A comparison of two Wingate anaerobic test software packages

Chris Talbot, Anthony D Kay, M Price

Research output: Contribution to conference typesPosterResearchpeer-review

2 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

A common data collection system for Wingate anaerobic testing (WAnT) is provided by Cranlea. More recently Monark have provided Wingate software for use with their ergometers. The aim of this study was to compare upper body WAnT performance measures provided by the two systems. Following institutional ethical approval, eighteen participants volunteered for the study (Male, n = 11, Age mean 26.1, s = 9.2, Female, n = 8, Age mean 22.6, s = 3.7), Each participant undertook three WAnT using a table mounted cycle ergometer (Monark 894E, Sweden) as part of familiarisation for a larger study. All tests involved a 4% body mass resistive load with a minimum of 24-h between tests. Prior to each tests participants undertook a 5-min warm-up (60 rev.min-1) including three 3-4 s practise sprints. Corrected peak power (PP; over 1 s duration for Cranlea; over one pedal revolution for Monark), mean power (MP; over 24 s), mean cadence and time to PP were recorded using Cranlea Wingate v4.0 and Monark v2.2 software. Data were analysed by paired t-tests and Pearsons correlation coefficient. There were no differences between Monark and Cranlea outputs for PP (546 s = 264, 517 s= 239 W, respectively, P = 0.240, ES = 1.42), MP (P = 0.204, ES = 1.54), Mean cadence (P = 0.406, ES = 1.00) or time to PP (P = 0.285, ES = 0.109), The range of PP values (Monark; 137 – 946 W and Cranlea; 179 – 1000 W) reflected the range of values reported in the literature. Mean differences between software for PP and MP were 33 (s = 46) and 22 W (s = 14). The results of this study suggest that either method of measuring upper body WAnT variables can be used.
Original languageEnglish
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sep 2010
EventAnnual Conference of the British Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences (BASES) - Leeds
Duration: 1 Sep 2009 → …

Conference

ConferenceAnnual Conference of the British Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences (BASES)
Period1/09/09 → …

Fingerprint

Software
Information Systems
Sweden
Foot
MP-33

Cite this

Talbot, C., Kay, A. D., & Price, M. (2010). A comparison of two Wingate anaerobic test software packages. Poster session presented at Annual Conference of the British Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences (BASES), .
Talbot, Chris ; Kay, Anthony D ; Price, M. / A comparison of two Wingate anaerobic test software packages. Poster session presented at Annual Conference of the British Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences (BASES), .
@conference{b88c151a431040da987796e8d3399634,
title = "A comparison of two Wingate anaerobic test software packages",
abstract = "A common data collection system for Wingate anaerobic testing (WAnT) is provided by Cranlea. More recently Monark have provided Wingate software for use with their ergometers. The aim of this study was to compare upper body WAnT performance measures provided by the two systems. Following institutional ethical approval, eighteen participants volunteered for the study (Male, n = 11, Age mean 26.1, s = 9.2, Female, n = 8, Age mean 22.6, s = 3.7), Each participant undertook three WAnT using a table mounted cycle ergometer (Monark 894E, Sweden) as part of familiarisation for a larger study. All tests involved a 4{\%} body mass resistive load with a minimum of 24-h between tests. Prior to each tests participants undertook a 5-min warm-up (60 rev.min-1) including three 3-4 s practise sprints. Corrected peak power (PP; over 1 s duration for Cranlea; over one pedal revolution for Monark), mean power (MP; over 24 s), mean cadence and time to PP were recorded using Cranlea Wingate v4.0 and Monark v2.2 software. Data were analysed by paired t-tests and Pearsons correlation coefficient. There were no differences between Monark and Cranlea outputs for PP (546 s = 264, 517 s= 239 W, respectively, P = 0.240, ES = 1.42), MP (P = 0.204, ES = 1.54), Mean cadence (P = 0.406, ES = 1.00) or time to PP (P = 0.285, ES = 0.109), The range of PP values (Monark; 137 – 946 W and Cranlea; 179 – 1000 W) reflected the range of values reported in the literature. Mean differences between software for PP and MP were 33 (s = 46) and 22 W (s = 14). The results of this study suggest that either method of measuring upper body WAnT variables can be used.",
author = "Chris Talbot and Kay, {Anthony D} and M Price",
year = "2010",
month = "9",
day = "1",
language = "English",
note = "Annual Conference of the British Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences (BASES) ; Conference date: 01-09-2009",

}

Talbot, C, Kay, AD & Price, M 2010, 'A comparison of two Wingate anaerobic test software packages' Annual Conference of the British Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences (BASES), 1/09/09, .

