Home > Journals > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness > Past Issues > Articles online first > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2017 Feb 22

CURRENT ISSUE
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints
Cite this article as

THE JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE AND PHYSICAL FITNESS

A Journal on Applied Physiology, Biomechanics, Preventive Medicine,
Sports Medicine and Traumatology, Sports Psychology


Indexed/Abstracted in: Chemical Abstracts, CINAHL, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 1,215


eTOC

 

The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2017 Feb 22

DOI: 10.23736/S0022-4707.17.07097-9

Copyright © 2017 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Yo-Yo IR1 vs incremental continuous running test for prediction of 3000 m performance

Boris SCHMITZ 1, Andreas KLOSE 2, Katrin SCHELLECKES 3, Charlotte M. JEKAT 1, Michael KRÜGER 2, Stefan-Martin BRAND 1

1 Institute of Sports Medicine, Molecular Genetics of Cardiovascular Disease, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany; 2 Department of Physical Education and Sports History, University of Muenster, Muenster, Germany; 3 Internal Medicine D, Nephrology, Hypertension and Rheumatology, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany


PDF  SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL  


BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare physiological responses during the Yo-Yo intermittent recovery level 1 (Yo-Yo IR1) test and an incremental continuous running field test (ICRT) and to analyze their predictive value on 3000 m running performance.
METHODS: Forty moderately trained individuals (18 females) performed the ICRT and Yo-Yo IR1 test to exhaustion. The ICRT was performed as graded running test with an increase of 2.0 km·h-1 after each 3 min interval for lactate diagnostic. In both tests, blood lactate levels were determined after the test and at 2 and 5 min of recovery. Heart rate (HR) was recorded to monitor differences in HR slopes and HR recovery.
RESULTS: Comparison revealed a correlation between ICRT and Yo-Yo IR1 test performance (R2=0.83, p<0.001), while significant differences in HRmax existed (Yo-Yo IR1, 189±10 bpm; ICRT, 195±16 bpm; p<0.005; ES=0.5). Maximum lactate levels were also different between test (Yo-Yo IR1, 10.1±2.1 mmol∙L-1; ICRT, 11.7±2.4 mmol∙L-1; p<0.01; ES=0.7). Significant inverse correlations were found between the Yo-Yo IR1 test performance and 3000 m running time (R2=0.77, p<0.0001) as well as the ICRT and 3000 m time (R2=0.90, p<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that ICRT and Yo-Yo IR1 test are useful field test methods for the prediction of competitive running performances such as 3000 m runs but maximum HR and blood lactate values differ significantly. The ICRT may have higher predictive power for middle- to long- distance running performance such as 3000 m runs offering a reliable test for coaches in the recruitment of athletes or supervision of training concepts.


KEY WORDS: Field test - Heart rate - Exercise capacity - Shuttle run - Competitive running

top of page

Publication History

Cite this article as

Schmitz B, Klose A, Schelleckes K, Jekat CM, Krüger M, Brand SM. Yo-Yo IR1 vs incremental continuous running test for prediction of 3000 m performance. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 2017 Feb 22. DOI: 10.23736/S0022-4707.17.07097-9 

Corresponding author e-mail

boris.schmitz@ukmuenster.de