Prediction of power output at different running velocities through the two-point method with the Stryd power meter.

BACKGROUND

The force- and power-velocity (F-V and P-V, respectively) relationships have been extensively studied in recent years. However, its use and application in endurance running events is limited.

RESEARCH QUESTION

This study aimed to determine if the P-V relationship in endurance runners fits a linear model when running at submaximal velocities, as well as to examine the feasibility of the "two-point method" for estimating power values at different running velocities.

METHODS

Eighteen endurance runners performed, on a motorized treadmill, an incremental running protocol to exhaustion. Power output was obtained at each stage with the Stryd™ power meter. The P-V relationship was determined from a multiple-point method (10, 12, 14, and 17 km·h) as well as from three two-point methods based on proximal (10 and 12 km·h), intermediate (10 and 14 km·h) and distal (10 and 17 km·h) velocities.

RESULTS

The P-V relationship was highly linear ( r = 0.999). The ANOVAs revealed significant, although generally trivial (effect size < 0.20), differences between measured and estimated power values at all the velocities tested. Very high correlations ( r = 0.92) were observed between measured and estimated power values from the 4 methods, while only the multiple-point method ( r = 0.091) and two-point method distal ( r = 0.092) did not show heteroscedasticity of the error.

SIGNIFICANCE

The two-point method based on distant velocities (i.e., 10 and 17 km·h) is able to provide power output with the same accuracy than the multiple-point method. Therefore, since the two-point method is quicker and less prone to fatigue, we recommend the assessment of power output under only two distant velocities to obtain an accurate estimation of power under a wide range of submaximal running velocities.