A comparison of two Wingate anaerobic test software packages. / Talbot, Chris; Kay, Anthony D; Price, M.

2010. Poster session presented at Annual Conference of the British Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences (BASES), .

Research output: Contribution to conference typesPosterResearchpeer-review

TY - CONF

T1 - A comparison of two Wingate anaerobic test software packages

AU - Talbot, Chris

AU - Kay, Anthony D

AU - Price, M

PY - 2010/9/1

Y1 - 2010/9/1

N2 - A common data collection system for Wingate anaerobic testing (WAnT) is provided by Cranlea. More recently Monark have provided Wingate software for use with their ergometers. The aim of this study was to compare upper body WAnT performance measures provided by the two systems. Following institutional ethical approval, eighteen participants volunteered for the study (Male, n = 11, Age mean 26.1, s = 9.2, Female, n = 8, Age mean 22.6, s = 3.7), Each participant undertook three WAnT using a table mounted cycle ergometer (Monark 894E, Sweden) as part of familiarisation for a larger study. All tests involved a 4% body mass resistive load with a minimum of 24-h between tests. Prior to each tests participants undertook a 5-min warm-up (60 rev.min-1) including three 3-4 s practise sprints. Corrected peak power (PP; over 1 s duration for Cranlea; over one pedal revolution for Monark), mean power (MP; over 24 s), mean cadence and time to PP were recorded using Cranlea Wingate v4.0 and Monark v2.2 software. Data were analysed by paired t-tests and Pearsons correlation coefficient. There were no differences between Monark and Cranlea outputs for PP (546 s = 264, 517 s= 239 W, respectively, P = 0.240, ES = 1.42), MP (P = 0.204, ES = 1.54), Mean cadence (P = 0.406, ES = 1.00) or time to PP (P = 0.285, ES = 0.109), The range of PP values (Monark; 137 – 946 W and Cranlea; 179 – 1000 W) reflected the range of values reported in the literature. Mean differences between software for PP and MP were 33 (s = 46) and 22 W (s = 14). The results of this study suggest that either method of measuring upper body WAnT variables can be used.

AB - A common data collection system for Wingate anaerobic testing (WAnT) is provided by Cranlea. More recently Monark have provided Wingate software for use with their ergometers. The aim of this study was to compare upper body WAnT performance measures provided by the two systems. Following institutional ethical approval, eighteen participants volunteered for the study (Male, n = 11, Age mean 26.1, s = 9.2, Female, n = 8, Age mean 22.6, s = 3.7), Each participant undertook three WAnT using a table mounted cycle ergometer (Monark 894E, Sweden) as part of familiarisation for a larger study. All tests involved a 4% body mass resistive load with a minimum of 24-h between tests. Prior to each tests participants undertook a 5-min warm-up (60 rev.min-1) including three 3-4 s practise sprints. Corrected peak power (PP; over 1 s duration for Cranlea; over one pedal revolution for Monark), mean power (MP; over 24 s), mean cadence and time to PP were recorded using Cranlea Wingate v4.0 and Monark v2.2 software. Data were analysed by paired t-tests and Pearsons correlation coefficient. There were no differences between Monark and Cranlea outputs for PP (546 s = 264, 517 s= 239 W, respectively, P = 0.240, ES = 1.42), MP (P = 0.204, ES = 1.54), Mean cadence (P = 0.406, ES = 1.00) or time to PP (P = 0.285, ES = 0.109), The range of PP values (Monark; 137 – 946 W and Cranlea; 179 – 1000 W) reflected the range of values reported in the literature. Mean differences between software for PP and MP were 33 (s = 46) and 22 W (s = 14). The results of this study suggest that either method of measuring upper body WAnT variables can be used.

M3 - Poster

ER -

Talbot C, Kay AD, Price M. A comparison of two Wingate anaerobic test software packages. 2010. Poster session presented at Annual Conference of the British Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences (BASES), .