Home > Journals > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness > Past Issues > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2017 November;57(11) > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2017 November;57(11):1391-8

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLE  EXERCISE PHYSIOLOGY AND BIOMECHANICS 

The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2017 November;57(11):1391-8

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 Münster, Münster, Germany; 2 Department of Physical Education and Sports History, University of Münster, Münster, Germany; 3 Internal Medicine D, Nephrology, Hypertension and Rheumatology, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany



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: Heart rate - Exercise tolerance - Running

top of page