Prediction of one-hour running performance using constant duration tests.

Abstract

Critical velocity (CV) represents, theoretically, the highest velocity that can be sustained without fatigue. The aim of this study was to compare CV computed from 5 mathematical models in order to determine which CV estimate is better correlated with 1-hour performance and which model provides the most accurate prediction of performance. Twelve trained middle- and long-distance male runners (29 +/- 5 years) performed 3 randomly ordered constant duration tests (6, 9, and 12 minutes), a maximal running velocity test for the estimation of CV, and a 1-hour track test (actual performance). Two linear, 2 nonlinear, and 1 exponential mathematical models were used to estimate CV and to predict the highest velocity that could be sustained during 1 hour (predicted performance). Although all CV estimates were correlated with performance (0.80 < r < 0.93, p < 0.01), it appeared that CV estimated from the exponential model was more closely associated with performance than all other models (r = 0.93; p < 0.01). Analysis of the bias +/- 95% interval of confidence between actual and predicted performance revealed that none of the models provided an accurate prediction of the 1-hour performance velocity. In conclusion, the estimation of CV allows us to rank middle- and long-distance runners with regard to their ability to perform well in long-distance running. However, no models provide an accurate prediction of performance that could be used as a reference for coaches or athletes.