry high Wprim? I find that it can be a bit more difficult to get reliable and repeatable results when the athletes have an high Wprim.
The tests we've done on club cyclists have been pretty reliable (see Burnley et al. (2006) in the description for an example). There is some evidence in the literature that highly-trained athletes might produce a higher end-test power than CP, but to me this indicates that in those individuals the test wasn't long enough to exhaust W'. Three minutes was chosen to be practical. Whether that is always optimal is a good question. The highest value for W' I've worked with was 27 kJ in a track cyclist, but that was on priming studies not the 3 min test unfortunately.
@@all-outphysiology2177 I work with a couple of athletes that are in the 20-25 kJ rage and to me It looks like it can be difficult getting a max result on all off the timeframes of the CP-test (when you use 3 min, 6 min and 12 min to test). For the 3 min MAX EFFORT I would say it would be impossible to get a good result if you are not there to coach them. Personally, I struggle with getting good results on the 8-15 min timeframe. I get good results on shorter efforts and longer efforts, but that middle range is difficult for me. But I do have an extremely high Wprim (40-45 kJ when I tested last year) so that might make it a bit difficult for the model since there might be other physiological limitations that the CP-model can account for.
Thank you for this vidéo. I have a question regarding how to run this test. I found in the literature that the subject can stand up (not be seated on the chair of the ergo cycle) while performing the test and this is in order to give its maximum. But in my case, the subject must remain seated on the ergo cycle chair while performing the test. In other words, the subject will try to perform at their maximum while remaining on the chair. Do you think the test will be meaningful in this case?
Hi Amine. My strong advice would be to ensure that participants are ALWAYS seated for this test, for two reasons. First, We are trying to estimate the capacity of the participants using consistent cycling kinematics. Second, there is a desire for participants to stand up and sit down repeatedly in the last minute of the test, much as they would do during a hill climb. This must be strongly discouraged (in fact, it should be explicitly forbidden as part of the participant briefing before the test), as standing up means that some power generated is coming from body weight pushing on the pedals, rather than the metabolic ability of the leg muscles. Moreover, at the cadences we typically see at the end of the test (80-90 rpm), standing can cause cadence (and thus power) to fluctuate too much to give a valid end-test power. Overall, maintaining a seated position is absolutely the right thing to do - you are performing it correctly.
@@all-outphysiology2177 Thank you for the response, that will help me a lot. My last question will be about the use of the following equation (linear factor = power / (preferred cadence)2) to calculate the 3MT resistance on the ergo-cycle. Do you have a video showing how to set up the linear factor in the Lode software?
Is this the basis for the 3 minute tests built into wattbikes? I recall doing a 3 minute test on a wattbike in my work gym not expecting the figure to be anywhere close to what my then lactate threshold was but to my surprise it was within a handful of watts. While i have heard you speak about priming on another podcast I'd be interested in hearing it again also.
Yes, I think it is although I've not used that function on a Wattbike before. I'm planning to do one on priming but to get there I will need to lay some groundwork on VO2 kinetics first. Watch this space!
wattbike.com/za/performance-tests/the-three-minute-test as far as I understand the Wattbike 3 minute test is a paced 3 minute test to estimate maximum aerobic power (power at VO2max) to set power zones from that power at VO2max, which I gather from the first video on this channel, would lead to incorrect intensity zone boundaries is many athletes
@@mashoedoe Ah yes, correct. Nothing inherently wrong with doing that kind of test as an estimator of aerobic power, but I would not use it for much more than that.
@@all-outphysiology2177 and that would be higher than Lactate Threshold wouldn't it. So if that figure got me very close to my then LT power figure then that suggests i wasn't truly giving it the beans, right? If i was giving it everything with no pacing at all I should hit a higher number than LT.
During lockdown, I was a participant in a study attempting to validate the 3 minute all out test remotely on home equipment like Wahoo Kickrs. The instructions were to do the entire 3 minutes seated. To me it feels like this lead to a lower power output in the first 30 seconds than I would have achieved if I was allowed to sprint in a standing position. Does standing while pedalling at the start, until too fatigued to stand, and then moving to seated pedalling for the remainder of the 3 minutes, invalidate or affect the results?
We always do sitting only. Not because standing wouldn't be useful early on, but because the tendency to switch between sitting and standing will add significantly to variations in cadence and power late in the test, which might affect the CP estimate.
We set it on the Lode ergometer so that by the time the participant reached their preferred cadence (say, 80 rpm) they were producing about 50% of the difference between VO2max and LT - i.e., power at LT + 0.5 x (Power at VO2max - power at LT). We set that using the linear factor on the Lode, but you can do similar things using any ergometer.
