Abstract

Ronnestad, BR. Comparing two methods to assess power output associated with peak oxygen uptake in cyclists. J Strength Cond Res 28(1): 134-139, 2014-The aim of this study was to compare 2 methods that are frequently used to calculate the power output (MAP) that is associated with peak oxygen uptake ((V)over dotO(2) peak) in the exercise mode of cycling. One method calculates the MAP by extrapolation of the individual (V)over dotO(2) to submaximal power output relationships to the measured (V)over dotO(2)peak (MAP(Daniels)), whereas the other method uses the minimal power output that elicits (V)over dotO(2)peak during a graded (V)over dotO(2)peak test (MAP(Billat)). Thirteen male competitive cyclists ((V)over dotO(2)peak = 66 +/- 5 mlkg(-1)min(-1)) performed 3 test sessions; first to determine MAP(Daniels) and MAP(Billat); second and third sessions were used to measure the time to exhaustion during continuous cycling exercise to exhaustion (T-max), time to 95% of (V)over dotO(2)peak, and time 95% of (V)over dotO(2)peak with MAP(Daniels) and MAP(Billat). Whether it was MAP(Daniels) or MAP(Billat) that was used on the second or third test session was randomized. There was no difference between mean MAP(Daniels) and mean MAP(Billat) (380 +/- 38 vs. 383 +/- 34 W, respectively) and their associated T-max, time to 95% of (V)over dotO(2)peak, and time 95% of (V)over dotO(2)peak during a T-max test. In conclusion, this study did not find any difference between MAP(Daniels) and MAP(Billat). The practical application of this study is that the choice of a method to calculate the MAP can be determined by practicality and that findings from studies using these 2 methods are comparable.