Bishop D, Spencer M, Duffield R, Lawrence S
School of Human Movement and Exercise Science, The University of Western Australia, Crawley.
J Sci Med Sport. 2001 Mar;4(1):19-29. doi: 10.1016/s1440-2440(01)80004-9.
Many team sports require participants to repeatedly produce maximal or near maximal sprints of short duration (1-7s) with brief recovery periods, over an extended period of time (60-90 min). Therefore, an important fitness component for these sports is what is often termed repeated sprint ability (RSA). A variety of tests have been devised to assess RSA. However, while the reliability of some of these tests has been reported, there has been no published attempt to assess the validity of RSA tests. The purpose of the present paper was to assess the validity of a popular RSA test--the 5 x 6 s cycle test. Ten moderately-trained males (Mean+/-SD age: 23.6+/-3.0 yrs, mass: 71.8+/-7.4 kg, peak VO2: 46.32+/-4.16 ml.kg(-1)min(-1)) participated in the investigation. Following familiarisation, subjects reported to the laboratory at the same time of day, on three occasions, each separated by at least 48 hours. Testing consisted of a 5 x 6 s cycle test (5 x 6 s maximal sprints every 30 s), a graded exercise test (GXT) and a simulated game (3 x 15 min periods separated by five min). The simulated game consisted of a 1-min circuit that was repeated 15 times in each period. The circuit replicated typical movement patterns observed during motion analysis of field hockey games. Each circuit commenced with a 15-m maximum sprint through timing gates. Time to run 5, 10 and 15 m was recorded. Oxygen consumption was measured during both the GXT and the simulated game with a portable gas analysis system (Cosmed K4 b2, Italy). Correlation coefficients between dependent variables were calculated using Pearson's Product Moment (r). There was a significant correlation between power decrement during the 5 x 6 s cycle test and decrement in 15-m time across the three periods (r = 0.76, P<0.05), but not decrement in 10-m time (r = 0.54) or 5-m time (r = 0.42). These results suggest that the 5 x 6 s cycle test is valid for assessing the decrement in 15-m time, but not the decrement in 5 or 10m time. Thus, one measure of RSA (sprint decrement) appears to be specific to the test protocol, rather than a general quality. The most likely explanation is that the energy requirements of the 5 x 6 s cycle test more closely match those required to repeatedly run 15 m (mean time = 2.74 s) than to repeatedly run 10 m (mean time = 1.97 s) or 5 m (mean time = 1.13 s). It is therefore suggested that, while the 5 x 6 s cycle test is often used to assess RSA ability in a wide range of sports, it may need to be modified to reflect the common sprint distances found in specific sports.
许多团体运动要求参与者在较长时间（60 - 90分钟）内，反复进行持续时间较短（1 - 7秒）的最大强度或接近最大强度冲刺，并伴有短暂的恢复期。因此，这些运动的一项重要体能要素就是常说的反复冲刺能力（RSA）。人们设计了各种测试来评估RSA。然而，虽然其中一些测试的可靠性已有报道，但尚未有已发表的研究尝试评估RSA测试的有效性。本文的目的是评估一种常用的RSA测试——5×6秒自行车测试的有效性。十名中等训练水平的男性（平均年龄±标准差：23.6±3.0岁，体重：71.8±7.4千克，峰值摄氧量：46.32±4.16毫升·千克⁻¹·分钟⁻¹）参与了该研究。在熟悉测试流程后，受试者在一天中的同一时间到实验室进行三次测试，每次测试间隔至少48小时。测试包括5×6秒自行车测试（每30秒进行5次6秒的最大强度冲刺）、递增负荷运动测试（GXT）和模拟比赛（3个15分钟时段，中间间隔5分钟）。模拟比赛包括一个1分钟的循环，每个时段重复15次。该循环模拟了在曲棍球比赛动作分析中观察到的典型运动模式。每个循环从通过计时门进行15米的最大冲刺开始。记录跑5米、10米和15米的时间。在GXT和模拟比赛期间，使用便携式气体分析系统（意大利Cosmed K4 b2）测量耗氧量。使用皮尔逊积差相关系数（r）计算因变量之间的相关系数。在5×6秒自行车测试中的功率下降与三个时段内15米跑时间的下降之间存在显著相关性（r = 0.76，P<0.05），但与10米跑时间的下降（r = 0.54）或5米跑时间的下降（r = 0.42）无关。这些结果表明，5×6秒自行车测试对于评估15米跑时间的下降是有效的，但对于评估（5米和10米跑时间的下降）无效。因此，RSA的一种衡量指标（冲刺下降）似乎特定于测试方案，而非一种普遍特性。最可能的解释是，5×6秒自行车测试的能量需求与反复跑15米（平均时间 = 2.74秒）所需的能量需求比与反复跑10米（平均时间 = 1.97秒）或5米（平均时间 = 1.13秒）所需的能量需求更接近。因此建议，虽然5×6秒自行车测试经常用于评估广泛运动中的RSA能力，但可能需要进行修改以反映特定运动中常见的冲刺距离。