Seems to be quite a nonsense. As the velocity at VO2max in running can be hold for 5-8 minutes, it is clear that a 3 minutes test would provide an even higher velocity as vVO2max. But CP is below vVO2max. So this is falsified.
@@alexbond7 yes, I did read your comment. Which is why I couldn't believe you'd seen the video. It's an all-out test, not a 3 min incremental test. vVO2max and the endurance at it is not relevant in the context of this test.
@@all-outphysiology2177 I wrote nothing about an incremental test. A 3 minute all-out test can't provide CP well (Vanhatalo, 2007), because it is well known that an athlete can hold vVO2max for 5-8 minutes (depending which paper you read), at constant load of course (no increment!). But the gag is that vVO2max (or power at VO2max) is higher as CP. That is the point. Therefore your 3 minute test is a nonsense and falsified. If i look at my own data it seems to be that this 3 minute test provides more like the power (velocity) at VO2max and not CP!
Geart work, mark. Looking forward to the next video.
Great video. Really enjoyed it. You're taking us all out of noobcountry.
Currently a 3rd year undergraduate completing my dissertation on priming exercise and VO2 kinetics. Really enjoyed watching these last few videos. A really helpful resource. Thank you.
So, you'd like one on priming?! That's one in the queue that I haven't made yet...
@@all-outphysiology2177 most definitely ! 👍🏼
Really enjoyed that, Mark. I did a 90 s version that Jeanne was trialling once and that was bad enough! Twice as long really must be a WTF experience. Looking forward to the next in the series
Oddly the last third is ever so slightly easier than the middle third, as respiratory drive is declining by then. The legs are still ruined though.
Mark, your channel is gold! Thanks a lot.
Really enjoyed that Mark
Of course you did. Nice to reminisce about times at Aber.
Thank you Mark, this was a pleasure to watch.
I will do some running experiments with a Stryd power meter and compare with CP derived from time trials/ various models (GoldenCheetah/WKO5/Powercenter).
Do you recommend a specific warm-up protocol, like including few VO2max /CP bursts? Does VO2 kinetics influence the outcome? I would think it would help on a time trial but here the scope is to empty W'. But it could help endure the burn a little longer.
Thanks,
István
Thank you István. There will be a video on just this topic in a few weeks' time. It will be on priming exercise and its effects on VO2 kinetics. I'll try and be specific there.
No I come to think of it, if you want to replicate the warm-up we did, it was 5 min at 100 W with 5 min rest before the main effort.
What does the HR graph look like? I can't imagine reaching max HR in 60 to 90 seconds from a cold start, yet VO2 max is reached that fast?
Great présentation Mark! Thanks a lot.
Is there a consensus on the best way of calculating CP with a 3 or 4 test approach? Is it to ride out to failure at certain outputs or to find your max average power on fixed times? Thanks in advance!
Great video!
Critical power testing is just painful, and it even gets worse when you get stronger.
Do know of any studies that have looked at the reliability of CP-testing when you have athletes with verry high Wprim?
I find that it can be a bit more difficult to get reliable and repeatable results when the athletes have an high Wprim.
The tests we've done on club cyclists have been pretty reliable (see Burnley et al. (2006) in the description for an example). There is some evidence in the literature that highly-trained athletes might produce a higher end-test power than CP, but to me this indicates that in those individuals the test wasn't long enough to exhaust W'. Three minutes was chosen to be practical. Whether that is always optimal is a good question. The highest value for W' I've worked with was 27 kJ in a track cyclist, but that was on priming studies not the 3 min test unfortunately.
@@all-outphysiology2177 I work with a couple of athletes that are in the 20-25 kJ rage and to me It looks like it can be difficult getting a max result on all off the timeframes of the CP-test (when you use 3 min, 6 min and 12 min to test). For the 3 min MAX EFFORT I would say it would be impossible to get a good result if you are not there to coach them.
Personally, I struggle with getting good results on the 8-15 min timeframe. I get good results on shorter efforts and longer efforts, but that middle range is difficult for me. But I do have an extremely high Wprim (40-45 kJ when I tested last year) so that might make it a bit difficult for the model since there might be other physiological limitations that the CP-model can account for.
It's basically an 1min all-out sprint directly followed by a 2min all-out sprint.
I think I would rather cut my legs off. 😛
Thank you for this vidéo. I have a question regarding how to run this test. I found in the literature that the subject can stand up (not be seated on the chair of the ergo cycle) while performing the test and this is in order to give its maximum. But in my case, the subject must remain seated on the ergo cycle chair while performing the test. In other words, the subject will try to perform at their maximum while remaining on the chair. Do you think the test will be meaningful in this case?
Hi Amine. My strong advice would be to ensure that participants are ALWAYS seated for this test, for two reasons. First, We are trying to estimate the capacity of the participants using consistent cycling kinematics. Second, there is a desire for participants to stand up and sit down repeatedly in the last minute of the test, much as they would do during a hill climb. This must be strongly discouraged (in fact, it should be explicitly forbidden as part of the participant briefing before the test), as standing up means that some power generated is coming from body weight pushing on the pedals, rather than the metabolic ability of the leg muscles. Moreover, at the cadences we typically see at the end of the test (80-90 rpm), standing can cause cadence (and thus power) to fluctuate too much to give a valid end-test power. Overall, maintaining a seated position is absolutely the right thing to do - you are performing it correctly.
@@all-outphysiology2177 Thank you for the response, that will help me a lot.
My last question will be about the use of the following equation (linear factor = power / (preferred cadence)2) to calculate the 3MT resistance on the ergo-cycle. Do you have a video showing how to set up the linear factor in the Lode software?
Is this the basis for the 3 minute tests built into wattbikes?
I recall doing a 3 minute test on a wattbike in my work gym not expecting the figure to be anywhere close to what my then lactate threshold was but to my surprise it was within a handful of watts.
While i have heard you speak about priming on another podcast I'd be interested in hearing it again also.
Yes, I think it is although I've not used that function on a Wattbike before. I'm planning to do one on priming but to get there I will need to lay some groundwork on VO2 kinetics first. Watch this space!
wattbike.com/za/performance-tests/the-three-minute-test as far as I understand the Wattbike 3 minute test is a paced 3 minute test to estimate maximum aerobic power (power at VO2max) to set power zones from that power at VO2max, which I gather from the first video on this channel, would lead to incorrect intensity zone boundaries is many athletes
@@mashoedoe Ah yes, correct. Nothing inherently wrong with doing that kind of test as an estimator of aerobic power, but I would not use it for much more than that.
@@all-outphysiology2177 and that would be higher than Lactate Threshold wouldn't it. So if that figure got me very close to my then LT power figure then that suggests i wasn't truly giving it the beans, right? If i was giving it everything with no pacing at all I should hit a higher number than LT.
@@gilleek2 Yes, most certainly.
During lockdown, I was a participant in a study attempting to validate the 3 minute all out test remotely on home equipment like Wahoo Kickrs. The instructions were to do the entire 3 minutes seated. To me it feels like this lead to a lower power output in the first 30 seconds than I would have achieved if I was allowed to sprint in a standing position. Does standing while pedalling at the start, until too fatigued to stand, and then moving to seated pedalling for the remainder of the 3 minutes, invalidate or affect the results?
We always do sitting only. Not because standing wouldn't be useful early on, but because the tendency to switch between sitting and standing will add significantly to variations in cadence and power late in the test, which might affect the CP estimate.
When setting up a 3-min all-out test on a cycle ergometer, what are the erg settings? How much resistance?
We set it on the Lode ergometer so that by the time the participant reached their preferred cadence (say, 80 rpm) they were producing about 50% of the difference between VO2max and LT - i.e., power at LT + 0.5 x (Power at VO2max - power at LT). We set that using the linear factor on the Lode, but you can do similar things using any ergometer.
Seems to be quite a nonsense. As the velocity at VO2max in running can be hold for 5-8 minutes, it is clear that a 3 minutes test would provide an even higher velocity as vVO2max. But CP is below vVO2max. So this is falsified.
Have you watched the video?
@@all-outphysiology2177 Did you read my comment? You guys are operationally blind.
@@alexbond7 yes, I did read your comment. Which is why I couldn't believe you'd seen the video. It's an all-out test, not a 3 min incremental test. vVO2max and the endurance at it is not relevant in the context of this test.
@@all-outphysiology2177 you’re a patient man Mark 😄
@@all-outphysiology2177 I wrote nothing about an incremental test. A 3 minute all-out test can't provide CP well (Vanhatalo, 2007), because it is well known that an athlete can hold vVO2max for 5-8 minutes (depending which paper you read), at constant load of course (no increment!). But the gag is that vVO2max (or power at VO2max) is higher as CP. That is the point. Therefore your 3 minute test is a nonsense and falsified. If i look at my own data it seems to be that this 3 minute test provides more like the power (velocity) at VO2max and not CP!